Build Date: Sat Feb 24 10:30:15 2024 UTC

Did somebody step on a duck?
-- Rodney Dangerfield

Canadia Is Dreary And Depressing

by Tjames Madison

2000-02-21 03:10:19

People come to me all the time and they say, "Mr. Tjames, Canadia is trying to fight us! They're coming with bombs and guns to take over our American style of freshness!" And I pat them people on the head and I say, "No, no; Canadians aren't evil, and they're not coming down here to put karate all over us. They're just really dull is all. It gets confusing."

And so I show them this site to prove that Canadia is, like, not trying to take us over. And they go "Whoa! Any country this obsessed with procedure and nitpicking would never be able to vote to go to war on us!"

And it's true. Take a look yourself at the "Upheld Complaints against the Canadian Code of Advertising Standards Report" published by Advertising Standards Canada. For a proud Canadiaphobe like myself, this is the Dead Sea Scrolls of our time. We normal people in the USA may be able to learn more about the Nucks just from this one, single report then we could from all the Lorne Greene and William Shatner movie and television appearances ever, combined.

Here's some stuff that Canadians not only got mad about in 1999, but that a national board of inquiry found serious enough to issue sanctions against the offending party:

Case One: The Quebec Government ran an advertisement criticizing the Canadia Federal Budget, by "contrasting the payment transfers to Quebec which, according to the advertiser, were lower than Ontario's." This upset a very dull (and anonymous) Canadian viewer so much that he or she sent a letter to the Ad Standards people, complaining that "advertisement was misleading and deceptive because it failed to include pertinent data." Result: complaint was upheld and Quebec was forced to withdraw the ad.

Case Two: A company called Business Depot aired a commercial which contained a scene of three children riding in the back seat of a car. A viewer complained that the children were "moving in such a way that would not appear to be possible" if seatbelts were being used. The complainant argued that the commercial "encouraged unsafe (and therefore, un-Canadian) behavior." The council agreed, and the offending ad immediately disappeared in a puff of twittery.

Case Three: A food manufacturer aired a commercial which depicted children "engaging in insolent, disrespectful visual and verbal exchanges with their parents." A whopping 23 Grande Hosers wrote to complain that these were BAD CHILDREN, and Canadian society DOES NOT TOLERATE THEM. Result: the advertiser WITHDREW THE COMMERICALS.

Case Four: A cosmetics manufacturer ran a print ad in which "the upper torso of a woman was almost entirely revealed for almost no apparent reason or need." Four complaints. The general gist was "showing nekkid bodies is political uncorrect to wimmen." Result: once again, the advertiser withdrew the offending material.

Aren't you glad you don't live in Canadia? Aren't you glad that HUNDREDS more case accounts JUST LIKE THESE are available in PDF format just by clicking the link down below this paragraph?

Over.  End of Story.  Go home now.

paco@pigdog.org

T O P   S T O R I E S

The Awl

C L A S S I C   P I G D O G

Quickies