• ultranaut@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    That does seem like a fucked up method of advertising for the government to be involved in. Incentivizing people to permanently alter their bodies to advertise something is inherently gross and tacky behavior, regardless of what it’s advertising.

    • naeap@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, especially that it’s just valid a year, sounds stupid.

      If they would give us a lifetime of free transport with a little ad tattoo for public transport, I would be fine with it.
      But a permanent tattoo for 1 year of using bus/train/bim doesn’t sound really attractive or reasonable

      More or less this was just an event to promote public transport stuff - and never was really about the tattoo, but it draws attention. So not needed that someone (or many) really does it

      • Davel23@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Is there actually something called “bim” in Austria or are you making a The Apple joke?

      • DogMuffins
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Permanent free anything is always problematic. Recipients would be able to sue in the future when anything changes, however small.

    • DogMuffins
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      IDK, I can’t really decide.

      What do you think about the free tattoos on environmental themes, is that gross and tacky?

      Does it make it gross and tacky if those environmental themes align with political policy?

      It would definitely be gross and tacky if it were an open offer. The limitation to 3 per day or festival changes it somehow IMO. If there were no limitation on numbers then it would somehow be tantamount to exploiting poor people. The scarcity makes it a publicity stunt.

      I don’t think i really have a problem with it. I mean I wouldn’t do it, and I think it’s a bit weird that someone would do it, but if they want to… have at it IMO.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Leonore Gewesseler, Green MP and Austria’s climate minister, was seen promoting the deal at the Frequency Festival in the town of St Pölten last Thursday.

    A pop-up tattoo parlour with a banner reading “Aktion geht unter die Haut” (Action that gets under your skin) has appeared at a number of events this summer.

    Attendees at the events where the tent appeared were also offered other tattoo designs related to public transport, sustainability and climate change free of charge.

    After the pop-up tent appeared at Electric Love Festival in Salzburg six weeks ago, social media users criticised the campaign for encouraging irresponsible behaviour from young people.

    Henrike Brandstötter, an MP for Austria’s liberal NEOS party, also said that “offering people money for putting advertising under their skin reveals an unacceptable view of humanity from a government minister”.

    Representatives of the company which sells the climate ticket also told local press that feedback at the festivals was “extremely positive” and the campaign had been well received.


    The original article contains 539 words, the summary contains 164 words. Saved 70%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • PotatoesFall
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It just says “climate ticket”. I would do it for sure that’s a great deal