Join 3,522 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Who blames the pigs?
March 1, 2012 12:31 AM   Subscribe

The Guardian reinterprets the Three Little Pigs. An advertisement for the Guardian's "open" approach to journalism. [SLGuardian]
posted by FrereKhan (31 comments total) 10 users marked this as a favorite

 
much more interesting that that Avengers Trailer.
posted by mary8nne at 12:36 AM on March 1, 2012 [5 favorites]


I saw this when it first aired last night and was pretty much taken aback by the tone and imagery it used, I wasn't entirely sure it was even a Guardian ad until the end (mainly due to the twitter and Youtube references throughout.) and was expecting it to be some kind of government propaganda style ad.

I guess they're just softening us all up for the impending apocolypse.
posted by DuchessProzac at 12:47 AM on March 1, 2012


I prefer John Branyan's take on how Shakespeare might have reinterpreted the Three Little Pigs
posted by straight at 1:03 AM on March 1, 2012 [3 favorites]


I guess they're just softening us all up for the impending apocolypse.

Noooooo. Aporkalypse. You really messed up that punchline.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 1:04 AM on March 1, 2012 [5 favorites]


I saw this when it first aired last night and was pretty much taken aback by the tone and imagery it used,

Exactly. I don't like how I felt responding to it. It was...strangely cinematic, and not so much about journalism as about how things tie together, how events cause other events and how people's reactions to those events occur. Except it was also creepily like a film that would be shown in...I don't know, some world that Alan Moore would probably be good at creating.

Interesting, but I'm almost more interested in how it makes people feel.

(That said, The Guardian's comments sections are generally more readable and less horrifying than any other news site's, so points for that?)
posted by kalimac at 1:18 AM on March 1, 2012 [2 favorites]


I thought it was a Charlie Brooker thing, since they ran it just before 10 O'Clock Live.
posted by Optamystic at 2:02 AM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]


Eye-opening. I never knew that the pigs were deadbeat homeowners who weren't paying their bills... I always assumed that the Big, Bad Wolf was just, you know, big and bad. Now when my kids ask why the Wolf wanted to blow down their houses I can explain that the Wolf was an innocent bill-collector who became the victim of an elaborate scheme by the Piggies to commit insurance fraud - which is a much better lesson than telling them that they should only build a house from bricks and mortar.
posted by three blind mice at 2:16 AM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]


The pig's problem that they are insufficiently little to qualify under the "not worth the effort for a snack" rule.
posted by rongorongo at 2:18 AM on March 1, 2012


The pig's problem that they are insufficiently little to qualify under the "not worth the effort for a snack" rule.

Too pig to fail.
posted by chavenet at 2:30 AM on March 1, 2012 [23 favorites]


pun = poor comment
posted by panaceanot at 2:38 AM on March 1, 2012


I thought it was an entertaining ad - I just don't think it's going to convince anyone new to buy the Guardian. Which newspaper doesn't have comments, polls, videos, and blogs on its website? How are tweets associated with The Guardian in particular, as opposed to other papers (and if they are, how many people in the UK use Twitter?). Even things like liveblogs, which I had thought for a long time were only done by The Guardian, turn out to be even better on sites like BBC News and The Telegraph.

So much of this advert is about The Guardian's online presence, but I think they've been resting on their laurels for years. They were the first and the best UK paper to get online in a big way, but today their commenting system is a bad joke (Discus is better, as used by other papers - at least you can rank by recommends) and their recent Music community launch, where readers are supposed to rate and review albums etc (Last.fm? Amazon? iTunes?) seems to be getting light traffic, which isn't surprising since it looks awful.

It's important that we have a good left-wing paper in the UK, and the Guardian does solid investigative journalism. But it's slipping.
posted by adrianhon at 2:45 AM on March 1, 2012


I thought it was a Charlie Brooker thing, since they ran it just before 10 O'Clock Live.

It really does have that same style, doesn't it? Maybe he or one of the people involved in his recent short films worked on this?
posted by atrazine at 2:45 AM on March 1, 2012


Discus is better, as used by other papers

I dislike Discus. Should MetaFilter replace the comments with Discus?

I don't think consolidation of comment systems across websites is such a good idea. Privacy issues aside, Discus comments are quite often a 'buffering' style indicator for me*, rather than a set of comments embedded in the page.

*and that's despite having to begrudgingly whitelist Discus in Ghostery.
posted by panaceanot at 2:52 AM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]


It's important that we have a good left-wing paper in the UK, and the Guardian does solid investigative journalism. But it's slipping.

I have two major gripes with the Guardian online:

1. The comment system is very user unfriendly for the commenter
2. Links do not open in a new window

Apart from that, I think the Guardian online is pretty much ahead of the pack when it comes to offering serious online news. I haven't found anything to equal it.

