Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Recycling Propaganda

  1. #1

    Default Recycling Propaganda

    Here is the video



    I just finished this, and to be honest, I don’t like it, it is very confusing, and most of the shots are shaky. Also about 15% of the footage was not shot by me, it is creative commons footage.

    Let me know what you think, or if you have any suggestions… Thanks…

  2. #2

    Default

    Nice vid

    Its a bit political, and to have an american saying its not good to recycle smells of a bush funded statement. I am not happy about the message so i will not coment on that.

    The shaky shots you don't really notice them too bad. I has a good pace to it and a good mix of stills and moving footage.

    Sorry just don't agree with the message, nothing personal but i think if people see this they will stop recycling and that is a bad message to put out, don't get me wrong i am no tree hugger. Sorry i'll get off my soap box and say good vid mate
    DUDE were's my car
    www.myspace.com/cheapdirt07

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,192
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Big thumbs down from me I'm afraid. Recycled footage, a tacky music track, condescending tone in the voice-over and false information... Adds up to a disappointing oil-industry propaganda vid.

    I'm afraid I have real problems with mis-information. A lot of the propaganda in the video was first promoted by the oil industry to make people stop recycling oil based products. Obviously when plastic's recycled, the oil industry's profits go down. Recycling may be good for the world but is bad for the rich Texans' bank accounts.

    The deep, adult "now children... let me explain" voice was very annoying. It reminded me of those "smoking can actually clean out your lungs" adverts from the fifties. Just because misinformation's given in a reassuring voice, doesn't make it true. The underlying message was that it's better to make new plastic products than to recycle, in a reassuring "don't worry children, the world isn't in danger" voice.
    So I'm sorry, it was just a bit of right-wing smokescreen in my book. Unless I missed the point totally and it was meant as a mickey-take, in which case it wasn't quite extreme enough.

    Just needed a "sponsored by Enron" logo to make it a great spoof though.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    11,526
    Blog Entries
    24

    Default

    I assume you don't actually agree with message of the video, and most of the information is simply made up. To that end, I'd certainly agree that you didn't go anywhere near far enough.

    As it stand you just look like someone that wants people to think he doesn't really know what he's talking about. You need to be far more extravagent in your claims to ensure people know it's a spoof.

  5. #5

    Default

    The video was inspired by this



    clearly they did a much better job. The facts are not made up, there just very one sided, and a lot of information was left out.

    Personally I do recycle, always have, but after some research I am convinced that some recycling in some cases is not good for the environment.

    I don’t think the videos are trying to change your opinion about it, but rather, trying to get you to think about it, or something.


    “Just needed a "sponsored by Enron" logo to make it a great spoof though.” haha

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    11,526
    Blog Entries
    24

    Default

    Without wanting to get off topic, this is sensationalism. Their facts are based on one self proclaimed expert's opinion.

    Of course it costs more to recycle, that's a no brainer and distorts the truth. To focus an entire 30 minute "documetary" on the fact that recycling "costs" more than dumping it in the ground is laughable. It's a short term outlook.

    Another spurious argument is that paper production increases the number of trees. Yes, trees are indeed grown for the use of paper, but its the fact that "virgin" paper DOES cost more than recycling that's convieniantly overlooked.

    Most of the energy used in papermaking is the pulping needed to turn wood into paper.
    Paper is a biodegradable material. This means that when it goes to landfill, as it rots, it produces methane, which is a potent greenhouse gas (20 times more potent than carbon dioxide). It is becoming increasingly accepted that global warming is a reality, and that methane and carbon dioxide emissions have to be reduced to lessen its effects
    The third spurious argument is that the US is running out of landfill. Yep, we could indeed go on putting waste in the ground, but why? Again it's a short term outlook that these two magicians are helping to promote.

    many councils charge solely on the basis of landfill operating costs. This approach underestimates the real costs of landfill disposal, by ignoring factors such as the cost of the land, mitigation of environmental effects, unplanned closure, corrective actions, site rehabilitation and aftercare
    In short, they're the bullshiters.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Bristol uk
    Posts
    8,938
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Documentary? - Vague and sensationalist simplistic claims with no context. Contradictory. Looks like us trash propaganda.

    Mockumentary? - No gag. Not funny or clever.

    Production? - Well pit together with intelligent use of editing and shots, quite polished. Quality of v over was very good, content of v over was pants.

    As said - of course recycling costs more - most of our stuff SHOULD cost more so money is spent on the mess created by making our toys.

    This video smells like republican propaganda- What is it supposed to be communicating ?

  8. #8

    Default

    "As said - of course recycling costs more - most of our stuff SHOULD cost more so money is spent on the mess created by making our toys."


    Well don’t you think that the billions of dollars could be used in a better way, like aids research, or feeding starving children?

    Just an idea....

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    11,526
    Blog Entries
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moldytoaster
    Well don’t you think that the billions of dollars could be used in a better way, like aids research, or feeding starving children....
    It's certainly not billions. The pervceived extra monetary cost has a comparible benefit to society. Not every cost or benefit is tangeable and it's assigning the true cost or benefit that's the tricky task in cost-benefit analysis.

    The author's argument Messers Pen & Teller cite is based on his opinion that there is no market failure in the recycling industry. As such, he believes market forces are sufficient in reaching an optimal level of recycling. He's suggesting there should be no government subsidies within the recycling industry. This goes against research which suggests the optimal level for society is not the cheapest. It's hard to model this within market forces and I believe his argument is fundamentally flawed in that respect. But what do I know, eh?

    Remember that money spent on recycling isn't at the direct expense of research into AIDS for example; money "saved" would merely go into funding other areas of local government spending. But then if we pollute the world, everyone will end up starving and AIDS will be the last of our worries.

  10. #10

    Cool

    To say that some recycling is good and some is bad gives out just the right message all the oil companies want to here. ie create confusion and everyone instead of seperating there rubish and putting it into separate bins just put it into 1 black bag and then it gets dumped into a land fill.

    How they can think that its better to put these resources into the ground and then use more raw materials that by the way are running out faster than we are led to believe is mind blowing.

    Video/TV is a very powerful media and to see this two COMEDIAN/MAGISIANS saying some recycling cost more than the benifit is a joke.

    Here's a sensasionist statement for you "Why is the US in Iraq, is to create a democratic muslem state or is it to rape a defenless country of its only wealth..oil"

    Question-Why does america need the oil?
    Answer - Because they don't recycle enough.
    DUDE were's my car
    www.myspace.com/cheapdirt07

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •