(Close Window)
Topic: Hypnosis in advertising
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (May 30, 2012 03:09PM)
I never seen this before... unusual ad

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MINxg4p0cA&feature=endscreen&NR=1
Message: Posted by: dmkraig (May 30, 2012 05:36PM)
It's not illegal to hypnotize people on TV. It's just boring and advertisers wouldn't want it. What people will sit through watching a stage show in person would have people at home clicking their remotes.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (May 30, 2012 07:06PM)
Its illegal in the UK to broadcast any induction on TV or Radio and I am sure its the case in Europe too. People can drop into trance just by watching others. Although I suspect that was a marketing phrase. It is only an an Advert in Holland.

The only thing about the message that is weak in my opinion is if the car is so good why would you need hypnotized to like it? Powers has loads of charisma though.

I don't know how the law stands with youtube though?
Message: Posted by: dmkraig (May 30, 2012 11:47PM)
Not illegal in US or Canada.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (May 31, 2012 08:09AM)
Here is the reason it was made illegal in the UK. BBC tried filming a live hypnosis show in 1952. The tv engineers fell into trance watching through the monitors.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary--peter-casson-1579819.html
Message: Posted by: hypnokid (May 31, 2012 01:03PM)
Which act of parliament is that law in Mindpunisher? I have searched the statute and not found it.

HK
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (May 31, 2012 02:35PM)
I'm not a lawyer ask one. But a full induction is not permitted to be broadcast on tv or radio in the UK. It has always been that way since I got into hypnosis 25 years ago. Even Paul McKenna stated that at the start of his shows. Its common knowledge among stage hypnotists.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 31, 2012 02:50PM)
Lots of common knowledge is more common than knowledge .
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (May 31, 2012 03:00PM)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/page/guidelines-harm-hypnotism/


There it is on the BBC website It is tied to the 1952 act apprantly.

I am not a lawyer I do not know the ins and outs of the law only that it is "illegal" not permitted or illicit. Either way no one will be able to do it.

illegal (ɪˈliːɡ ə l)

— adj
1. forbidden by law; unlawful; illicit
2. unauthorized or prohibited by a code of official or accepted rules

Whether it is because of a direct Act of Parliment or part an official authority's code it IS "illegal" in other words not permitted prohibited whatever words you want to use.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 31, 2012 03:10PM)
Do you have to make it a rule? Isn't it just common sense... never mind it is England .

Anyhow he asked for a law, not a BBC guideline.

I can't imagine why anyone would broadcast one. I mean just having someone under and out of your control is daft.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (May 31, 2012 03:17PM)
It can't be done in this country its illegal. I doubt any programme would get a license to broadcast a full induction.

If he needs details of how the law prohibits then he should talk to a lawyer I'm not a lawyer. I don't make any rules either. I doubt any license would be given for any full broadcast of a show.

These are not BBC guidelines. The BBC do not have the power or authority to broadcast a full induction. No TV broadcasting company does.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 31, 2012 03:20PM)
When I sell copies of my show I edit pug the induction. I don't have to, but again I can't imagine why someone wouldn't .

Plus it is as boring as can be.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (May 31, 2012 03:33PM)
Maybe so but the reason its not permitted is because of the possibility of viewers falling into trance while watch as happened to the TV engineers that were filming Peter Casson's show for TV.

I don't make up the reasons. Im not arguing for or against since it is most unlikely I will be on TV with a hypnosis show so I'm totally indifferent. Its just of historical and passing interest to me.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (May 31, 2012 05:44PM)
The reason I edit it is the same. Don't want someone falling on a coffee table. I just didn't need a law to tell me is all.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (May 31, 2012 06:12PM)
I agree its pretty obvious to me. But it seems not everybody thinks that way the link further up shows they were planning to broadcast the induction of Peter Casson's in 1952 the same year the hypnotism act was created!. I don't know if there was any connection? It was only when half their engineers went into trance they thought it was a bad idea.

I don't know about your part of the world Danny but we actually need commonsense rules and guidelines because there would be some idiot somewhere trying to do the things you probably wouldn't dream of.
Message: Posted by: TonyB2009 (May 31, 2012 06:54PM)
MP, did Casson really hypnotise the engineers, or is that the sort of legend we build up around ourselves to exploit a chance for some good publicity? I smell a fish...
Message: Posted by: Owen Mc Ginty (Jun 1, 2012 02:11AM)
[quote]
On 2012-05-31 19:54, TonyB2009 wrote:
MP, did Casson really hypnotise the engineers, or is that the sort of legend we build up around ourselves to exploit a chance for some good publicity? I smell a fish...
[/quote]

Smells fishy to me too, but it smells like great !@#$in fish!
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Jun 1, 2012 11:59AM)
I think it is totally possible it happened. It happens all the time when I do shows. I am asked to wake someone up at the back that went into trance in the audience but had no intention of doing so. Especially big theater type shows it is quite common. Its used to happen to me nearly every show. I could easily see it happening to an engineer watching through a monitor.

If you read the article he never got on TV because of it or the exposure that lesser magicians got in his day.

I think its probably true even if only one engineer went into trance. And even if its not true it is still the reason why you are not allowed to broadcast a full induction because of the "danger" of someone falling into trance while watching. I think its possible that the very suggestible type could easily do so.

But I don't know how it could be verified. I assume the BBC would have historical records of it somewhere? It mustve been great being a hypnotist in those days when there was still so much mystery surrounding hypnosis.
Message: Posted by: Owen Mc Ginty (Jun 1, 2012 02:22PM)
It΄s kind of weird like that in spain, or at least here in the south - a load of people here still think that kinda stuff is black magic ;)
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 1, 2012 04:26PM)
In Jamaica they still have people who believe in Voo doo!!! You are just short of a god to people when you look at someone and say sleep and they fall over.

