Nevermind. I was trying to hotlink an Imgur video but I couldn't get it to work properly.
Did you try <video src="url">? With any html5 video tag options like controls.
I've edited my post on the previous page now to use the tag as you suggested. Seems to work on my browsers and starts auto-playing in a loop but with sound muted until you use the controls to unmute / adjust volume. That's what I was trying to do but failing yesterday. Thanks.
Here it is again to save you having to go back to the previous page like some refugee.
Nevermind. I was trying to hotlink an Imgur video but I couldn't get it to work properly.
Did you try <video src="url">? With any html5 video tag options like controls.
I've edited my post on the previous page now to use the tag as you suggested. Seems to work on my browsers and starts auto-playing in a loop but with sound muted until you use the controls to unmute / adjust volume. That's what I was trying to do but failing yesterday. Thanks.
...
<video controls autoplay muted loop> ...
But ... you included the 'muted' attribute ... and therefore ...
Also you included 'autoplay' which is evil.
Simpler format:
Simpler format, however, messes up vbulletin processing so nothing appears after it in the same post (like this text)
I thought autoplay and loop were a good idea for people viewing the post on phones or tablets - so they don't have to mess with controls to watch it - and mute was to make it safer for work.
Or is he offended by suggesting men should step in against bullying and harassment?
Or what?
I honestly can't see what people could object to in that advert.
He objects to the anti bullying campaign of the First Lady of the United States because he hates freedom.
Also.
I hate to break it to you ... but @gillette isn't the first razor company to run ads against "toxic masculinity" Schick, Harry's Razors, and the parent company of Dollar Shave Club (Unilever) did it too. ����*♂️ pic.twitter.com/5Jd7gPcJ20
I honestly can't see what people could object to in that advert.
Challenge accepted!
To be clear, I'm actually not bothered by this specific instance, but the trend overall.
It's a cheap, easy, relatively non-controversial stance. The fact that there is a small vocal minority that will get outraged actually helps, by mobilizing literally everyone else.
Corporations do not have sincere social or political stances. Gillette has probably done plenty of market research that's led them to believe this will be an effective publicity tool. A small number of people may actually boycott for some limited time, but overall, this is an ad and it is designed to increase sales. So the majority of people who agree with these relatively lukewarm sentiments can, instead of doing something actually useful, buy Gillette brand products and feel like they're taking a brave stand. This, collectively, induces a sort of charity fatigue in many people. These corporate 'feel good' campaigns give people the emotional satisfaction of actually contributing to a cause, which can actually make them less likely to actually do anything else. They 'gave' at the checkout.
And speaking of the checkout, what percentage of men with such regressive attitudes about masculinity actually do their own shopping anyway? Maybe some MGTOWs and incels, but for the most part, men like that have their mothers and wives buy their razors for them. Some of them probably don't even know what brands they normally use. And they're not very good at, like, remembering things like that, because keeping shopping lists and brand preferences and things in your head is for ladies.
Granted, something like this is less tangible than the Amazon Smile effect, where people feel like they've already done their part because of the $1 charitable donation triggered by their $200 purchase, but I have 100% known people who thought their weak little corporate alliances and social media posts made them activists, and used that as an excuse to be sloppy and shitty about other stuff.
And it's still a cynical corporate marketing tactic.
Again, I'm not outraged or offended by this specific instance, but I do object to the phenomenon as a whole.
I honestly can't see what people could object to in that advert.
Challenge accepted!
To be clear, I'm actually not bothered by this specific instance, but the trend overall.
It's a cheap, easy, relatively non-controversial stance. The fact that there is a small vocal minority that will get outraged actually helps, by mobilizing literally everyone else.
Corporations do not have sincere social or political stances. Gillette has probably done plenty of market research that's led them to believe this will be an effective publicity tool. A small number of people may actually boycott for some limited time, but overall, this is an ad and it is designed to increase sales. So the majority of people who agree with these relatively lukewarm sentiments can, instead of doing something actually useful, buy Gillette brand products and feel like they're taking a brave stand. This, collectively, induces a sort of charity fatigue in many people. These corporate 'feel good' campaigns give people the emotional satisfaction of actually contributing to a cause, which can actually make them less likely to actually do anything else. They 'gave' at the checkout.
And speaking of the checkout, what percentage of men with such regressive attitudes about masculinity actually do their own shopping anyway? Maybe some MGTOWs and incels, but for the most part, men like that have their mothers and wives buy their razors for them. Some of them probably don't even know what brands they normally use. And they're not very good at, like, remembering things like that, because keeping shopping lists and brand preferences and things in your head is for ladies.
Granted, something like this is less tangible than the Amazon Smile effect, where people feel like they've already done their part because of the $1 charitable donation triggered by their $200 purchase, but I have 100% known people who thought their weak little corporate alliances and social media posts made them activists, and used that as an excuse to be sloppy and shitty about other stuff.
And it's still a cynical corporate marketing tactic.
Again, I'm not outraged or offended by this specific instance, but I do object to the phenomenon as a whole.
I WIN.
That's what she said!
__________________
Much of MADNESS, and more of SIN, and HORROR the soul of the plot.
That was one of the things I absolutely hated about 'project RED' consumeractivism bullshit that tech companies and apple did awhile ago. Like sure if you were about to buy an iPod and decided to get the one that helped people, awesome, but going out to buy a couple hundred dollar device to show that you helped or specifically too help even though you weren't going to buy one is nothing more than performative activism. And a bunch of rich people patted themselves on the back for helping out and giving back to society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lisarea
market research that's led them to believe this will be an effective publicity tool.
Take PETA, their entire concept is all publicity is good publicity and so they do crazy stunts to get people talking about them, and it works. Sure many are talking about how much they hate them but all that talk translates into $$$ and into people who care about animals but not enough to do much reading are drawn in, like celebrities.
Re: Miscellany
Re: Miscellany
Linear Mode
