Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Finance, the economy & Economics Bailing out the auto industry - yes or no?

Steve: I intentionally said nothing about gender. Nothing at all.

Ken, actually, yes, I did link my comment about the American love affair with cars to the auto bailout.

Smoking declined in part because the tobacco industry was forced to link reality to its advertising. In the US this took the form of small-print warnings; in Canada it was more like cigarette packages wrapped in "DEATH! DEATH! DEATH!"-stamped paper. It took other efforts as well but eventually smoking went from James Dean cool to basically unwelcome behavior.

Maybe the bailout could require advertising changes. Perhaps advertising for vehicles that don't meet mileage standards should have to note that, visibly, in every advertisement. Perhaps vehicles advertise for "only $nnn a month" should have to follow that statement with "for five years for a total of $nn,nnn."

Cars which are considered insurance risks because they're overpowered should have to make that clear in their advertising.

Since accelerating from 0-60 in 30 seconds is useful in very rare occasions, perhaps those claims could be removed from advertising.

Gosh, since the LDS is into advertising these days, maybe they could run one of their "life choices" ads that says "if your three children actually loved each other, you wouldn't need an 8-seat vehicle, would you?"

Ads showing large vehicles driving straight up mountains or otherwise off-road, but which are sold predominantly for street use -- should, instead, be shown maneuvering through city streets and parking lots.

Want to sell pickup trucks? Advertise them carrying loads, as pickups are intended to do, and advertise their gas mileage when loaded.

Show cars and trucks as the tools they are -- rather than making all of us tools of the car makers and advertisers.