I could see an engineer falling asleep. I can also see people not quite understanding what is going on and over reacting and making rules and laws. I can also see the hypnotist not wanting to tip the gaff either. It all actually makes perfect sense to me.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Jun 2, 2012 04:34AM)
Thing is if story is true and it probably is the hypnotist would lose out financially by not getting the show broadcast. And also lose out on the tv coverage. It made Paul McKenna a house hold name and multi millionaire.

I can see why the broadcasting authorities would feel nervous. Some one could possibly injure themselves by falling over etc. And with millions watching it is only a numbers game.
Message: Posted by: hypnokid (Jun 2, 2012 07:41AM)
There is no law in the UK but there is an OFCOMM guideline which covers TV in the UK. Prior to that there was a BBC guideline that applied to the BBC only that probably dates back to the Casson story.

HK
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Jun 2, 2012 07:52AM)
They don't need an actual act of parliament then since it seems to be self regulated. Its illegal in the sense that its not permitted.
Message: Posted by: hypnokid (Jun 2, 2012 08:25PM)
Is that you being artfully vague?

HK
Message: Posted by: Anthony Jacquin (Jun 3, 2012 01:54AM)
This article is closer to the truth. It was a controlled test.

I am not convinced the stray engineer had not already been 'touched' by Casson.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=_2k-AAAAIBAJ&sjid=4EsMAAAAIBAJ&pg=5177,5790978&dq=peter+casson+bbc&hl=en

If the link does not take you to the article jut search fro Peter Casson BBC in the archive and look for the articles from 1946 relating to this experiment.

Anthony
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Jun 3, 2012 03:42AM)
I couldn't find full article

There is a a paragraph here mentioning "test". But it doesn't say whether they were directly hypnotised or fell into trance while filming. http://www.teletronic.co.uk/herestv8.htm


The Independant article says it was in 1952.

I still think its possible for someone suggestible to go into trance from watching through a monitor. Whether this was the case or not. I don't know why Casson's would jeopardize his chances of tv exposure by hypnotizing an engineer deliberately.

But who knows.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Jun 3, 2012 04:07AM)
[quote]
On 2012-06-02 21:25, hypnokid wrote:
Is that you being artfully vague?

HK
[/quote]

illegal doesn't necessarily mean criminal law. It also means not permitted.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 3, 2012 08:56AM)
[quote]
On 2012-06-03 05:07, mindpunisher wrote:
[quote]
On 2012-06-02 21:25, hypnokid wrote:
Is that you being artfully vague?

HK
[/quote]

illegal doesn't necessarily mean criminal law. It also means not permitted.
[/quote]

Are you sure?

Well anyhow if the discussion is if you can fall into trance from watching a monitor then why discuss? Of course you can.

Seriously is that the question? There really is no debate. If a blind person can be hypnotized, and they can, then watching a monitor or even just listening can work. I don't see the debate.

Now legs@ or what not sure debate away.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Jun 3, 2012 05:34PM)
Here are a few definitions of the word illegal But I don't see what the point is of continuous nitpicking over meanings of words. The reality is it is NOT possible to broadcast full inductions on TV at least in the UK for sure.

Anybody who has done enough shows especially with larger audiences will know about how easy it is for innocent members of the audience to slip into trance with no intentions. So I don't even know why we are debating whether a TV engineer was hypnotized or not. It's certainly easily possible and it would have been to Casson's advantage financially for his show to have made it to broadcast. So I assume he was motivated to make it work. But we will never know for sure from the info online alone.

illegal (ɪˈliːɡ ə l)

— adj
1. forbidden by law; unlawful; illicit
2. unauthorized or prohibited by a code of official or accepted rules

— n
3. a person who has entered or attempted to enter a country illegally

il'legally

— adv

ille'gality

— n

Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition
2009 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins
Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009
Cite This Source




1. unlawful; illegitimate; illicit; unlicensed. Illegal, unlawful, illegitimate, illicit, criminal can all describe actions not in accord with law. Illegal refers most specifically to violations of statutes or, in organized athletics, codified rules: an illegal seizure of property; an illegal block ( in football ). Unlawful means not sanctioned by or according to law: an unlawful claim to the inheritance; to take unlawful advantage of the trading situation. Illegitimate means lacking legal or traditional right or rights: an illegitimate child; illegitimate use of privileged knowledge. Illicit, which originally meant simply “not permitted,” now most often applies to matters regulated by law with specific emphasis on the way things are carried out: illicit conversion of property; an illicit attempt to control the market. Criminal most often refers to violation of the statutes of penal as opposed to civil law. All felonies are criminal as are all crimes sometimes punishable by death such as murder, arson, and kidnapping: a criminal act.
Message: Posted by: hypnokid (Jun 3, 2012 07:09PM)
You stand by your words. I like that.

HK
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 3, 2012 09:25PM)
Here is another definition of illegal.

A sick bird.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Jun 4, 2012 05:08AM)
[quote]
On 2012-06-03 22:25, Dannydoyle wrote:
Here is another definition of illegal.

A sick bird.
[/quote]
Are you sure that's not an illeagle?
Message: Posted by: bobser (Jun 4, 2012 08:01PM)
I honestly think we all got that :)
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 4, 2012 09:51PM)
I sure hope so.
Message: Posted by: mindpunisher (Jun 5, 2012 02:44AM)
I met this sick bird on Sat who bought me a ticket to go see cage fighting with her in Glasgow. She screamed in delight everytime someone was hurt.... bizarre night. Weegies are now paying to watch them kill each other...


I have never heard of the term before

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sick%20bird
Message: Posted by: Decomposed (Jun 12, 2012 01:37AM)
Whether or not its illegal I think its chancing it to do it. JMO