Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Cartoon Network CEO Resigns Over Aqua Teen Scare

Posted by Zonk on Fri Feb 09, 2007 09:35 PM
from the i-doubt-he's-laughing dept.
DesertBlade writes "Jim Samples, CEO of Cartoon Network, has resigned over the bomb scare prompted by the Aqua Teen marketing campaign. Turner (CN's parent company) ended up paying over 2 million in restitution to the city of Boston, and a man with a thirteen year record at the company has lost his job. Though many people have been citing this as 'the ultimate successful advertising campaign', there have obviously been real consequences from the incident." By virtue of the consequences of the campaign, was this now officially a bad idea? Or is your opinion that this is all far too much knee-jerking? Have your say in the comments.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] News: Aqua Teen Hunger Force Brings Boston to a Halt 804 comments
An anonymous reader writes "An ad campaign for Aqua Teen Hunger Force featuring the Mooninites Ignignot and Err caused major security concerns in Boston, MA when magnetic light displays were mistaken for possible bombs. The displays included one of Ignignot flipping the bird (as hard as he could), but Gov. Deval Patrick was not amused."
[+] Entertainment: Aqua Teen Stunt Costs Turner and Agency $2M 557 comments
evw writes "The NYTimes reports that the Turner Broadcasting System and the ad agency responsible have reached a $2M settlement with the city of Boston and state and federal agencies that treated the light boards placed around the city as an act of terrorism (as covered earlier on /.) Half of the money is to cover direct costs associated with the response. The other $1M goes to 'goodwill funds' that will be used for response training and public outreach."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by vanyel (28049) * on Friday February 09 2007, @09:44PM (#17958070) Journal
    Not only Boston overreacting, but now the network itself? Where are the people willing to stand up for sanity? It's truly a sad day...
  • by copponex (13876) on Friday February 09 2007, @09:46PM (#17958082) Homepage
    That's right kids - we're one step away from failing to have the ability to sort by color and shape. How did it come to pass that Lite Brites shut down the city of Boston?

    The government has been very successful in scaring the public into thinking that the terrorism threat is real. The fact is, more people have died from lightning strikes in the past fifty years than from terrorist acts on American soil. This is fueled by the new status of new media as entertainment rather than information, which creates a sea of idiotic speculation before any facts are actually discovered. Witness the media trial of the man accused of Jon Benet's murder, or any of the number of bomb scares that have turned out to be simple security breaches.

    There's no simple solution, but I think we as a society need to admit first that we have a problem.
  • by bgspence (155914) on Friday February 09 2007, @09:49PM (#17958118)
    At least the city of Boston found the weapons of mass deception.
  • by pcx (72024) on Friday February 09 2007, @09:49PM (#17958122)
    The Boston media screwed up. The Boston Officials Screwed up. The two schmoes who put the signs up will pay for that as they're charged with everything from littering to having bad haircuts (real charge: making city officials look foolish). Big media tosses a bit of pocket change around to make sure things don't get any higher than the two dudes already arrested. And the exec at the cartoon network is fired because the cost of the advertising campaign exceeded the value of the show. So while the Boston Media and Officials try to convince themselves that two million dollars proves they were right, the rest of the country has pretty much concluded that Boston is one supremely messed up city.

    Did I miss anything?

  • by sokoban (142301) on Friday February 09 2007, @09:51PM (#17958136) Homepage
    Seriously folks, I understand that people are still all sorts of freaked out over a terrorist attack which happened in the US over 5 years ago, but it is time to chill out and not be so uptight about anything which may be suspicious.

    These 38 lighted signs which were mistaken for bombs, never should have made the news. They did not look like bombs in any way shape or form, and had been in place for a considerable amount of time before people started going apeshit over them. People seem to fail to mention the "real" fake bombs which were planted in Boston on the same day (http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.b g?articleid=180349), and have been focusing entirely on a silly marketing stunt which didn't hurt anyone. Honestly people, do most terrorists even know where Boston is? It isn't exactly the biggest city in the US, nor does it have any huge symbols of American Imperialism such as the World Trade Center. It has a couple of nice universities, but do you thing the terrorists care at all about those?