I recently bought a subscription for the Times online and I'm going to cancel because there is nothing of interest for me there, despite the Times being a better real-life paper in many ways.
posted by Summer at 3:00 AM on March 1, 2012


Expensive ad, preaching to the converted, imho.

(Of course, they may be targeting the converted, and trying to get them to buy more, interact more, and spend more time on the site)
posted by DanCall at 3:03 AM on March 1, 2012


Did I think that Mefi should replace comments with Discus? Hells no. Do I think it's the best system for papers? Of course not: I prefer the NYT's, for example. But is it better than The Guardian's current system? IMO, yes.

If The Guardian's comments were more like a conversation between commenters (as they are in Mefi) then having unthreaded, chronological ordering makes sense; and sometimes that's what they are. But much of the time, as on all papers, they're simply individual responses to the content of the article, in which case having better sorting systems makes sense.

FWIW, I have been hearing that The Guardian is working on improving their commenting system... for the last 3 years.
posted by adrianhon at 3:03 AM on March 1, 2012


I thought it was an entertaining ad - I just don't think it's going to convince anyone new to buy the Guardian. Which newspaper doesn't have comments, polls, videos, and blogs on its website?...

As I see it, the problem with many news outlets is that comments, polls, videos, and blogs have replaced actual reporting. In other words, they file a few facts, then hand the story over to the readers to flesh out the details.

What somebody posts in a comments section should not take the place of fact-checked follow up by a journalist, but that's what the video seems to imply.

On the other hand, the Guardian is a damn sight better than some of what passes for news in the states.
posted by SteveInMaine at 3:19 AM on March 1, 2012


That said, The Guardian's comments sections are generally more readable and less horrifying than any other news site's

Only in a very, very relative sense.
posted by ninebelow at 3:47 AM on March 1, 2012


When it comes to posting comments on news/media/forums, only three things will take me from lurker to user:

1. Ease of registration.
2. Simple, clean, straightforward layout.
3. Consistency and stability.

This is why Metafilter works so well.
posted by Fizz at 4:37 AM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]


ROFL at the placard towards the end: "Wake up and smell the bacon!"

I would watch the movie. Hell, I'd write the movie.
posted by unSane at 4:48 AM on March 1, 2012


Griping about the Guardian's comment system.

Griping about the comment system.

Griping about the system.

Yes many systems are broken, I agree, but that whole 'throw the baby out with the bathwater' truism?
posted by panaceanot at 4:56 AM on March 1, 2012


1. The comment system is very user unfriendly for the commenter

Which, unfortunately, may explain why, as somebody points out above you, its comment sections are generally more readable and less horrifying than any other news sites: the awful UI keeps away the idiots.
posted by Skeptic at 4:59 AM on March 1, 2012


Watching it, somehow I didn't quite get the openness vibe, but more an uneasy feeling about the power of the fourth estate as they manipulated he sheeple to riot. Excellent, but kinda queasy-making, which I don't think was the point. Unless the readers weren't he intended audience.
posted by Iteki at 5:09 AM on March 1, 2012 [5 favorites]


I feel Christopher Walken's take remains definitive.
posted by running order squabble fest at 5:16 AM on March 1, 2012


So a fairy tale story totally misrepresents reality? Animals given human traits, then those traits are exaggerated into one-dimensional stereotypes while physically impossible events occur? Why is this news? How is the "Three Little Pigs" story applicable to anything in real life anyway? The real journalistic expose should be "Guardian believes in talking pigs!"
posted by oneswellfoop at 8:02 AM on March 1, 2012


Seems like it was partly an attempt to update their original classic points of view ad.
posted by chrispy at 8:47 AM on March 1, 2012


Aren't comments are like adverts ... commentblockpro or something? Views compiled in the time it takes the commenter to think it? (irony much?)

I <3 ad guns n bangs etc needs mor bacon tho me RT it now lols kthxbi
posted by fistynuts at 9:08 AM on March 1, 2012


I would watch the movie. Hell, I'd write the movie.

High concept: "It's like Natural Born Killers...only with talking animals! We'll get both the family AND the furry crowd in!"
posted by happyroach at 9:19 AM on March 1, 2012


They were the first and the best UK paper to get online in a big way erm, what about the Electronic Telegraph?
posted by MrMerlot at 3:27 PM on March 1, 2012


I saw a bunch of effects that the BBC's Sherlock should steal.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:21 PM on March 1, 2012


When it comes to posting comments on news/media/forums, only three things will take me from lurker to user:

1. Ease of registration.
2. Simple, clean, straightforward layout.
3. Consistency and stability.




The Guardian talkboards were exactly like this, and ran from 1999 until they were abruptly pulled for legal reasons last year.
posted by mippy at 1:51 AM on March 5, 2012


« Older Old Rags is a collection of photographs of beautif...  |  "Everyone knows there‚Äôs a cata... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments