After receiving the text for the ad quoted above, a representative from the advertising team suggested AFSC use the word “war” instead of “genocide” – a word with an entirely different meaning both colloquially and under international law. When AFSC rejected this approach, the New York Times Ad Acceptability Team sent an email that read in part: “Various international bodies, human rights organizations, and governments have differing views on the situation. In line with our commitment to factual accuracy and adherence to legal standards, we must ensure that all advertising content complies with these widely applied definitions.”

  • @LePoisson
    link
    11 month ago

    It’s not intentionally deceptive, they literally called it that because one of the founders admired the Quakers.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      71 month ago

      I mean, they wanted to cash in on the positive reputations Quakers had in business. While not being Quaker. And not implementing any of their business practices AFAIK. Plus their logo is of a traditional Puritan and has nothing to do with Quakers.

      I think “deceptive” is a fair word.

    • Zagorath
      link
      fedilink
      61 month ago

      qualities describing Quakers, such as integrity, honesty, and purity, were traits that he wanted customers to associate with the company’s product

      I dunno how else to describe that but intentionally deceptive.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 month ago

        I dunno how else to describe that but intentionally deceptive.

        Yeah, it IS part of marketing after all.