    Security will never come through "preparedness" against an enemy which doesn't care whether it lives or dies. If terrorists/crazy dictators/serial killers/thugs want to kill you badly enough, they probably will. The only way we will ever be secure is to make people not want to harm us
  • by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) (613870) on Friday February 09 2007, @09:52PM (#17958150) Journal
    ..."the terrorists have won".
  • by RoutedToNull (1040292) on Friday February 09 2007, @10:14PM (#17958330)
    I think this says it best... http://bostonbombsquadtraining.ytmnd.com/ [ytmnd.com]
  • by StarWreck (695075) on Friday February 09 2007, @10:17PM (#17958368) Homepage Journal
    Its quite obvious that the high-strung nut-jobs in Boston over-reacted. The EXACT SAME ads were in Atlanta for a week before they were installed in Boston and on the very first night in Boston people were crying that it was 9/11 times a million!!! They didn't even bother taking the ads in Atlanta down until a couple of days after everybody freaked out in Boston and still not a single person thought they were a bomb.
    • by agent dero (680753) on Friday February 09 2007, @09:40PM (#17958032) Homepage
      Sorry, but your post mentioned the buck at the top of the list and September 11th, and I can't help but draw any subtle lines between the head of the corp and the head of the state...

      Anyways, I'm glad he took the fall for it, as he most likely has savings as opposed to the young guys who actually put up signs. Another sacrifice is made to the new State of paranoia.
      • by Mr. Flibble (12943) on Friday February 09 2007, @09:51PM (#17958130) Homepage
        To me, the fact that he took the fall for it is an ironic sign of good leadership. Not many at the top would allow themselves to be taken out over an incident like this. It probably means that he is a good leader, and understands responsiblity, and stepped up to take the heat.

        The irony is that this is just the sort of person you actually want at the top, and now he is gone.
    • by c_wraith (226724) on Friday February 09 2007, @09:43PM (#17958058)

      It's highly likely that if this had happened on September 10, 2001, there wouldn't have been this kind of uproar. But in a post-9/11 U.S.A., the authorities have to assume things like this could be terrorist in nature and respond as if they were
      No, they don't.

      Just because it's cartoony doesn't mean it should be taken less seriously. If we took that attitude, next thing you know, you'd be getting shredded by a Hello Kitty full of C4 and nails.
      I'd rather take that chance than be forced to watch continual idiocy perpetrated by those who claim to be protecting us.
    • by Wordplay (54438) <geo@snarksoft.com> on Friday February 09 2007, @09:45PM (#17958074)
      They don't -have- to assume anything. It's not like 9/11 was the kick-off party, and now all the terrorism is going to stream in.

      We're spewing hippopotamus repellent and then claiming victory because there are no hippos. All 9/11 opened the door for was paranoia and jingoism.
    • by Crazy Man on Fire (153457) on Friday February 09 2007, @09:45PM (#17958076) Homepage

      I think it's cool that he is taking responsibility instead of cleaning house. He can afford to go without a salary for a good while, and the rest of his accomplishments as CEO will probably earn him a nice position once the smoke clears.
      I couldn't agree more. However, I take serious issue witih the first part of your comment...

      But in a post-9/11 U.S.A., the authorities have to assume things like this could be terrorist in nature and respond as if they were.
      This kind of attitude is exactly what is wrong with this country right now. Living in fear of LED signs is exactly what the terrorists want. They're called terrorists. They intend to terrorize us. If we can't walk down the street without freaking out when we see some blinking lights, they have achieved their objective. Should the police have investigated these devices? Well, somebody reported it. Somebody should have probably calmly investigated it before bringing the whole city to a halt. Anybody with any common sense can tell that the thing wasn't a bomb. This marketing campaign hit ten cities. Only Boston freaked out. Even NYC, which has much more reason to be afraid of terrorist attacks than Boston, didn't bat an eyelash. Just because we're in a "Post 9/11 World" doesn't mean that we have to freak out and assume that everything out of the ordinary is a terrorist plot. Keep your wits about you, think critically, and respond accordingly. People running around freaking out is only going to make us less safe.
      • by Original Replica (908688) on Friday February 09 2007, @10:07PM (#17958276) Journal
        "This marketing campaign hit ten cities. Only Boston freaked out."

