Iceland Advert

[itsabit]

So my 7 year old has come home from school upset that she has seen the Iceland advert as they're learning about the rainforest. Whilst I appreciate that the advert was banned for its political background as opposed to its content, should they have not asked before showing them it? They wouldn't have shown a banned film just because it's content is relevant to current learning surely?

If it’s the political motivation that’s the issue, then there’s nothing to stop them showing a different video clip covering exactly the same content. I don’t see how you are in a different position now to if that had happened.

And I think Clearcast said the video itself wasn’t political, it’s just that Greenpeace are so according to the rules it can’t be used as an ad. That wouldn’t affect schools showing it at all.

You get to see lesson plans? For everything?
I don’t see how that works? I only plan a few days ahead in case of adjustment.
There will be many times school shows or discusses something that upsets a child. This seems like something worth showing.

It was not approved since it was made by a political organisation and was deemed to be, on balance, more about politics and less about the product - supermarket. Political advertising is specially regulated particularly in regards to funding and amount of time allocated.

Having said this, I don't see anything particularly contentious about the message which is being conveyed - HOWEVER, this is a slippery slope for the school and they should not have shown it. Would it have been okay to show a party political broadcast by the labour party, how about UKIP or the green party? On this point, you should definitely complain.

Would it be wrong to discuss Rosa Parks, because it's political? Or just good teaching.

The green peace advert wouldn't have been allowed to be shown as anything politically motivated cannot be shown in schools

I don't think this is the case. I know a few schools who used the initial video in primary school as a focus of work including some higher profile teachers on social media. If schools weren't allowed to show anything politically motivated then an awful lot would not happen in schools.

The advert hasn't been banned totally.
One regulator hasn't barred the video, linked to a specific supermarket, from being used as an advert on television.
The original video has not been banned. It is widely available.

My children have all watched newsround from around age 7 at school. I think the showing of this short video is important to everyone. I disagree it's political, it's environmental awareness and something that fits perfectly with the topic your child is studying.

It opens up a great opportunity to talk more about it with him and educate him.

You seem to want everyone to agree with you though so.......

@Maursh that was more my point, which appears to have been missed.

My son comes home saying all sorts of things I don’t agree with or don’t care. In reception he was taught about healthy diet . Imo in an extreme way as no balance so I took from it what I thought was important and adapted it to our home .

This is one example however I do think it is an important message . My Ds is doing about the devastation plastic is causing .

I think children do need to be exposed to this .

As for your question should you be asked . No . Let the teachers do there job.

We do get to see lesson plans for all upcoming terms

Seriously?
We don't even have to give OFSTED lesson plans let alone run them by parents!
We do a rough overview for parents of what types of things will be covered but they are by no means exhaustive, and they are just key headings and by no means a list of what will be covered day by day or week by week, with the list of resources and media attached.
Do you really get lesson plans covering so much detail?

I think the advert is a soft way to introduce the real effects of palm oil production and rain forest destruction to children. It's an advert which will encourage questions and debate. Content wise it is much less shocking than many adverts by children's and animals charities on tv

I very much doubt you see lesson plans, an outline of the term's work maybe but not lesson plans, that's nonsense. The advert should absolutely be shown.

My question wasn't about lesson plans. It was about whether an advert which had been banned from mainstream TV as it is deemed to be politically motivated, so something my son wouldn't normally have seen, should have been shown in a school without prior consent. Yes we do see term wise lesson plans. They are week by week so we can start to discuss things with our children. Two weeks ago it was the change in season, so we went on an autumn walk to show him how the leaves were changing colour in readiness for his lesson. Whilst it might not happen in your school, or be required for ofstead, it happens at this school.

But it isn’t banned for being politically motivated in and of itself, it’s not been approved as a supermarket advert for TV broadcast because of the link to a political organisation. It’s a subtle but important difference.

And yes I would be happy with a party political broadcast being shown in an appropriate context, such as discussing what different parties stand for or the use of emotive language.

I showed it to my dc... seemed a good age appropriate way to begin discussion of how we can help and perfectly on topic

I think if the "ban" gets lifted by the petition it will be on telly soon frequently anyway - so seems weird to be annoyed school showed it

Also I get that you may be told the themes being covered, but so they share the detailed plan with the exact work, resources and objectives? I would happily bet that this is far from the first video clip the class has been shown to link to a topic.

My question wasn't about lesson plans.

Well no, but you talked about lesson plans and receiving them, hence why they've come up now as the thread has continued.
I was simply surprised as it is a big commitment for teachers to have to do, and opens them up to all manner of issues with parents - what happens if they deviate from said plans to reflect current issues that arise, what happens if they do something not included, etc. As has happened here it seems.

...should have been shown in a school without prior consent.

Schools do not have to give parents prior notice, or gain parental consent, to show most video clips used within the classroom. They are even allowed to bypass age ratings for clips where the content matches the curriculum.

The content of the video doesn't feel like it is contentious or contains anything it shouldn't to me.

It hasn't been banned because it is politically motivated overall. Just that it has been deemed to have breached political TV advertising rules for a supermarket. So the video has not been banned. The advert has been bared at present until Greenpeace can confirm a few bits of information about their standing politically.

The video, in both its original and new versions, is still widely available, just not on television. It is available on social media and YouTube for example.

Clearcast themselves have said:

"It’s important to note that the concerns of Clearcast and the broadcasters do not extend to the content or message of the ad, ie Clearcast do not consider the ad itself to be political. "

and

"Whilst the ad is not cleared for television, it is free to run on non-Broadcast platforms"

IF Iceland had created the advert themselves from scratch there would be no issue. Clearcast has no issue with the content nor the message. It is simply because it was initially created by Greenpeace and has been available on the Greenpeace media for a long time before it was used by Iceland.

an advert which had been banned from mainstream TV as it is deemed to be politically motivated

The advert content has not been deemed to be politically motivated.

The bar is simply on it being a supermarket advert.

As I have skimmed answers no one has said they think your dc should not of been shown it .

Just as a summary

It's not banned.

It was not approved to be run as an advertising campaign.

There's a big difference. If it was banned, it wouldn't be able to be played on tv at all, not on the news or This Morning or anywhere else. This can be played to its hearts content; but cannot be run as an advertisement as it was originally a Greenpeace advert that has been slightly edited for Iceland.

That's important here. It's not banned content.

was about whether an advert which had been banned from mainstream TV as it is deemed to be politically motivated,

No it wasn’t. Clearcast have already concfirmed that they don’t consider the advert to be politically motivated. They have no issue with the content of the ad.

Prior consent wasn’t needed imo, it fitted with current topic.
I’ve shown it to both my (12 & 7) and answered questions they had. My dd 12 saw it again during a geography lesson and had a discussion about palm oil and the environmental impact.
In my dcs school during the last general election, the whole school did work about it. Campaigned as the parties would and they even held a school wide election on the day. It’s good that politics are taught in school so they gain understanding and learn why it’s important to vote.

I've have no issues with my child the same sort of age being shown the clip - I've got more issues that they've introduced her to some fucking terrible music choices in assembly over the last year leading to me having to endure listening to some right shite (especially entering the Christmas cheese zone) to be honest! They also watch and discuss things like Newsround in DD1's class fairly regularly.

My DD is 7 and I hope they show her this in school and discuss it. It's important.
She's already seen it and we've talked about it, she wasn't upset, she got the point it was making, but I'm sure her teacher will be able to put it in a more child-friendly context than I can.