Log in

No account? Create an account
Holy (not) f***! - Her Most Regal Majesty, the Queen of Snark — LiveJournal
void where prohibited, except by law
Holy (not) f***!
11 comments or Leave a comment
invisible_al From: invisible_al Date: October 26th, 2008 02:38 pm (UTC) (Link)
I don't know, I liked it. From the comments on the donation page I got the impression that people liked being able to have their point of view out there where normally it's marginalised. It's nice to know you're not alone thinking that stuff, I mean apart from Dawkins who appears to be 'the face of atheism' (and he really can be a giant offensive prat) it doesn't really get much play in the media compared to "church leaders worry about x" and giant posters for the 'Alpha Course".

£100,000 is also miniscule in terms of an advertising spend, the press coverage alone it generated is well worth that small amount of cash.
sesquipedality From: sesquipedality Date: October 26th, 2008 05:40 pm (UTC) (Link)
£100,000 may be a miniscule advertising budget, but it's enough money to run a medium sized CAB or small charity like the Open Rights Group for a year or more.

It's up to people what they give their money for, but to me at least, there seem to be many other worthy causes out there in more desperate need of financial support.

And I'd say the same goes for advertising the Alpha Course or verses from the BIble.
addedentry From: addedentry Date: October 26th, 2008 08:54 pm (UTC) (Link)
"Worthy causes" trump anything else you care to spend money on.
sesquipedality From: sesquipedality Date: October 26th, 2008 11:36 pm (UTC) (Link)
For all I know, a large gig or football game costs about that much to produce too. I'm not objecting to the idea that people choose to spend their money on something other than the social good, so much as the idea that it's OK because £100,000 is small beer in terms of national ad campaigns.

This just seems like such a pointless empty gesture to me.
11 comments or Leave a comment