Some interesting things to note about conversations such as this:
1) Sometimes folks seem to be upset at the notion that others are offended (despite the fact that being offended is subjective and a right as much as free speech is)
2) Sometimes folks seem to make the assumption that just because people are offended, they seem to be calling for censorship (Some posters on this thread defend free speech as if someone has called for the labels to be banned, but as far as I can tell no one has said that yet).
Why can’t free speech and the right to be offended live comfortably together? The brewery has the right to make the label. People have the right to be offended about it. End of story, no?
|
Post a reply 
Private message 
|
+1.
Evelyn Beatrice Hall: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Offended? Yes. Willing to censor? Absolutely not. As Aaron said, given sufficient quantity disgusted potential consumers, the label will effectively censor itself.
|
Post a reply
Private message
|
I’ll point out that I don’t think it should be censored, I’m merely making the argument that profiteering off of Hitler’s likeness is in fact offensive to many people. There are those who merely shrug their shoulders and say, "So what?" to the use of Der Fuhrer’s visage. They’re probably the ones who sat in the back and slept during history class.
|
Post a reply
Private message
|
So what you are saying is controversial topics and controversial subjects should not be discussed?
This is exactly the type of thing that should be discussed and brought into the open.
If the view is this is freedom of speech, surely others must realize this notion will be openly challenged, just like any controversial freedom of speech issue.
Tim
|
Post a reply
Private message
|
Because there are so many unqualified statements on forums like the internet, it’s good to try to balance them by speaking from the other side. If 25 people all say how wrong they think something is, it’s perfectly legitimate to point out on what grounds that something has the right to be so wrong. It doesn’t necessarily mean you’ve misread the statements, or intentions, of the 25 critics.
|
Post a reply
Private message
|
Well, crazy’s a given, aunt, can’t 100% sure but for example here that can be used as a somewhat derogatory yet relatively neutral term for someone who’s gay or acting feminised.
|
Post a reply
Private message
|
I would like to hear the opinion of Christian Skovdal Andersen.
Christian:
What message are you trying to convey by using the image?
Why would you chose the image to represent your product?
Do you see any repercussions in the use of the image?
|
Post a reply
Private message
|
Seems reasonable but I wonder why in Spanish? Why not Verrückte Tante? My wild guess would be that it’s a derogatory name the Spanish Republicans (or Nationalists for that matter) called Hitler but that still wouldn’t explain the connection to a Belgian-German wheat beer. One more question to ask Christian.
|
Post a reply
Private message
|
Here’s the explanation to the name:
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=da&ie=UT
F-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fbeerticker.dk%2Fny-oel-beer-here-tia-loca-3117%2F&sl=d
a&tl=en&history_state0=
More:
http://www.beerhere.dk/beers.aspx
|
Post a reply
Private message
|
Christian always had a thing about Hitler.
Remember his old avatar?:
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=-3&id=690374629#/photo.p
hp?pid=343955&id=690374629
Anyways, I somehow believe that he’s quite amused by all the controversy.
He has logged in today, so I’m sure he’ll finally call in here.
|
Post a reply
Private message
|
