• 80
How much do marketing angles play into consumer choices? The European Union apparently thinks a lot. For instance, we've recently seen all tobacco sponsorships pulled from motorsports, such as the world's most popular, Formula 1. Now it seems that automobile advertisements will be the next form of media ordered to clean up its act. Potential new rules that are currently in draft form and up for review by the College of Commissioners call for the inclusion of fuel consumption and carbon emission warnings on all vehicle advertisements, just like health warnings are included on packs of cigarettes. It is suspected that the legislation follows a previously published report that suggests 20 percent of every automobile ad should address environmental concerns. Arguments against the proposition claim that it will lead to lost revenue from decreased advertising by automakers who don't want to publicize how dirty their cars are. Would the Bugatti Veyron buyer really be swayed from his or her decision by seeing a single digit city fuel economy rating staring back from within the pages of Robb Report? We think not.

[Source: Autocar UK]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 80 Comments
      • 6 Years Ago
      please make the madness stop.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Such nonsense. No reason to force this.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Now what about the story about the UNINTENDED acceleration of Toyota trucks. Warning signs????
      I can see it now.
      • 6 Years Ago
      I really hope this comes to the US. It would really keep me informed. It would also be useful if my light and water bill had that info to tell me how much CO2 is related to my home. Also if they could advertise the numbers on boxes of cereal and packages of beef. Or they could make it easier on me by just having it totaled on the bottom of my receipt next to the price. What would be really good would be if they totaled the CO2 related to each purchase and taxed it. That way heavier polluting people would pay. They could come up with a really cool name for it to. Maybe call it carbon credits or something.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Has anyone attempted to determine the CO2 output of governments around the world, and then attempted to do a cost benefit analysis of the CO2 output of governments?
      • 6 Years Ago
      And what about other emissions-producing goods like a refrigirator or a lawn mower? Will they too face such requirements? What about the factories and refineries for the raw materials that make up nearly all consumer goods? And the manufacturing? How about warnings for their emissions too?

      Are these people really setting out to inform consumers about harmful emissions, or maybe this is just another hate campaign against the auto industry? I mean how many people already believe that automobiles are the leaders in greenhouse gas contribution? This will surely just make that bit of fiction even prolific.
      • 6 Years Ago
      keep that crap on the other side of the pond please. I likes me cars w/o warning lables thank you very much. They already make me sick to the stomach when I sees the MSRP.
        • 6 Years Ago
        no, I MUST over react. If I don't, the terrorist win. That's what the Republicans said. And while PSA did put me at ease for a minute, Goat Law pushed me over the edge again. Now I'm f-n freekin out.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Read Psa's comment and stop overreacting.
        • 6 Years Ago
        lol k
        • 6 Years Ago
        my big, nasty trucks and SUVs have had rollover warnings on the driver's visor for over a decade now.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Why doesn't the EU just go ahead and legislate that Global Warming, as envisioned by Al Gore, is a scientific fact and thereafter ban all carbon emissions, especially the dreaded carbon dioxide, human and otherwise. I for one would love to see human carbon dioxide emissions wipped away from the pristine wilderness of Europe.
        • 6 Years Ago
        In a politically correct world I should not be saying this, But banning tobacco advertising has badly weakened Formula One. Yes we all know that is bad for your health, but they had the funds to support most of the teams, even the unsuccessful teams that never won a single race but were there for the love of the sport. Now certain teams can't even compete in all the races due to a lack of cash. Now they are proposing this, What next.

        People are going to smoke if they want to, No matter what.

        By the way, I'm a non smoker.
        • 6 Years Ago
        @Adrian

        "People are going to smoke if they want to, No matter what."
        Do you honestly think that most smokers "want" to smoke??? If they say that, they are merely trying to justify why they can't overcome thier drug addiction. The vast majority of smokers hate the fact that they now "have to" smoke wether they like it or not.

        BTW I haven't had a cigarette in 12 Days.
        • 6 Years Ago
        I used to be "meh" about smoking regulations until I saw my two-year old son with a straw in his mouth, pretending to smoke, because he's seen people on the street do it.

