Beam Me Up Scotty !

Joke for the day!
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/william- ... 00891.html

That proves it, he didnt get Spock's Brain in the Will! Jim

Dammit, Jim, you're an actor, not a technician.--Bones.

I always figure actors are hard up for some $$ when they start doing commercials.

Set my reaction to stunned.

Shatner has always been a hack. Roddenberry was the true genius.
That ham (Shatner) nearly ruined the franchise with his behavior.

At least he's not using dilithium.

Mr. Sulu, get him outa there before he warps his own drive.

The money for the one outweighs the money from the many.

Take the con. So I can join the con.

If you're on twitter.... so is he... @WilliamShatner

I did enjoy "Bucket List"--especially Terry Bradshaw.

I just saw him in the (NOCLEAN) commercial on TV earlier this evening.


Den

.

Chris8243 wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:33 pm

I always figure actors are hard up for some $$ when they start doing commercials.

Maybe "he liked it so well, he bought the company"........... (to paraphrase Victor Kiam)


Den

.

chunkyfrog wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:36 pm

Shatner has always been a hack. Roddenberry was the true genius.
That ham (Shatner) nearly ruined the franchise with his behavior.

Shatner wasn't the only one. TOS and TNG were amazing but it went downhill from there.

I notice at the end of that press release they falsely describe their product as a CLEANER and sanitizer.
I do not think making false statements in a legal statement bodes well for them.

prodigyplace wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 05, 2019 4:27 am

I do not think making false statements in a legal statement bodes well for them.

Did you see Palerider's post with the link to the "current" lawsuit against them for false advertising? You're right, they may be setting themselves up for another.

A press release is not a legal statement. It is basically ad copy, which is not effectively policed or regulated by anyone these days.

Since the package contains a prewash, FauxClean may feel they can easily support the claim that their "system" helps both with "cleaning" and with "sanitizing."

If there was an enforced law that said ads can't stretch the truth, most ads presently in use would not, uh, presently be in use.

I hate the ads because, in my opinion, they give CPAP a bad name. But ads for equipment for cleaning medical equipment are not presently held to the same standard to which drug ads are held. The FauxClean people aren't required to list possible side-effects on air, for example. And all cleaning involves risk, such as breathing in the cleaning agent. No one is going to pull bleach or ammonia off the store shelves of your local store for the reason that those agents are dangerous to breathe into the lungs.

The product itself may be mostly worthless, but I don't hate the product itself for that reason. Most things Americans buy are worthless. I only hate the ads and the misleading instructions that come with the machines.

My hope is that the ad agency's pulling in a celebrity may eventually change the thrust of the ads so that they are not such an attack on CPAP, an attack that gives the public the impression that CPAP is inherently a dangerous therapy. I applaud them, actually, for using a CPAP user. That will help somewhat to mitigate their ads in that some will mostly hear the subtext that 'the celebrity uses CPAP; therefore, CPAP must be a good thing.' So at least there is that going for them, I guess.

Unfortunately, all makers of cleaning products have to assert that there is some imaginary need for their particular product. That is what retail is. That is what ad agencies do. And on that basis, I doubt there will ever be any legal recourse for what such ads say and imply. And for that reason I also doubt that the lawsuit mentioned earlier will ever really get anywhere. The only real mileage will come from quoting it on forums, is my guess.

Hey, just me. Not a doc, not a lawyer, not an ad-copy writer. Just opinionated. Because, hey, look, this is the Internet.