Conservative adscam

[Mr.Canada]

DrGreenthumb, no where on these signs is there any mention of the Conservative Party. So I don't undeerstand how these are ads for The Conservative Party as you say.

You must be against any tax paid advertisment from any government at any level then right?

Edited February 25, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[DrGreenthumb]

Yes I am against spending 56 million on a government advertising blitz meant to promote the federal government no matter what party is in power. The signs are a different story and were pegged at 45 million dollars. When they advertise nearly 100 million dollars worth on "action plan" ads then the Leprechaun, and other government ministers can't speak without talking about their "action plan" every 2 seconds, the association is made between the ads and the party, so whether their name appears on the sign or TV ad is really irrelevant. Maybe you are too slow-witted to make the connection to most people it is plain to see that the Conservative government is using OUR money for shameless self promotion.

[Mr.Canada]

Yes I am against spending 56 million on a government advertising blitz meant to promote the federal government no matter what party is in power. The signs are a different story and were pegged at 45 million dollars. When they advertise nearly 100 million dollars worth on "action plan" ads then the Leprechaun, and other government ministers can't speak without talking about their "action plan" every 2 seconds, the association is made between the ads and the party, so whether their name appears on the sign or TV ad is really irrelevant. Maybe you are too slow-witted to make the connection to most people it is plain to see that the Conservative government is using OUR money for shameless self promotion.

Again, on this forum when you make statements you need to back them up with proof and cites. We cannot just take your word for it. So in order for this discussion to move forward we'll need to see some proof that the Action Plan is directly advertising for The Conservative Party.

I provided links to the signs clearly illustrating the lack of logo or wording about The Conservative Party or PM Harper so at the moment you just seem to be name calling and finger pointing. Do you have anything of substance or is this it?

[myata]

Still it sucks as h... that a government would spend this amount of our money for no other reason than to cover its own blunder (with prorogation) and create a more positive view of itself. I.e. as per regular course of affairs in our transparent democracy, "I screwed - you pay".

[William Ashley]

DrGreenthumb, no where on these signs is there any mention of the Conservative Party. So I don't undeerstand how these are ads for The Conservative Party as you say.

You must be against any tax paid advertisment from any government at any level then right?

Why advertise the government domestically? Marketing is usually to do what acts alone don't.

Is it that monetary spending is so insignificant and unneeded no one would realize it without a huge sign saying it is from your conservative government?

Needing to advertise what you do is a desperate cry for help.

Hard Hats on site is a sign that would make some sense - Paid for you by the Federal Government is not one that has piratical purpose and is propaganda plain and simple.

Edited February 25, 2010 by William Ashley

[Mr.Canada]

Why advertise the government domestically? Marketing is usually to do what acts alone don't.

Is it that monetary spending is so insignificant and unneeded no one would realize it without a huge sign saying it is from your conservative government?

Needing to advertise what you do is a desperate cry for help.

Hard Hats on site is a sign that would make some sense - Paid for you by the Federal Government is not one that has piratical purpose and is propaganda plain and simple.

No where on the sign does it say it's from anyone's Conservative government, that'll be lie number one from you.

Governments of all stripes put out notices and advertisements to inform the public of how thir money is being spent. Some people don't have T.V's or internet in their houses or if they do they don't watch the news or other programs. Putting it up in plain so everyone can see that their government is working for them, creating jobs for them is a valuable public service.

So again show me some proof that the signs say what you claim or just keep quiet as jealousy will get you know where. I understand the hunger for power from the socialists in strong but do try to contain yourself. Someone else has it for a while now, deal with it.

[ToadBrother]

No where on the sign does it say it's from anyone's Conservative government, that'll be lie number one from you.

Governments of all stripes put out notices and advertisements to inform the public of how thir money is being spent. Some people don't have T.V's or internet in their houses or if they do they don't watch the news or other programs. Putting it up in plain so everyone can see that their government is working for them, creating jobs for them is a valuable public service.

So again show me some proof that the signs say what you claim or just keep quiet as jealousy will get you know where. I understand the hunger for power from the socialists in strong but do try to contain yourself. Someone else has it for a while now, deal with it.

Normal advertising for government programs are pamphlets and on-line equivalents, not expensive TV spots of smiling people or big glossy signs. The only reason governments (right or left, it don't matter) do that sort of thing is because they're trying to associate those programs directly with the elected representatives of their party.

Quite frankly, I think all around the best thing we could do would be to set up an independent advertising body, which would be responsible for all Federal advertising. Being non-partisan, it would be much better at determining the nature of advertising than a clearly biased government (particularly one that was already busted putting party logos on cheques and the like).

[Mr.Canada]

Normal advertising for government programs are pamphlets and on-line equivalents, not expensive TV spots of smiling people or big glossy signs. The only reason governments (right or left, it don't matter) do that sort of thing is because they're trying to associate those programs directly with the elected representatives of their party.

Quite frankly, I think all around the best thing we could do would be to set up an independent advertising body, which would be responsible for all Federal advertising. Being non-partisan, it would be much better at determining the nature of advertising than a clearly biased government (particularly one that was already busted putting party logos on cheques and the like).

The Tories are pushng the envelope when it comes to advertising and are stretching it thin at times I'll admit. That said every government advertises and has advertised its governments programs. Chretien, Martin they're the ones who practically started it. It being the highly biased slant that todays ads can take at times.

I like the idea of an independant government body but the problem is that it will always be biased as long as humans are involved in running it. It's just the way of things. There's no perfect solution.

Edited February 25, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[noahbody]

Normal advertising for government programs are pamphlets and on-line equivalents, not expensive TV spots of smiling people or big glossy signs.

You don't know what you're talking about obviously. Governments have always used television, radio, print and outdoor forms of advertising.

[ToadBrother]

The Tories are pushng the envelope when it comes to advertising and are stretching it thin at times I'll admit. That said every government advertises and has advertised its governments programs. Chretien, Martin they're the ones who practically started it. It being the highly biased slant that todays ads can take at times.

I do love how the Liberals get the blame even for Tory misdeeds. At any rate, I saw this in BC years ago over the major Vancouver Island highway project, first began when the Socreds were in power, but when the NDP got in, suddenly there were these billboards on signs driving into Victoria with the picture of the Minister of Transportation (can't remember who it was at the time), despite the fact that the entire initiative had had nothing to do with the NDP government.

I like the idea of an independant government body but the problem is that it will always be biased as long as humans are involved in running it. It's just the way of things. There's no perfect solution.

You can't get rid of bias, but I think you can make it better. If parties, whether in government or in opposition, want to pump themselves up to the electorate, then let them pay for it out of their own coffers. Taxpayer money should not be used for partisan advertising, period.