About The Show      Bio    
   Videos  
    Blog     Podcast

Does this go too far?

Posted By: Ric Peterson · 4/25/2012 6:55:00 AM

Fingers cut off, blood, dramatic music. To get their message across, the CSST launched its new awareness campaign. Last year the ads addressed fatal accidents at work where we saw a man trapped in the bowels of an industrial machine. This year the focus is on accidents and they've gotten even more graphic.  "A campaign that will stay with you and leave no one indifferent," says the press release. Each ad opens with actor Claude Legault saying: "Charles is no longer. It is no longer the same since he fell climbing on it. His life changed. The people around him too. "  The viewer then witnesses the accident unfolding in slow motion. The image does not spare us the blood, the screams of pain over poignant music.  Over the line? In bad taste?  Effective? 

We'll be talking about it at noon today leave a comment.  Watch them below and compare to what they are doing in Ontario at the very bottom.

Leave a comment:

showing all comments · Subscribe to comments
  1. Joseph RichardM posted on 04/25/2012 12:56 PM
    Compared to the WSIB ad, the CSST ads are very mild. I wasn't able to hear any sound but the background music and the voice over, so a lot of the impact of the accident was lost. Also, even in the ad where the employee has an accident where he loses his finger, there is little more than blood on clenched hands for us to see. I don't find them graphic at all. Conversely, the ad for the WSIB was much more graphic, with a much more accurate sense of the pain and the damage done by the accident. Not surprisingly, the WSIB ad impacted me much more than the CSST ad did.
  2. Drew posted on 05/01/2012 01:04 PM
    What is worst is trying to deal with a CSST agent. They only move their butt when you threaten union arbitration.
  3. Fred posted on 05/28/2012 01:30 PM
    How true Drew, I many yrs ago was on CSST and did go to court and they won. diaganosis degeneritive disk desease, it runs in famlies but not one of my reletives even from 100yrs ago ever had this. Just one more unjust ruleing from the CSST.
showing all comments