        Then I got a little twitchy. I'm not quite sure what I think about it, yet, but I do think that being up-front with warnings is not a bad thing.
      • 6 Years Ago
      So when are we going to require that all babies born come with a stamped on notice of carbon emissions. I for one am all for it. Mandatory tatoos in the name of informing people, eh APrime? Everytime one of those nasty buggers exhales, he is poluting our air and irreparably damaging our fragile planet.
        • 6 Years Ago
        I want a disclaimer on my car ads telling me how many plants are fed by the CO2 from my car.

        Then I want a number showing what percent of our planet's atmospheric CO2 is anthropogenic.

        THEN I want ANOTHER number showing what percent of anthropogenic CO2 is caused by automobiles.

        You know, just so we can all stay "informed".
        • 6 Years Ago
        Goat Law, I shouldn't bother explaining this because you ignore all reason that disagrees with you. But I'll try.

        When you breathe out CO2, you do it by attaching carbons to the oxygen you breathe in. These carbons came from plants and animals you eat. In the case of animals, those animals ate plants or ate other animals that ate plants. In the end, all the C you are breathing out comes from plants that absorbed the C from the air during the growing cycle in the past year. So you are just returning those Cs to the atmosphere in a cycle.

        In the case of a car, the Cs are coming from oil that was taken from the ground. These Cs going into the atmosphere have not been in the atmosphere during your lifetime or likely the lifetime of any human that ever existed.

        So, when you just move Cs around and don't add to the count in the atmosphere, you aren't changing the conditions over time (when measured over periods longer than a year). When you introduce Cs that have been out of circulation for recorded history, there's a good chance you are changing conditions.

        Think if it this way.

        What if I gave you $100 every spring? But you gave me $100 back every fall? You are $100 richer in the summer, but over time, you gain nothing.

        But instead, what if I gave you $10 every spring and you gave nothing back in the fall? You may not be richer initially, but over time the money "builds up" since you keep it.

        This is the difference. Over time, this burning of oil can build up and change the atmosphere. Breathing (or even cow farts) doesn't change anything long-term because those carbons are just moving around from the atmosphere to plants/animals and back.

        Now, you can say you don't agree that a build of carbon is a problem. That you think changing our atmospheric by burning oil isn't going to be a problem. This is a valid position scientifically. But don't go equating breathing with burning oil, it's not a scientifically accurate comparison.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Holy f' humans are consumer goods now?
        • 6 Years Ago
        That C doesn't just disappear when it "feeds plants" as you says. Those plants might get eaten or burned, and the C released again. You've put C into the carbon cycle that wasn't there before. The results are rather unpredictable, they might be okay. They might not.

        100% of the carbon being added to our air (not just in the cycle) is anthropogenic.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Hmm. All the people here who like to state they are only being reasonable about global warming are instead actually up in arms?

      If CO2 doesn't matter, why do you care if it is listed on ads? It's not like anyone is prohibiting you from buying the car.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Manufacturers should look into lighter material like magnesium and aluminum alloys. I know they are more expensive than stainless steel, but I wouldn't mind paying extra for a lighter vehicle. The money saved on gas will eventually pay it back.

      Furthermore, magnesium and aluminum don't rust like stainless steel.
        • 6 Years Ago
        ...Where are you getting at?
        • 6 Years Ago
        Nevermind, I don't understand how but I managed to skip a sentence even after rereading what you said earlier.
        • 6 Years Ago
        yeah, I thought the whole point of *stainless* steel was that it *didn't* rust.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Here's a warning:

      "Driving a high-performance car may make you happy."
      =]
        • 6 Years Ago
        AMEN Brother Ben
    • Load More Comments
    Advertisement

    From Our Partners

    2014 Jeep Cherokee
    MSRP: $22,995 - $30,095
    2015 Mercedes-Benz E-Class
    MSRP: $51,800 - $103,200
    2014 Chevrolet Cruze
    MSRP: $17,520 - $24,985