TVSquad

Based on the information that is already out there, these ads were in place for at least a week if not more before the scare. All phone calls to 911 were placed within a 5 min. window. It seems like there is a pice of information there that we, the public, are missing. Why the freakout if they were there for days already? What caused all those phone calls to be placed within the same timeframe?

Reply

Are you telling me that at some level the police and government officials of Boston hold no responsibility for creating this "panic" in the first place? Most news reports have mentioned that these same ads were placed in various other cities with little to no fanfare. Now, even if those involved don't know what the show is, or what guerilla marketing is (what decade are they living in?), that is no reason to not excerise even the smallest amount of judgement in shutting down roads, bridges and shipping lanes. Apparently in Seattle there was something of a negative reaction as well, but it wasn't splashed all over the news as a terrorist plot because, we can assume, they actually, you know, investigated the situation.

Obviously, if Turner or the marketing firm didn't jump through all the right hoops in Boston, but for some reason warned everyone else, then they should share in a large portion of the blame. But otherwise, it seems to me that the city has backed itself into a corner where its only choice is to throw the book at these two guys, or admit that they went a little overboard. And when presented with those two options, I think we can all guess how they'll act.

Reply

While, I don't expect the police to be hip to the latest in late night television, I do expect the bomb squad to figure out what is and is not a bomb. I've been seaching for pictures on the internet and found a few that show this is just a circuit-board with some LEDs and a battery.

When I first started hearing about the situation I thought it was Turner/CN's fault for a stupid marketing campaign, but in reality this is an over reaction by the officials in Boston and the media fueled panic that followed. Cities around the country have been taking these signs down for weeks without issue, but once the media got ahold of the story and spread panic throughout Boston all hell broke loose. Now the city is trying to save face.

From CBS News:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/01/national/main2420426.shtml
Outside the courthouse, Michael Rich, a lawyer for both of the men, said the description of a bomb-like device could be used for any electronic device.

"If somebody had left a VCR on the ground it would have been a device with wires, electronic components and a power source," he said.

Reply

You must be kidding me. The police are not responsible for not being able to tell the difference between some blinking LEDs and an explosive? Marketers should be held responsible because their ads might, if you squint really hard look sort of like a bomb?

"in this day and age you can't be too careful,"

No, actually, you can. Living in a "post 9/11 world" is not an excuse for acting like an idiot. Being suspicious isn't the same thing as being illegal, being confusing isn't the same thing as being dangerous and being a moron isn't the same thing as being cautious.

You know what else might be a bomb? Shoes. Damn, shoes are dangerous. We should arrest people who wear shoes in public.

Reply

Overreaction, maybe. Any fool could tell, questionable. Calls within a 5 min. span, suspicious. (Why hadn't the calls come in the week or so before? No one noticed? Oh, NEEDED people to notice?) Why oh why did EVERYONE wait and watch (and maybe laugh) for four hours? Not funny, dumb. If you had your chuckle at the Police, Boston officials and the ATF why did you wait so long to tell them? Ted will settle for probably a few million. Good deal for the hundreds of millions in free advertising nationally.

Reply

know what the saddest thing about this incident is? i wouldn't be surprised if an example like this will be responsible for limiting civil rights and creativity in the public domain even more. now, you can of course say that viral marketing has a lesser right of existence than public safety, sure, but the point is that this guerilla campaign was conceived with means that have their origins in art. take the british artist Banksy who has created lots of examples of "guerilla art", e.g. painting a "hole" into the israeli-palestine defence wall. just to make a point. which, of course, is part of the right to freedom of expression. and i wouldn't want to miss this.

Reply

Harry Knowles summed it up pretty well:

"It's illegal to yell FIRE in a theater - you arrest the person who screamed FIRE! This kid didn't yell, BOMB. The media did, the city did. If there was panic in the city, it was caused by the BOSTON news stations, radio stations and the people in government that leaked the story to them. They're the ones to blame" read the rest here: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/31418

I think the guys behind it are right to make a mockery of the "press conference" since the press made such a huge deal about it. Okay so maybe they should have put a logo on the card or something BUT the bomb squad should be able to tell the difference between a bomb and a goddamn lite-brite.

Reply

'I wonder why this didn't cause a panic in NYC or the other cities where the ads were placed?'

Maybe because intelligent people who see a lite-brite don't call 911?

The people to blame most are NOT Turner and the marketing company they hired, but the Boston city officials who have overreacted by arresting the aritsts and calling this thing a 'terrorist hoax'.

This wasn't a hoax or a prank, just some freakin' lite-brites.

Reply

So bombs have blinking lights to call attention to them now?

Reply

"I wonder why this didn't cause a panic in NYC or the other cities where the ads were placed?"

Because a lot of people aren't fearful morons?

If every other city has no reaction, and one city does, who do you think over-reacted?

