They could have filmed this legally, as the pilots could have easily followed the drone through all of the scenes shot, but it's completely irrelevant, what you ACTUALLY see on screen is illegal and encouraging illegal drone use.
Sun Hol's abuse of the 'Drone Code' with a DJI Drone!
- Thread starter FoxhallGH
- Start date
They could have filmed this legally, as the pilots could have easily followed the drone through all of the scenes shot, but it's completely irrelevant, what you ACTUALLY see on screen is illegal and encouraging illegal drone use.
Bwoody321
Well-Known Member
hoggdoc
Well-Known Member
Disgraceful advertising at a time where the hobby is already being greatly demonised.
I just have to say this, no one cares about the hobby that is why the hobby is an easy target. I started building multi-rotors when I retired in 2012 I'm now considering selling or otherwise getting rid of all my RC stuff, it's just not worth the aggravation.
MML
Well-Known Member
Ahhh, The Sun. An absolute rag of a "news"paper, and it always has been.
Nothing they do surprises me.
Nothing they do surprises me.
Not sure it's a bad thing.
If you ask 100 people who have a dis-favorable opinion of drones if they'd ever seen one in flight, I suspect a high percentage (75+%) have not. They have created a drone monster within their own minds based on the media' coverage of weaponizing drones, invasion of privacy, airline threats, etc...
This commercial points to the absurdity of what a drone can do with it's free time having a mind of it's own.
To a degree the advert has made drones observable where in one of the worst things it does (beside the peeping tom part) is knock over some bowling pins out of turn....ahhhh, cute.
I think the average viewer would realize this is intended to be absurd, and may show how small and comparatively harmless drones are.
This advert has done more for introducing drones to the general public, than I have.
Myself, and other have noted, that the majority of people who approach us are favorably inquisitive. I imagine these same people are a portion of the advert' target audience. They'll get it, and if the advert has any traction it will open the dialogue.
Don't hate on me...we can't all be like minded, or we will become the closed minded group we accuse the anti drone people of being.
I hear what you are saying in that it raises awareness - but - in addition to the blatant disregard of the Drone Code - what I don't like about it is;
a) it's reinforcing prejudice ("Drones invade privacy") - and
b) you may get budding 'drone-pilots-to-be' who look at that as being the 'norm' for flying a drone (near people, indoors, over built up areas, up to windows etc.) ...
There is a lot of VERY good drone work incorporated into advertising, movies and TV now ... It would be much better to publicise those vid's and point out the skills involved to the credit of the Pilots, than to try and get something positive out of this advert!
Very much this, I think. I've lost count of the number of times people have come up to me when I'm flying who have never seen one in action before and are curious. Probably a 50:50 split between random members of the public and other photographers who are interested in seeing what a drone can do.
I make a point of having a friendly chat, showing them a few images so they can see that there really isn't that much of a privacy risk unless the drone is really close, and have also let a few fly for a bit. I've got a few tips for interesting locations to fly that way, and if I can help dispell some of the paranoia then so much the better!
I agree. However, that is POV, and not video of the drone.
Regarding the skills involved, if people are interested they will discover the skills it takes as there are a multitude of how to videos on youtube. Otherwise, I'm not sure you would keep the general public' attention. It certainly wouldn't be a news feature, unless it's casual Friday. Ironically, a local pilot teaches about drones at a state park, which you cannot fly in. To me, that's fairly ironic.
I argue that fears are exacerbated by lack of knowledge, and this is at least an introduction albeit a poor representation from a responsible drone pilot' perspective.
Also, I realize we have a responsibility, however, I'm beginning to think we have whipped the taking up of that responsibility into a frenzy. I find myself looking for little nooks and crannies where I won't be bothered, and I won't bother anyone. After flying, I realize nobody really gives a flip about it.
I think we may be doing this to ourselves.
I have become very conscious of manned aircraft; typically, the small two seaters. I see them doing things we could never get away with. E.g. flying over residential neighborhoods, downtown buildings, events, touching their wheels at the local lake. Where is the enforcement? I know. If you see it report it. Well, obviously nobody is reporting it because they continue doing it.
It's as if there are two sets of rules, and we are harping on ours, when all we're doing is flying a battery powered 1 to 2 pound piece of mostly plastic.
Last edited:
TheRoach
Well-Known Member
Many of these shots are not done with a drone. An example is the water slide. Many of the other shots were completed with something like the Osmo, such as the construction guy and the wall climbers. Let's not assume the makers of the video are irresponsible. It's an advertisement. If they were true, Big Macs would look a lot better out of the box.
Thank you, Drone On. This was obviously a professional shoot and without a doubt, everyone in the video signed on and was paid for their time. Therefore the "Except people who are participants in the flight" kicks in. This was simply a very well done and for me, very entertaining short video.
So some kids or adults are going to get the idea that everyone can do this? Of course. Tune in to your favorite TV channel and take a look at the auto commercials. You will see the subject cars being driven at high speed on what appears to be public roads. You will see demonstrations of auto-braking and near collisions. And there will be idiots who think that's normal. There will ALWAYS be idiots. It's not illegal. Perhaps watch the original "Fast and Furious". There might be some people who assume that that is normal driving technique and that all they have to do is run off and leave the cops.
Guys, please lighten up a bit. It's actually less stressful to enjoy the good things in your life than search continually for something to be offended by.
This was just a put-together ad, OK? It wasn't real.
I for one didn't search for something to be offended by, this advert was shown to me whilst I was watching TV. Drones are a VERY sensitive topic in the UK at the moment and it's taking enough effort from drone enthusiasts to try and improve our image and stop mis-informed authorities making new laws that are going to push us all out of a very enjoyable hobby and in a lot of cases full time employment, without having brainless fuckwits like The Sun purporting illegal drone use.
So you're saying we should just let this slide because other commercials do something similar? That's a dangerous mentality to get into, has nobody ever said to you "if they jumped off a cliff......"? Using a bad thing to justify another bad thing doesn't make it a good thing.
It doesn't matter what happened in the production of this video, we know how it was made and that it could have been made legally, but what it actually shows is illegal, and there are enough idiot drone pilots out there already without encouraging more to join them. Drone use is a lot less common than car use, meaning it's a lot easier for the Government and/or CAA to issue an outright ban on all drones (or at least so much legislation that it's almost impossible to fly) without major repercussions.
This may seem extreme, but watch the media and public opinion at the moment. We're getting closer to this every day. If I can help even just a tiny bit by spouting my mouth off at The Sun, the ASA, the CAA or whoever, then I fully intend to.
To be fair, adverts are produced and scheduled months in advance. Chances are that without Gatwick we wouldn't even be having this discussion - those involved were clearly aware of the camera's presence (most of which probably were not even attached to a drone) so the "flight" was legal from that respect. It's really no different from all the other adverts that show products being used inapproporiately to make their pitch - cars being a major example, as already pointed out.
OTOH, timing is everything, and Gatwick/Heathrow has made this less than ideal. Adverts have faced public backlashes and been pulled in similar circumstances before due to inadvertant connections to unfortunate real-world events. Sometimes that's entirely voluntary by the company involved, sometimes it takes a nudge by the ASA. If it bothers you, get in touch with the ASA and The Sun; if they get enough negative feedback they might pull it, or maybe add some "always fly responsibly" disclaimer, but I wouldn't count on it - as has also been pointed out in the Gatwick threads, drones are still a misunderstood novelty and we simply don't have the numbers.
Even if Gatwick hadn't happened, this would still be a bad advert to be putting out and I would still complain, there have been several issues with drones abroad where they've been spotted near airports, though I think Gatwick is on a bigger scale than anything we've seen before, so there are still irresponsible pilots out there which need nipping in the bud so we can try and prevent unrealistic draconian laws being introduced.
I have already complained to the ASA and The Sun, along with Youtube, The Sun's rival papers, DJI themselves and a couple of other drone forums. You're right, we don't have the numbers, which is why I think it's important that as many of us as possible raise objections to this, rather than taking the laid back "yeah but everybody else does it" attitude that's being suggested here.
Well, I have to stand by what I already said. It was a professionally produced ad and everyone involved was hired and paid. I actually thoroughly enjoyed it. The real problem was identified: the government. If you want to complain to someone, I would suggest that you start with your government. Yours is apparently even more of a problem than ours (USA, for me).
In this day, governments seem to exist to restrict and remove rights from people like you and I. Yet, when there is a real problem (Gatwick, at least it APPEARED to be a real problem), the government, with all its power, resources, and technology, is powerless to do anything about it. It took a call from a passerby who saw someone loading a drone to affect an arrest.
But, I say it again; there's no use in picking on a company whose job is to produce entertaining videos in a professional manner. They simply did their job and did it well. It's true that a simple disclaimer like "This was produced by professionals; don't try this at home" would be a good idea.
Having said all that, it's also your right to complain to anyone you want, and I would never infringe on that right. As we say in Southern America, "Go ahead on".
In this day, governments seem to exist to restrict and remove rights from people like you and I. Yet, when there is a real problem (Gatwick, at least it APPEARED to be a real problem), the government, with all its power, resources, and technology, is powerless to do anything about it. It took a call from a passerby who saw someone loading a drone to affect an arrest.
But, I say it again; there's no use in picking on a company whose job is to produce entertaining videos in a professional manner. They simply did their job and did it well. It's true that a simple disclaimer like "This was produced by professionals; don't try this at home" would be a good idea.
Having said all that, it's also your right to complain to anyone you want, and I would never infringe on that right. As we say in Southern America, "Go ahead on".
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one - The Sun know exactly what they are doing and they know what the current sensitivity on drones in the UK (mainly because they are one of the ones creating all the anti-drone hype).
I'm with you from the point of view of the production company - But what is getting UK Drone owners spiked up about this, is not the production company - but the company that commissioned the ad' i.e. the SUN newspaper. The people who provided the Mavic 2 Pro used in the ad' and who flew it for some parts of the video, probably didn't see the end result until it was finished, as most of what was shown with a Drone actually in-shot was blue-screened (or green - or orange ... whichever).Well, I have to stand by what I already said. It was a professionally produced ad and everyone involved was hired and paid. I actually thoroughly enjoyed it. The real problem was identified: the government. If you want to complain to someone, I would suggest that you start with your government. Yours is apparently even more of a problem than ours (USA, for me).
In this day, governments seem to exist to restrict and remove rights from people like you and I. Yet, when there is a real problem (Gatwick, at least it APPEARED to be a real problem), the government, with all its power, resources, and technology, is powerless to do anything about it. It took a call from a passerby who saw someone loading a drone to affect an arrest.
But, I say it again; there's no use in picking on a company whose job is to produce entertaining videos in a professional manner. They simply did their job and did it well. It's true that a simple disclaimer like "This was produced by professionals; don't try this at home" would be a good idea.
Having said all that, it's also your right to complain to anyone you want, and I would never infringe on that right. As we say in Southern America, "Go ahead on".
The SUN newspaper however, is [one of] the same daily that for the duration of the Gatwick Drone problems, was laying into UK drone owners, with a very broad brush, and calling us irresponsible and all sorts of names, and pointing out that UK rules and legislation - as well as health and safety rules - were being broken by not just the Gatwick rebels, but UK Drone users in general. It's against that backdrop that the video is viewed ... "How come we get called names, but the Sun can openly flaunt the same rules it tells us we are not obeying?" that's the question behind all this ... But you can call it 'revenge' if you like ...
Fortunately - we don't have to complain to the Government about this, as we have an Advertising Standards Authority - and I believe they have received a lot of complaints about this video.
Also - it's notable that Gatwick Airport is not owned or operated by the UK Government - it's a Private operation. Therefore, it's not automatic that Military anti-drone tech' could be deployed there, although the Government appear to have been sympathetic and assisted where they could.
Just for closure on this thread - I believe this is the text of the Advertising Standards Authority response to the concerns registered regarding the Sun Hol's add ...
"Thank you for contacting the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) with your complaint regarding a News Group Newspapers Ltd ad for Sun Holidays, which featured a man flying a drone. We received 130 complaints about this ad which appeared on television, on video on-demand (VOD) services and on The Sun’s YouTube channel.
The complaints we received objected to the portrayal of the use of the drone around buildings and people, and a number of complainants made particularobjections on the grounds of responsibility, in light of the alleged drone activity that caused the Gatwick Airport closure in December 2018.
We’ve assessed the ad you highlighted and from the information we have, we think it is likely to have breached the Advertising Rules that we apply. We are writing to let you know that we have taken steps to address this.
We understand that the ad is no longer due to be broadcast and reached the natural end of its booked slots on TV and VOD, on 6 January and 12 January respectively, and that it has been removed from YouTube.
On the basis that the ad had already been scheduled for withdrawal before any complaints had been reported to the advertiser or Clearcast, the body which pre-clears ads for TV broadcast, we explained your concerns to the advertiser and Clearcast and provided guidance to them on the areas that require attention, together with advice on how to ensure that their advertising complies with the Codes.
Thank you once again for taking the time to raise your concerns with us. Comments such as yours help us to understand the issues that matter to consumers and we will keep a record of your complaint on file for use in future monitoring."
"Thank you for contacting the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) with your complaint regarding a News Group Newspapers Ltd ad for Sun Holidays, which featured a man flying a drone. We received 130 complaints about this ad which appeared on television, on video on-demand (VOD) services and on The Sun’s YouTube channel.
The complaints we received objected to the portrayal of the use of the drone around buildings and people, and a number of complainants made particularobjections on the grounds of responsibility, in light of the alleged drone activity that caused the Gatwick Airport closure in December 2018.
We’ve assessed the ad you highlighted and from the information we have, we think it is likely to have breached the Advertising Rules that we apply. We are writing to let you know that we have taken steps to address this.
We understand that the ad is no longer due to be broadcast and reached the natural end of its booked slots on TV and VOD, on 6 January and 12 January respectively, and that it has been removed from YouTube.
On the basis that the ad had already been scheduled for withdrawal before any complaints had been reported to the advertiser or Clearcast, the body which pre-clears ads for TV broadcast, we explained your concerns to the advertiser and Clearcast and provided guidance to them on the areas that require attention, together with advice on how to ensure that their advertising complies with the Codes.
Thank you once again for taking the time to raise your concerns with us. Comments such as yours help us to understand the issues that matter to consumers and we will keep a record of your complaint on file for use in future monitoring."
I got the email this morning, forgot to mention it here.. probably still in shock that they actually followed up!
here is a start for complaint in the USofA.
Filing an Informal Complaint
any broadcast company must obey a set of codes, but it takes people to complain before the fcc will do anything.
and yes they do investigate every complaint. a broadcaster breaks the law, and they can get there permit to broadcast pulled.
Filing an Informal Complaint
any broadcast company must obey a set of codes, but it takes people to complain before the fcc will do anything.
and yes they do investigate every complaint. a broadcaster breaks the law, and they can get there permit to broadcast pulled.
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
1. Mini 2
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
New Threads
-
-
Air 3 Loch Kinardochy - Spring Highland Sunshine- Started by AlbionDrones
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Forum statistics
