Throw a rock and hide your hand...

You name theme and I give you my opinion

Dignity? What is dignity?
She had money and fame which is what made her somehow special or above reproach?
If a junkie died in a squat from over indulgence they'd be treated with disdain. But because she was famous we are supposed to hold her up as a special case?

Not my style, either. Not everyone will agree with what you write or read it as you wish people to read it. I am actually busy thinking about SVP using some sad rocker's death, not about offending you..so don't be hurt . I was irritated by Kurt Cobain, to be honest, the whole shtick, but music I actually remember liking before they sold out. With Amy W., I didn't care for music that much, nor the whole image etc., but found her careless gutty attitude refreshingly non standard and interestingly out of place. Too bad it cost her life, I am sure her artistic development would have been interesting.

I wonder if anybody from that said SVP campaign even heard any of her songs, etc.

No, the opposite. Fame and cash has nothing to do with that. Didn't help her much, obviously, either. I would nag about a dead junkie from a squat being treated with disdain, too, eventhough something tells me it would actually hit home more with young people. Dignity is not using tabloid guerilla in an official political campaign. Too bad people fall for the fake moralizing aspect.

I recently saw photos in the press of Michael Douglas smoking after recvering from throat cancer. He's been castigated for his actions while he's still alive.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...=feeds-newsxml
Is that poor taste or not?
They can live their lives as they wish I suppose, cigarettes are not illegal.
Is it wrong to use living people as an example?
Charlie Sheen's been named and shamed for his actions while he's still alive but ignores the negative PR.
So youth shouldn't be given examples of wasted lives from the living or the dead? So we just tell them to stay off drugs with no foundation? Just classroom facts with no illustrative examples that will catch their attention?
I personally don't think that's the best way to get the message home.

For all we (or the Sun) know, Amy's parents may not actually object to this poster.

I dont understand why anyone is surprised though. Its just like Michael Jackson. That man could entertain and sing and dance and make money and and and and....

But would you let him baby-sit your kids? Not Really....

Amy is in the same boat. She can entertain but she is far from being a roll model.

I think if the SVP were to use Elvis, or Curt Cobain, or even Janis Joplin no one would know who that is here. They are targeting younger prospective voters so they have to use some one they know of. So when people say "This was tastelessly timed." I understand that, but if they were to wait 6 months no one would care.

Would the people in this thread be that offended if Britney Spears were to over-dose and the SVP were to make a sign with her? I highly doubt it.

Higgybaby, what do you think? Did they ask them?
So Amy was responsible for her destiny, fair do's. But what about the parents and family and friends? Aren't they suffering enough?

How about treating both the junkie in the squat and Amy Winehouse with equal dignity, neither being able to answer for themselves once they're dead?

I am not going to muse over living versus dead celebs, since at the end of the day they are just like us. I wouldn't have liked to see anyone's dead face on a campaign that in my opinion is not really made to warn against drugs at all.

What I would like to muse about more is the fact that I do not think kids we should worry about would respond to some photos. Any photos. Why do adults think that showing photos, or saying drugs are bad are going to deter youth from drugs? It won't. Providing life that matters, with substance, taking them seriously, having a bond, showing we understand, talk about things will have an impact and realizing, they have seen this already. Not throwing some horrid photos of just dead unfortunate, lost soul, quite annonymously in mail boxes or sticking on a lamp post, it won't have an impact. Preaching won't either. Scaring them with see what can happen to you is really not going to work, in our uber fast and often empty life, where images are just a click away and chances are kids have already seem these pics way before we even switched our pcs on. It's moralizing and no age group is less sensitive to this attitude than teens. They are one step ahead of us. They know playing with fire will get them in trouble. Even kids in the mountains. This place is laid back in terms of drugs and alcohol, no hysterics, so why start it now, thinking if we don't they will all turn out like youths in the US or UK where absolute binging is supposed to kill the boredom or hurt. I think we shouldn't take ourselves as know-it-alls and thinking grusome images and talks of coffins will scare them. I know it will sound absurd but it may even be inspirational to those who are high on their contrarian phase. I am not trying to be smart here, the oposite, I deeply feel sorry for AW who died and I know kids by now. This whole theme of how to motivate or demotivate certain age group, how to relate so there is successful communication is my daily bread. Sometimes we do things that we think will have desired effect, and often, it's a giant miss. Kids know. AW was not a kid and had troubles. Using her death to deter is tacky.

Yes, but it may get the desired votes! (and that's what it's all about)

Tom

Did anyone else notice that Angela-74 is SMOKING HOT tonight?

If you wanna get serenaded later baby you know where to PM me at.

Oh, and FYI, I gots that champaign that goes so good with KFC...

Actually, they probably picked on her because everyone recognises her. But it does not deter from the fact she isn't Swiss. They could have taken a couple of pics of locals at their worst time of life - the thing is if they had done that, there would have been an outcry about privacy issues. So Amy Winehouse it is.

I don't know what all the fuss is about. She profited from making songs and living a legacy of substance abuse, and now the SVP, whose propaganda I normally burn or piss on in my front yard, tries to make a point that if you use drugs you can die from it. They have done way more dis respectful ads then this, but, in my opinion it something that is very true.
Do you think it's better if we use little hand puppets to talk to people about drugs, or rather something they can relate to that is real, and now?

I'll tell you this, when Eazy E died of AIDS, I went the very next day to the free clinic to get the whole range of tests. If Silk the Shocker or Kayne West had it now it wouldn't have the same effect. If you can use something that can have a positive effect on people I think there is no wrong.

Blast the SVP all you want, I do, just lets not be like delusional Amy Winehouse fans and get offended when people talk about her addictions, that she bragged about, made videos and songs about, and made everyone in her family and entourage money on. When they have a valid point, respect should be given.

like what fatmanfilms was saying in the other posts... i think this is what happens if you don't let professional designers do their job.

A showbiz life that destroys soul is not real. It affects miniscule number of people. Sure, kids know the music and read tabloids, etc. But it is as far from their real life as writing about penguins in Alaska. It is as exotic.

Hand puppets? For teens? These kids have seen it all, by the time we think we should talk to them about substance abuse. They have computers, with gazillions of images and archives. I am not sure why making some offensive, hard copy poster makes the campaigners think it will change anything. It is mere populism, using kids as an excuse, pointing fingers abroad, yet again. Using images like this is patronixing to kids, and, disrespectful to her family and her.

Even in that photo she still repulses me less than a photo of Blocher.