Motion: THW ban the ads for alcohol outside on billboards, roads and bus stops. On radio and TV, ads would be allowed after 9 PM curfew
Role: Secretary (opp.)
# 1 Argument:
Alcohol consumption is not based on alcohol advertising. The notion that people would drink more because of billboards is ridiculous. I’ll tell you why people drink. They drink, because
- someone offers them a taster at an impressionable age
- they start drinking socially in their teens
- they continue to drink socially in their student years
- they find out that alcohol may help personally as a cure or remedy for anxiety, joy, envy, love, hatred, fears and other emotions (shame etc.)
- they may find out that alcohol is a great companion when preparing meals and discussing food, almost by accident (someone at some point uncorks a bottle of wine)
- they can only meet and hook up with certain people when they drink together with them on premises that are licensed to serve alcohol
Summed up, these things lead ”one” (standing for anyone) to the conclusion that alcohol is intert(wine)d (no pun intended) with our lives. The substance is almost inextricable in some cases. It is ludicrous to try and control the sale of alcohol through ads, when they do not actively or effectively generate sales. What the ads do is they merely redistribute to what breweries and distillers the alcohol dollar, euro and pound is going to in the end.
# 2 Argument
Let us imagine a lab-rat experiment. Let us picture lab rats in an environment with alcohol advertising and without alcohol advertising. There would be no texts as animals cannot read, but there would be pictures of liquids, bottles, glasses and accessories around. Now, do you think that this would affect the consumption of alcohol by mice and rats in the maze at large, at all or all the way? My presumption would be that the consumption of alcohol would be equal and even in both the ad-freaky and the ad-free environment (or maze). Mice and rats would smell the substance in any corner of their maze as long as it was somehow available, through using a lever or straight up. They would drink it and they would act accordingly; sometimes gregariously and socially and sometimes viciously and dissocially. The same thing applies to human communities. The VISUAL info on alcohol is nothing compared with the CHEMICAL information that the substance imparts.
# 1 Assertion:
Alcohol is seen as an evil as such, but maybe it’s the grey area in life which is neither good nor bad. It is true that a lot of bad things happen in the wake of downing the tipple, but perhaps that is merely an excuse rather than a reason. People slyly start drinking alcohol SO THAT they can commit heinous crimes with an ”alibi”; ”I did it because I was under the influence”. To me, it has always been clear what I have done or seen when intoxicated up to the point of passing out. I never use it as an excuse for anything. I know that I may talk a little louder or bolder when I’m drunk or make my voice sound hoarser and raspier, but that’s about it. I am always aware of my emotions and responses and actions when I drink. Like many people, I get ideas – some also affirmative, not always adversative – that seem stupid on the morning after, but I don’t have to act on them. Alcohol would be stopped used as an excuse if people did not listen to stories about it as an excuse. It simply would not be tolerated as an extenuating circumstance, period. For this reason(ing), I state that alcohol is NOT bad as such, and therefore there should be no restrictions on its advertising either; it is not an evil the public should be guarded against.
Thank you for listening.
Puheen kesto: 5 min 34 sek
Arvio: * * * * *. Tämä puhe on vain niin hyvin strukturoitu ja muotoiltu, että kyse on muotovaliosta… Myös sen pituus on lähes sekunnilleen täydellinen antaen mahdollisuuden vastata pariin lyhyeen kysymykseen kuitenkin vastaukset lennosta hieman pidempinä. Jos joku muu kuin minä esittäisi saman puheen, asettuisin puheen pitäjän kannalle.