        So if Boston leaders are of the same caliber of leader as Jim Samples: They should accept some responsibility, admit they over reacted, and absolve Mr.Samples of this "heat" which has given him reason to step down. The marketing campaign was not at fault, Boston was.
      • by JWSmythe (446288) * <jwsmythe&jwsmythe,com> on Friday February 09 2007, @10:47PM (#17958646) Homepage Journal

        I think it's cool that he is taking responsibility instead of cleaning house. He can afford to go without a salary for a good while, and the rest of his accomplishments as CEO will probably earn him a nice position once the smoke clears.


        I couldn't agree more. However, I take serious issue witih the first part of your comment...

        But in a post-9/11 U.S.A., the authorities have to assume things like this could be terrorist in nature and respond as if they were.


        This kind of attitude is exactly what is wrong with this country right now. Living in fear of LED signs is exactly what the terrorists want. They're called terrorists. They intend to terrorize us. If we can't walk down the street without freaking out when we see some blinking lights, they have achieved their objective. ...

        Just because we're in a "Post 9/11 World" doesn't mean that we have to freak out and assume that everything out of the ordinary is a terrorist plot. Keep your wits about you, think critically, and respond accordingly. People running around freaking out is only going to make us less safe.
        Thank you for saying this.. I've told plenty of people exactly the same thing, but it seems no one listens.

            The government has been playing the game right out of the Cold War Play Book. An enemy attacks us, they obviously have a goal to conquer or destroy.

            Unfortunately, terrorists aren't playing by the same set of rules. Their goal is to destabilize through fear. They launched a single attack almost 6 years ago, and the American response is "Oh my gosh, it's another attack!" We are terrified. We're scared of each other, of the government, and of some vague group on the other side of the world, who don't have the means to stage a traditional war, or even a single battle. ... and I'm sure I'll get some people replying "BUT WE ARE AT WAR! THEY SHOOT AT US ALL THE TIME!" Sorry guys, those aren't the "terrorists". Those are the citizens of two foreign countries that the US Government decided to conqueror, and slaughter a fair percentage of their population (in that order), in the name of stopping a loose knit group of individuals around the world. If another country did that to the US, I'd bet every American able to hold a gun would be shooting back too. Well, maybe not, there's a lot of passive idiots who will take whatever abuse they're given, say "thank you", and ask for more.

            But hey, we're defending ourselves from terrorism, even if it means scaring all of our civilians into believing anything may be the next attack, and reinforcing the idea that the next attack is coming, even though there is no need for a next attack, because the first one is STILL doing it's job.

    • by pcgamez (40751) * on Friday February 09 2007, @09:49PM (#17958112) Homepage
      You make the assumption that a full-scale response is needed in this kind of situation. Anyone with half a brain (which apparently does not include the Boston PD) would have immediately known that those objects were not bombs. The problem with it all is that if the government keeps responding in this manner, the common citizen will ignore warnings when the real thing happens.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 09 2007, @09:52PM (#17958140)
      It's because it's Boston, and that's the only reason why this happened. Don't forget, what part did Boston play in 9/11? Boston's the city whose security was so fucked up, they let the terrorists onto the planes. Boston is the city that caused 9/11. Not surprisingly, after being the primary cause of the worst terrorist attack on United States soil, Boston is a little jumpy about terrorism.

      But other than causing 9/11, what else is Boston known for?

      Well, there's always wasting billions of federal tax dollars to bury a highway to improve the city skyline [wikipedia.org], which lead to
      crushing a woman [wikipedia.org] when three-ton ceiling tiles that had been glued to the ceiling fell.

