-
Up In Smoke
Posted on March 2nd, 2009 8 comments
No apology is offered to readers who are smokers, or christians, of their own free will. The author has been both, and is now neither.
The article’s vanished from the website of The Australian now, but there are copies all over the web, like sweaty prints in a shroud of Turin, helping with the problem of disbelief. Of course, I mean Roy Eccleston’s article from September 20, 2005: “The Atheist Who’s Selling Jesus”.

The big-bucks media push and website of the Jesus All About Life campaign, set up as part of a multiple-state, multiple-church campaign to spread their big message, is an interesting study in What’s Not Said.
The article begins:
Angus Kinnaird has advised some big brands – the Sydney Olympics, the Melbourne Commonwealth Games, Telstra and Brand Australia to name a few – but admits he has rarely had an assignment so tough.
“I’ve had lots of clients wanting to update their image,” says the Melbourne strategy director of FutureBrand. “But I don’t think I’ve ever come across one that has quite as many problems as the church.”
The Christian church certainly has had its share of difficulties: paedophile priests, an out-of-touch hierarchy, falling attendances in traditional churches, a reluctance to incorporate women, and a lack of relevance to a baby boomer generation bred on freedom, consumerism and self-absorption.
Further in, we read…
The new marketing strategy keeps the church, the Bible and religion well out of the picture. Instead, the spotlight falls on just one star. Jesus is played not as the son of God but a tough-talking no-nonsense philosopher who makes life easier and, incidentally, eternal.
and…
Why Jesus? “That was the only place we had to go,” Kinnaird says. The research shows that the church is almost an insurmountable obstacle to the campaign. “The church was seen as the problem, not the solution,” he says.
This “Accentuate The Positive, Dodge Around The Negative” approach reminds me of the devious ways of cigarette advertising, back in the days when overt advertising of the stuff was allowed over here.

The image of the carefree smoker, complete with success, all the play-toys imaginable, and not a problem in the world, was the thing. In Marlboro Country, where the flavour is, there are no sad bastards with coughs, and even the skinny, round-shouldered guy becomes a tanned, manly cowboy, at ease with the world he surveys from atop his powerful horse.
Tar, carcinogens, bunged-up airways, clogged arteries and cancer therapy are never mentioned when tobacco is advertised. This holds true from time immemorial, till today. It’s all about flavour, all about freedom, all about choice, all about style, all about satisfaction, all about social acceptance, all about freshness, all about mildness… somebody ought to have chucked in “all about life” somewhere down the line: after all, an early choice for Kinnaird’s campaign was “Jesus. Nothing about Religion“.

Bit of a soft-soap, huh?
Now bear in mind that cigarettes, no matter how they’re packaged, will still yield tars and carcinogens, clog up some bits of the user’s body, and considerably increase the susceptibility of the smoker to cancer. And anybody responding to the Jesus All About Life adverts will get exactly what the advertisers don’t want to tell them about… a church, complete with all the things people get to hate in a church. I think Mr Kinnaird listed some in the article quoted at the beginning of this post:
- paedophile priests,
- an out-of-touch hierarchy,
- falling attendances in traditional churches,
- a reluctance to incorporate women,
- and a lack of relevance to a baby boomer generation bred on freedom,
- consumerism and
- self-absorption.
All in all, it’s much the same, church or cigarettes… buy into the dream, pay more and more for a pack, and get irritating, harmful hot air.
Still, everybody’s doing it, as the opinion makers will gladly tell you…

8 responses to to “Up In Smoke”
-
Hey i was looking through the site, and it seems that a few people run it or something. i got abit confused but…, when i was reading, cause it seems people have obviously looked into this stuff and done research, and have probably read the bible to get verses. but the thing i dont get is why are you trying to throw stuff back in peoples faces? dont people have a right to believe in what ever they choose to? im not trying to or meaning to point a finger but i dont understand how come you’ve gone so indepth to try to get a message across so harshly. do you loath Jesus and church and stuff because you’ve been hurt by a church or what? it just doesn’t seem very logical. if you could please explain where your coming from and the background into why you think they way you do about this topic it might make what your trying to say a little bit more comprehendable. thanks
-
Hello. Yes, our site is run by people: that was a very good guess! (I cannot think what the alternative would be.)
We are people who realise that selling Jesus without mentioning churches (and some of the nasty people and things that come as part of the package) is like selling cigarettes without mentioning the risk of cancer, emphysema, gangrene and all: in short, deceptive practice. Yet that is what the JAAL campaign is about!
As far as throwing stuff back in people’s faces, who threw the “stuff” in the first place? People have a right to informed belief, so the holes in the Jesus business should be exposed, in depth if necessary. If belief can only handle a shallow version of reality, it would be better to keep it simple and switch your worship to the Tooth Fairy.
When you’ve dealt with the two different biblical accounts of Judas’ last days, and reconciled the twenty-odd conflicts in the resurrection fairytale parts of the gospels, come back and tell me “it just doesn’t seem very logical”.
You have probably been conditioned to start praying, praising or something else, when confronted by criticism like this. Stop a moment. Look around you.
Are child-harming church workers Jesus? Is a millionaire pastor, taking money from pensioners Jesus? Is Jesus listening to the large body of christians, who tolerate this and wait (in vain) for god to do something?
You’ve had your turn on the soapbox: we don’t do protracted debates.
-
Gee Suss April 22nd, 2009 at 10:29
Sure people can believe what they want, but also we have the right to point out how stupid that is if we find it so.
Religion seems to have a standing no other belief does. If you believe in Labour compared to Liberal, you can discuss your points at length, but if it’s RELIGION, you can’t say a word! Why?
Mainly because there’s a lot to lose, all those tax breaks and being able to justify bigotted points of view etc etc
We are inundated with religion, and some folk have just had enough. Our knowledge of religion is testament to how insidious it is.
So personally, yes, I am pointing a finger and going HAHA! how silly!! what a silly belief! And these same people get tax breaks to further spread their mind virus in indigenous communities and state schools. Religion should have no rights above any other secular organisation, just because they believe in a sky fairy!
-
* f.a.n.a.t.i.c@hotmail.com: You were told. One bash at the soapbox, and that’s it. G’bye. *
-
[...] a link to an earlier post on the subject: – the lengths gone to are [...]
-
I am a Christian, and I thing that the Jesus All About Life Advertisements are shameful.
Perhaps you’d like to look at some more intelligent christian advertising:
[link deleted- available upon request]. -
Outreach media? How about just living your lives in a way people would want to join in: it’s the only real hope anybody has of spreading anything but hype.
-
black – I am a Christian and I fully agree with that statement. I believe that the way I live my life should be the most important testimony for why I believe in Christ and why I believe others need Christ too. Unfortunately, this is not always the case, as, obviously, I am not perfect
I honestly believe that if everyone who called themself a Christian practiced the love of God the way that it was actually intended in the Bible (quite simply – "Love your enemy"), there would be a lot less hate and strife in the world. But it's not my intention to proselytise you or anything, so I'll leave it at that.
Chloe – Why do you feel that the JAAL campaign is shameful?
Leave a reply
Additional comments powered by BackType
help

