Comments on: Are you offended?

By: Dennis Junior

Dennis Junior — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 08:03:00 +0000

I think that WWF should disclipine the staff in Brazil by, Immediately firing them…

=Dennis Junior=

By: Jim Newman

Jim Newman — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 20:21:31 +0000

Hello again
I saw the video and understood that those who carried out the attentat were helping to pollute our planet.
I totally agree and all such war activities should be stopped immediately.
Jim

By: Abdelilah Boukili in Morocco

Abdelilah Boukili in Morocco — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 16:16:41 +0000

The Youtube video is no longer available. Comments can be made by reading a thousand words which a single picture can summarize. Those who missed the video can read the links provide at WHYS blog to make a mental picture of what all the fuss is about.

Having seen this video before, I understand the pollution caused by airplanes is likely to cause massive deaths similar to those caused on the doomed 9/11.

I am not offended as the publicity foreshadows a tragedy that can threaten the whole humanity and not simply the population of a particular country. 9/11 was a real tragedy. It’s not bad if it is put for a good cause to make people feel the horror mother nature can cause if offended by careless human activities.

By: Norman

Norman — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 11:51:18 +0000

It seems there are folk who are not paying attention. The WWF did NOT sanction the ad. Read a bit further and find out how it surfaced. It has never been flighted.

By: scmehta

scmehta — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 07:25:16 +0000

The Ad was not only “offensive and tasteless”, it was also shamelessly materialistic and heartlessly insolent.

By: Vijay Pillai

Vijay Pillai — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 16:42:07 +0000

WWF tarnised by this commercial.I used to have WWF sticker on the back of my car for more that 2 decades but it has lost its shine after 2 decades just like the current image of WWF as a result of this advert.
But let us be sensitive to people ‘s life and feelings and one cannot expect to get any mone or sympathy by dramatising in this way.

By: Joe Polly

Joe Polly — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 12:54:30 +0000

I think the point they are trying to get across is that the world is a black and white animal cue the panda at the end.

By: Lloyd

Lloyd — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 07:15:34 +0000

It doesn’t offend me but is certainly a powerful message in expressing the destructive power of nature. As for not being able to compare the 9/11 attacks and the tsunami, I agree that there is not a direct comparison. It is worth thinking about that human contribution to climate change will result in an increase in the frequency of these sort of tragedies though. I think the message made have had a stronger message had it struck that chord and gone a little less Hollywood on it.

By: Steve in Boston

Steve in Boston — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 02:00:46 +0000

It’s horribly offensive. Using the murder of thousands of people as an advertising gimmick. I still can’t escape the image of the people flailing helplessly in the air as they jumped from their offices in the World Trade Center, or the interview that took place during the tragedy where it had to be explained that the thumps in the background were the sounds of human beings hitting the ground at over 100 miles per hour.

Now it’s an advertising device? What’s next, Jews being marched to the gas chambers? You would have to be completely devoid of all humanity to not be offended.

By: Pam in US

Pam in US — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 00:37:22 +0000

Offended? Rather, confused. What is the point? (Assuming there is one) Why make a compare/contrast of two disparate tragedies? Loss of human lives is the only common denominator. The cause of one was a deliberate, intentioned mass murder. Preventable, most likely. The other, an ill-fated, tragic but natural occurance. Which was more of a tragedy? Depends on whether you lost someone I suppose.