Okay, you Direct TV defenders…if you can stop rolling on the floor with hilarity over people being tasered by police officers and having their food adulterated by redneck waitresses for a second, explain this one to me.
In a current Direct TV commercial about the joys of paying your satellite bill online, a woman enthusiastically chirps, “No more “borrowing” stamps from the office!” Yes, not only does Direct TV assume that everyone steals stamps from their work place, but they think it’s no big deal. If it was anything to be ashamed of, the ad wouldn’t accuse its potential customers of doing it, now would they?
Stealing stamps or anything else of value from your job isn’t cute, and it isn’t right. Who are these people? How did they get this way? This time, they don’t even have the excuse that it’s just for laughs, because this commercial is all business. I think Direct TV’s ads show a company with an ethically corrupt culture, so much so that its management and staff just assumes everyone is just as dishonest and selfish as they are. If they’ll steal stamps, they’ll pad my bill.
So please explain to me, Direct TV fans, why accusing us of stamp stealing is all in good fun. Otherwise, I think I’ll be going back to cable. It is beginning to look like there is something seriously wrong with this company.
Ethics Alarms 
The only way I might do that is if I didn’t have any on hand and whatever letter I was sending had to go out then, and I would try to pay the stamp back somehow.
Once, when I had some drawings I wanted to Xerox, my father said, “well, I can just take them to the church and get them Xeroxed there.” so I wouldn’t have to pay. I said, “I don’t really want to steal the toner from a church and get on God’s bad side in the pursuit of saving two dollars.”
What? You mean the company that partners with Qwest to do installations and sales might not be on the up and up? No way!
Sarcasm ill-becomes you…
😦
Jack,
Stealing stamps from work isn’t ethical, but it IS relateable. As people, we all find excuses and make up justifications for our ethical failings (some of which are bigger than others). It may not be ethical, but it is natural. DirectTV isn’t encouraging people to steal, rather they’re recognizing that a number of us DO “borrow” things from work and are having fun at our expense.
From a Freudian perspective, the “protagonists” in the spots (the tasering cop, the woman stealing stamps) are society’s collective id let loose in a fictional world where no one’s really hurt. It’s the same reason kids play with fake guns and grown-ups watch action movies, You’re arguments are invalid because the DirectTV ads don’t revel in the sin being committed, they poke fun at it as a way of attracting people to their product.
-Neil
PS: From a Pavlovian perspective, the commercials also aim to create a positive response (laughter) from the audience hoping that we will, in turn, associate said “good feeling” with DirectTV and buy their services.
Behavioral modification, yes. Unethical, no.
I don’t buy either argument.
Regarding the stamps, the DTV ad minimizes and trivializes theft by telling us the of course “we” do it. Unethical conduct is “natural” for some people, not others (I would never use another person or company’s stamps; it is like stealing cash.) You are really stretching to be a contarian here. There is absolutely no implication of “having fun at our expense.” Honestly: do you work for DirecTV? Come on…come clean!
As for the NFL ads, they corrupt us by trying to prompt laughter at some things that just are never, never justified, are potentially harmful, and flat-out mean: a service provider tampering with food; a police officer abusing a citizen with a taser. Both are illegal, as is, by the the way, sending in your dog to soil my house. Is humor your only standard? A funny ad about a rape or a lynching or defacing a synagogue would still be fine? OK—you don’t think these things can be funny. But what would they tell you about the people who proposed and approved them?
I’m not that atypical a viewer: I bet I’ve watched TV more than any two Ethics Alarms visitors. These ads sure don’t give me a good feeling. What I see is arrogant stereotyping and a celebration of violence against “the other”, perpetrated by a groups the creeps at DirectTV think are worthy of being belittled.
The ads both portray a sick culture and d their tiny part to make it a reality. The more I hear people tie logic into knots defending them, the more confident I am of my verdict.
Jack,
I fail to see how I’ve “tied logic into knots” defending anything. I’ve never tried defending the behavior depicted in the ads as ethical (except to say that it’s not real), nor have I argued that such behavior is acceptable anywhere outside of a fictitious. Moreover, despite your objections, none of the “protagonists” in ANY of the spots are set up as examples to be emulated, and I fail to see how anyone would assume they were.
It’s TV. Lighten up ..
-Neil
PS: Even though my views are often very different than yours doesn’t necessarily make me a “contrarian” and I resent the implication that I’m perpetually playing devil’s advocate. Disagree though we may, I don’t see that your arguments hold any more water than mine, and shouldn’t be written off so easily.
I don’t mean any disrespect or lack of admiration, Neil—you’re one of my favorite participants here. I don’t think your ideas hold less water than mine; indeed, I look forward to your takes. On this particular matter, I thought you were stretching.
I don’t need lightening up…honest. I do think we often underestimate the power of TV, including commercials, to make what once seemed like outrageous conduct begin to appear commonplace and benign. Regarding the comic commercials, I think they cross the line; and I’m willing to make the argument they do: I’m not especially welded to the opinion. The “borrow” line, however, is affirmatively creepy, and it puzzles me that you, or anyone, would see it.