      Apparently Boston wasted billions of federal dollars, only to glue three-ton concrete ceiling tiles to their tunnel.

      If you want to look at government waste and horrible mismanagement, look no further than Boston. The only reason this happened is because Boston is run by incompetent idiots. The part 9/11 had with this is that 9/11 is Boston's most well known failure, one that they're not eager to repeat.
    • No (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dsanfte (443781) on Friday February 09 2007, @09:55PM (#17958176) Journal
      If real attacks come, they'll be like Madrid. You won't know it until it happens, it'll be in a crowded place, during rushhour, and there won't be any ambiguity or warning. Boom, and it's done, and lots of people will be dead. And there's little chance of stopping it. That's life, and it fucking sucks, but here's what I can tell you for sure:

      They won't be leaving fucking light-brites at the side of the road.

      Some things just aren't plausible.

        • Re:No (Score:5, Insightful)

          by professionalfurryele (877225) on Friday February 09 2007, @10:27PM (#17958458)
          You request to tyranny that it furnish you with it's version of security is being granted as we speak. Your son may grow up safe from terrorists, although those who you plead with for his life could hardly care less, and can do little to protect it. The security you seek is a figment of your imagination. The protection you seek is from an enemy that is hardly a threat. It remains to be asked however, where will you plead to when your son is threatened by the very tyranny you invite?

          It would be a grave error in judgement to confuse those of us who fear extremists in our governments more than we fear extremists a thousand miles away as merely narcissistic.
        • Re:No (Score:5, Insightful)

          by inviolet (797804) <pineminder@yahooEULER.com minus math_god> on Friday February 09 2007, @10:33PM (#17958510) Journal

          I've got a kid. And if a little overreaction means the difference between drawing flowers with him and placing flowers on his grave, then I'm all for a little overreaction.

          Having a child is the best reason to be cavalier about this. The world is full of risks, and this particular risk (terrorist litebrite bombs) is well on the "might as well worry about being hit by a meteorite" end of the risk spectrum. Yet, tour child is watching your reactions and noting your opinions in order to develop his or her own sense of reasonable.

          Furthermore, your child will eventually be living under the heel of the authorities -- the same authorities who are subconsciously but quickly realizing how much control they can take due to incidents like this... and how much fun it is to control others.

          So take care when you are tempted to demand a padded world for your child. That kind of safety, at that price, is not a blessing, will not make them usefully safer, and will not cause them to develop fortitude and strength of character.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 09 2007, @09:58PM (#17958196)
      On the plus side, terrorists now have an easy way to shut down a city, just for the price of a few batteries and wires.

      Praise Allah, the batteries were not even connected and the infidels shrieked as if they were set afire with fuel.
    • by SirSlud (67381) on Friday February 09 2007, @10:09PM (#17958292) Homepage
      If we took that attitude, next thing you know, you'd be getting shredded by a Hello Kitty full of C4 and nails.

      I was never suspicious of a Hello Kitty doll, but now that I've chosen to be suspicious of it, I'm doing my part! In fact, cars explode on the streets of Iraq every day, so now I call 911 everytime I see a parked car. Yet, for some reason, I'm being blamed with clogging the system full of rhetoric and empty false alarms. I just don't get it. Cars explode way more often than Hello Kitty dolls, but my vigilent attitude is not being appreciated!

      I love Americans, truely, but this is one particular case wher I am absolutely thrilled that I live in a country in which you can't score political points for making a mountain out of a mole hill. Its getting to the point where you can make yourself look good by selling creative, tangential, and obtuse terrorist threats rather than workmanlike every day global occurances that kill and maim dozens to hundreds of people at a time.

      You really have to give the 9/11 atrocity commiters some credit. Crash a few planes, and inspire scenarios of exploding C4-laden Hello Kitty dolls. I mean what the fuck, even domestic bombers know that letters, pipes, and cars is really all you need to be successful. If you want to kill lots of people, creativity is the domain of comic books, not reality.