New TAC - Scope advertising

Hi there,

Just wondering whether anyone has seen the latest (maybe not the greatest) TAC/Scopes ad on the TV.  Link for it is [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I can't say that I have been impressed.  Once again they target the motorcyclist rather than the driver at fault. It's worth a watch AND a letter to the TAC AND the Minister for the TAC, Minister for Roads, AND the deputy commissioner of police re the unfair targeting of the motorcyclist, when with a slightly changed script, the nig nog drivers could just as easily be targeted.

My letter to the TAC is below. I will do same or similar for the Minister/s etc ...

Hi there,

I have just seen on free to air TV your latest ad campaign.  This advertisement has prompted me to go to your web site and review the video of your advertising.

Before I make any observations regarding your advertising campaign I think I should alert you to the fact that
1. I walk,
2. I ride HPVs,
3. I ride a motorcycle and
4. I drive a motor car.

With regard to your advertising campaign, I would like to make the following observations …

1. You are to be commended for raising the four key safety issues of cornering, road position, road surfaces and debris, and other road users as issues that you address in your campaign.
2. Your advertising campaign objectives are commendable.
3. In three of the four incidents featured the motorcyclist is the innocent victim of the RV, the tractor or the SUV. In the fourth incident, the rider is again an innocent victim of road debris, but attribution of responsibility for any adverse incident resulting from the debris would be directed to the motorcyclist.
4. The RV driver (first incident featured) fails to give adequate notice of his intention to turn right – just two “blinks” of the right turn indicator, switched on at the commencement point of the right turn.  This, I understand, is against the law and would potentially fall within the category of culpable driving.
5. The driver of the farm vehicle (tractor) (second incident featured) has entered the roadway without due care, and failed to give way to the right. Also, the onus and responsibility is on the driver of the vehicle entering a roadway from a drive way (drive-in) to ensure that it is safe to enter that (public) road way. Another incident which would potentially fall within the category of culpable driving.
6. The SUV featured in the fourth incident has clearly crossed the double dividing line marked on the roadway.  This again is breaking the law. Should such driver “take out” another vehicle, whether it be a motor car or motorcycle, with the result producing a fatality, this driver would also, potentially, be charged with culpable driving.
7. You claim that your advertising campaign attempts to address five key safety issues, one of which is speed.  Careful observance of your video clip gives no indication that excessive speed on the part of the motorcyclist could be a contributing factor in any of the scenarios depicted.

BUT…

Your campaign could just as easily, with modification of the sound track only, be directed to all road users to make them aware that they need to take due care and regard for other.  For instance, the RV driver, had the advertisement featured a collision with a motor car, there would be a good chance that the RV driver as well as the motor car driver and front seat passenger would be road fatality statistics.  The same would apply with the SUV should it have been involved in a head on collision with another motor car/truck.

The bottom line of this email is …

It is not just motorcyclists who need educating with regard to road law/lore.

Your advertising campaign could just as easily and with just as much effect and effectiveness focus on educating, ALL road users.

Thank you for considering the content of this email. I look forward to seeing just as focused advertising directed at road users other than motorcyclists.

Sincerely


You need to put your name, address and full contact details somewhere in your letter.