35 points

From the same era when heroin was sold as the non-addictive alternative to morphine. “Truth in advertising” wasn’t a thing then.

permalink
report
reply
21 points

“Truth in advertising” wasn’t a thing then.

Is it a thing now?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

In theory, but then there’s Goop and its ilk.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Sounds like a hell of a time to be alive!

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points
*

Mod of the Forgotten Weapons community chiming in to explain. Iver Johnson revolvers featured a (at the time) new safety mechanism that prevented the guns from going off when dropped. I wouldn’t recommend giving it to a baby though.

More famously they had a “Hammer the Hammer” ad series where they showed this off.

Post with more info: https://lemmy.world/post/10228746

permalink
report
reply
9 points

That’s not a baby. She’s old enough to own at least 2 or 3 guns!

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The baby is on the right duh

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

She was probably teething and they put some opium on her pacifier.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That’s a pretty sweet looking revolver though

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

It’s not a toy, but let your children play with it?

permalink
report
reply
14 points
*

I think this may have been an early prototype of the philosophy: “It doesn’t matter what your advertisement says, it matters whether people remember it and are impacted by it.” I’d be genuinely a little curious to find out how well this ad performed in practice.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Or you just lie to everyone about your product until someone proves you wrong or even tries to sue you for the death of a family member … and even then, you fight any accusations as much as possible until you either win or are forced to pay penalties.

And once the costs of accidental deaths out pace the cost of lying about it all, then you can change your message or your product.

Ford Corp was famous for balancing the cost of recalls that could prevent deaths to litigation. The last time I read about it 20 years ago, the company had narrowed it down to valuing human life at about two million dollars. If litigation per person rose above that level, then it was cheaper to announce a recall.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Tyler Durden, is that you ?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Thank god we’ve improved our advertising philosophy since then…

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

And finally solved the gun issue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

* learned to better disguise our advertising philosophy

There are still kids in the houses that store the firearms being sold today

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Between 1899 and 1908 ~700,000 were sold. But I’d attribute it more to a more successful campaign they ran called “Hammer the Hammer”

Link for info on that:

https://lemmy.world/post/10228746

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

“Accidental discharge impossible.”

If only all those kids who shot themselves had better parents who bought “the right” gun.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

An accidental discharge is not a negligent discharge.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

They also made bikes and motorcycles, which I think is kinda funny.

permalink
report
reply

Community stats

  • 126

    Monthly active users

  • 66

    Posts

  • 751

    Comments

Community moderators