The answers to so many of the rhetorical questions in the original post are so blindingly obvious, I'm tending to think that it's a parody of other comments found on The Internets.

Reply

Jim B. - that's exactly my beef with this. Check out my comment on the original post... I was watching all day, and there are a few things that need to be cleared up.

-"all" the calls did not come in "simultaneously." There was a report of a suspicious package in Boston, and then within an hour or so, additional reports came in with increased frequency (people reacting to the first report)

-"why did you wait so long to tell them?" Because it wasn't until after it was deemed a "hoax" that anybody broadcast pictures of the devices. You can bet there would have been scores of people calling in to CNN etc. if we'd seen a picture - my coworkers and me included.

Reply

I said this yesterday I said this today. The Boston police are idiots.

And frankly so are these guys, they are on nation TV and went on some pointless rant. What they should have said was "We are sorry. We are sorry that we live in a city like Boston that much have some of the more ignorant officers in the country. We are sorry that the Boston police scared the shit out of the people in and around Boston. We are sorry that the cops can't do a better job protecting the city from the real crimes. For all that we are sorry".

Reply

The light boxes didn't cause a panic in other cities because, quite frankly, they were not panic worthy. Suspicious, yes, in poor taste, perhaps, it's debatable. But the escalating overreaction on the part of the city smacks of nothing more than embarassment and CYA. And the Boston authorties who are complaining about the cost of dealing with it should have been as concerned with the taxpayers money when they arrested those guys yesterday. Because the longer they try to respin this series of errors the more this will cost the taxpayers in the end.

Reply

"but the people who deserve the least amount of second guessing from us are the Boston police and city officials."

Um, maybe initially but the fact that they are charging an employee of the marking firm with planting Hoax Devices....quite absurd.

What the officials fail to realize is that no crime was comitted. No one left devices to scare or alarm the public. The moment Turner realised that this might be related to their ads they called the authorities asap. From what I've read the people at Turner had no clue the items in Boston might be theirs until someone described one as a "spongebob giving the finger".

Meanwhile I would like more information about the calls that were placed, it seems kinda malicious and intentional.

Reply

Re: #3

They didn't leave these things on the ground. They attached them to bridges and highway overpasses, 20 feet above street level. Honestly, I'm glad the police handled it the way they did. I'd rather they assume that the electronic devices are bombs and dispose of them accordingly rather than take time to try to figure out if they're bombs or not. If they were actually bombs, then they could've blown up while the police was trying to figure out if it's dangerous or not.

Were the signs discovered attached to bridges and other likely places for bombs in the other cities? Or was the first one to be discovered in those cities in locations where they wouldn't be as suspicious? That makes a huge difference.

Honestly, I don't understand how any of the blame falls anywhere other than at the feet of Turner. If they hadn't concocted this crazy scheme in the first place, there would be nothing for Boston police to react (or overreact) to. End of story.

Reply

I'm glad to see some level-headed comments here. It's one thing to be careful; it's another to call the bomb squad every time you see a box with lights on it. I don't think it's in terrorists' best interests to hang their weapons in wide open public places with bright alien cartoons on them.

Reply

Perhaps Ted will have to call is good friend Denny Crane to represent these kids in Boston court!

That would be an awesome episode.

Reply

A quote from a Reuters article:

When I talked to the bomb squad who responded there ... they tell us that what they look for is a power source, which existed here...they look for a circuit and there was a circuit board with wires attached to it. And that wire was running to what to their eye appeared to be a possible explosive material. It was wrapped in duct tape," said Grossman.

Grossman added that their location in some of Boston's busiest areas also looked suspicious. "The location was such that it was the type of location one would put a bomb if you wanted to interrupt the infrastructure," he said."

I'm sorry folks, but the Boston police did absolutely nothing wrong and the people of Boston are lucky to have people who would rather err on the side of caution then explain down the road why they ignored signs of a bomb when a real attack happens.

Bob is correct. Terrorists, whether foreign or our local home grown nutbags can't plant their bombs in goofy packaging? If someone planted a package with Scooby doo's picture on it with wires and a pack strapped with duct tape on a seat in a plane or on the side of the G.W Bridge, should we all ignore it? Maybe the media went on ad nauseum about it, but I commend the Police for being alert enough to do something about it.


The lawyer for the two morons at the press conference must have an ulcer. These dopes making jokes is pretty much killing any chance that the DA will cool off enough to drop charges against them. That's right meatheads, piss off the person prosecuting you.

Reply

Another thing to note. Whether people are paranoid or not, whenever a call comes in that there may be a bomb, the police, by law, have to investigate. If there is even the most remote chance that the bomb my be genuine, they have to clear a secure area before they determine if it is real or not.

I am sure we have all seen how many planes were grounded based only on a phone call of a bomb.

Reply

I feel they are playing the media exactly how they need to be played. THE MEDIA is at fault for blowing this thing totally out of proportion.

Reply