John Lewis Ad. Is all publicity really good publicity?

The response from JL in the press following complaints about this ad is that it is a “playful storyline, adding: “He is not wilfully damaging his home and is unaware of the unintentional consequences of his actions".
This is not a "playful storyline", it is appalling behaviour. I have never raised my hand to any of my children, but I just want to give this kid a slap. If any parent brings their child up to behave like this, then all I can say is that they are raising a spoilt brat. JL had totally gone down in my estimation and their ad agency should be sacked

Dreadful dreadful dreadful. It is irrelevant what he is wearing, but if he did that in my house......agh. Is that what John Lewis thinks children should be allowed to do, quite ridiculous.

I love edge of seventeen

The only thing I am irritated by is how beautiful the house is

It’s the ‘boys can do what they like’ message while girls just have to sit quietly & accept it.

I agree Kandinsky. With misogyny in the press recently, why give out this message?

Off topic but not off topic….

Just had a pleasant surprise ….my household insurance premium is only £110 ……

From what Sashabel says, JL refer to the brat being ‘unaware of the unintentional consequences of his actions’. Well sorry JL’s PR agent but the insurance appears to require that the actions be unintentional, which they certainly were not, and the brat knew exactly what the consequences of those actions would be but under the terms of the insurance his awareness or lack of is irrelevant. Playful my a**e.

I think it's great. I was a bit surprised at the very early shots showing the boy wearing lipstick I imagine that the boy had a wonderful time dancing around. I wonder how many takes they had to do or maybe it was one with several different cameras place.

I'm surprised at the, mainly negative response. Surely you have better things to do?

No.
Only housework.

I've put on some overalls and and I'm spraying lynx onto the carpets whilst singing football chants

I watched it a few nights ago and wondered what JL was trying to achieve. I will be well miffed if they destroy their Christmas advert this year trying to be too clever.

The OP started the thread and has got some responses. On a more serious level I believe JL is misrepresenting what its insurance covers.

Had that scene been played out in a classroom setting, with a child deliberately throwing an object at things on shelves then tipping up a classmate’s paint on the floor and smearing it over himself and walls I doubt the teacher would have called the behaviour ‘playful’; as for throwing handfuls of glitter about the room………!

When he was just five my nephew’s parents were called into the school because he had deliberately kicked off his shoes in the school playground, in a similar manner to the boy in the ad, and he was deemed old enough to know that such behaviour was unacceptable and that he may have injured another person. (I disagreed at the time and thought it was overkill, but said if he’d been a couple of years older then he should certainly have known better and should be held accountable.)

Miss A, your 1336 is just terrific.

Can’t stand the advert. There’s an interesting article on it here by the Spectator:

www.spectator.co.uk/article/john-lewis-and-the-entitled-little-emperors/amp?__twitter_impression=true

Good article.
The ad isn't going to convince decent parents to stop teaching their kids to be respectful, kind and well-mannered.
Hopefully quite the opposite when they see how stupidly he is behaving.

I've just watched it. I actually feel quite sick.
Whatever possessed them... ?
I'm speechless.

Sparklefizz

^It’s the ‘boys can do what they like’ message while girls just have to sit quietly & accept it.^

I agree Kandinsky. With misogyny in the press recently, why give out this message?

Did you watch Tiny Dancer at all?

Missed the point, much?

I'm thinking of writing to John Lewis to say that all their future insurance ads must feature a chap in a suit, sat behind a desk, explaining exactly what good value their policies are and exactly what they cover. Finishing up with an explanation that satire and parody is not allowed.

I much prefer this one to Tiny Dancer.

Probably the music

V3ra

I've just watched it. I actually feel quite sick.
Whatever possessed them... ?
I'm speechless.

Why on earth do you feel sick?

It’s awful isn’t it?
I’m really disappointed in JL.
They surely don’t have to resort to these kind of tactics.

In my view the advert would have resonated far more with parents if the child was shown in a family setting, causing accidental spills , breakages etc, of the kind that occurs in every household with children.
Then the parents might think that could easily happen here, maybe we should look into getting that insurance.

The viewing public needs to identify with advertisements, and to feel that the scenario portrayed could easily happen in their home.

the song is about violent death

I would question whether deliberate vandalism of the contents of the property should be included.

Alegrias1

I'm thinking of writing to John Lewis to say that all their future insurance ads must feature a chap in a suit, sat behind a desk, explaining exactly what good value their policies are and exactly what they cover. Finishing up with an explanation that satire and parody is not allowed.

Yes, do write. You are so clever. ?

JenniferEccles

It’s awful isn’t it?
I’m really disappointed in JL.
They surely don’t have to resort to these kind of tactics.

In my view the advert would have resonated far more with parents if the child was shown in a family setting, causing accidental spills , breakages etc, of the kind that occurs in every household with children.
Then the parents might think that could easily happen here, maybe we should look into getting that insurance.

The viewing public needs to identify with advertisements, and to feel that the scenario portrayed could easily happen in their home.

No, they really don't. They need to be talking about the company.

And that's worked, hasn't it?