I found this quite interesting.
I found this quite interesting.
WHO’s next ‘hit’ group, namely sweets, fizzy drinks and confectionery. Fast food is fourth, with ‘power advertising’ – glamorisation of speed – comprising the fifth group.
Sooooo.... F1 will be restricted from promoting anything that glamorizes speed.... uhm... yeah.
In reply to aircooled :
Yeah. I liked that one. On a larger philosophical note, how long before anything with a hint of danger gets on the list? Riding a bicycle can be pretty dangerous, and you can get hit walking across the street. I guess, the WHO's idea of a long safe life involves sitting on a flat wooden chair in your kitchen with the windows locked...
In reply to Streetwiseguy :
Watch out for splinters!
Which is why the Isle of Man TT will be the last race on Earth
aircooled said:WHO’s next ‘hit’ group, namely sweets, fizzy drinks and confectionery. Fast food is fourth, with ‘power advertising’ – glamorisation of speed – comprising the fifth group.
Sooooo.... F1 will be restricted from promoting anything that glamorizes speed.... uhm... yeah.
The existence of this "hit list" that was supposedly made in that '80s seems to be a retroactive fabrication based on things that the WHO has come out against in the past decades, with "power advertising" tacked onto the end out of absolutely nowhere.
Although the article revolves around this fictitious "hit list" the central point that alcohol advertising (and perhaps unhealthy food avertising) could go the way of tobacco advertising is plausible.
There is literally a world of other things F1 could advertise, it's nothing to worry about. Remember when computer parts and electronics advertising started to seep into motorsports in the '00s? What happened to that? You'd think it would be bigger today than ever.
I think the relevance of racing ICE-powered cars will be a more immediate problem for F1 than advertising unhealthy products. F1 would be wise to turn to an ultra-high-end electric race series in the next few years before FE accidentally pulls the rug out from under them.
GameboyRMH said:aircooled said:WHO’s next ‘hit’ group, namely sweets, fizzy drinks and confectionery. Fast food is fourth, with ‘power advertising’ – glamorisation of speed – comprising the fifth group.
Sooooo.... F1 will be restricted from promoting anything that glamorizes speed.... uhm... yeah.
The existence of this "hit list" that was supposedly made in that '80s seems to be a retroactive fabrication based on things that the WHO has come out against in the past decades, with "power advertising" tacked onto the end out of absolutely nowhere.
Although the article revolves around this fictitious "hit list" the central point that alcohol advertising (and perhaps unhealthy food avertising) could go the way of tobacco advertising is plausible.
There is literally a world of other things F1 could advertise, it's nothing to worry about. Remember when computer parts and electronics advertising started to seep into motorsports in the '00s? What happened to that? You'd think it would be bigger today than ever.
I think the relevance of racing ICE-powered cars will be a more immediate problem for F1 than advertising unhealthy products. F1 would be wise to turn to an ultra-high-end electric race series in the next few years before FE accidentally pulls the rug out from under them.
I include myself, among many others I know and suspect many out there, I couldn't care less about electric racing.
ICE + Hybrid, yes. Full electric? Not interested.
That's cool, the business problem for F1 is that in a decade or two, ICE racing will be historic racing. Nothing wrong with a historic F1 series, I'd watch it, but it will be a business problem for them.
this explains Williams' fall from grace! They're obviously focusing on advertising and bringing in dollars and brand perception, and not building a better car and winning races.
You'll need to log in to post.
