Those damned Mooninites

[JonInMiddleGA]

http://apnews.myway.com//article/20070131/D8N0HO180.html

Boston Devices a Cartoon Marketing Ploy

Jan 31, 5:44 PM (ET)
By KEN MAGUIRE

BOSTON (AP) - Nine blinking electronic devices planted at bridges and other spots in Boston threw a scare into the city Wednesday in what turned out to be a marketing campaign for a late-night cable cartoon. At least one of the devices depicts a character giving the finger.

Highways, bridges and a section of the Charles River were shut down and bomb squads were sent in before authorities declared the devices were harmless.

"It's a hoax - and it's not funny," said Gov. Deval Patrick.

Turner Broadcasting, parent company of Cartoon Network, said the devices were part of a promotion for the TV show "Aqua Teen Hunger Force."

(AP) Members of the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority police, the Masachusetts State Police and the...
Full Image
"The packages in question are magnetic lights that pose no danger," Turner said in a statement. It said the devices have been in place for two to three weeks in 10 cities: Boston, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta, Seattle, Portland, Ore., Austin, Texas, San Francisco and Philadelphia.

"We regret that they were mistakenly thought to pose any danger," the company said.

Police said only that they were investigating where the device came from. The Department of Homeland Security said there are no credible reports of other devices being found elsewhere in the country.

An angry Mayor Thomas Menino said a stiff penalty will be pursued against whoever was responsible for the devices.

"It's about keeping a city on edge. It's about public safety," he said.

Authorities said some of the objects looked like circuit boards or had wires hanging from them.

The first device was found at a subway and bus station underneath Interstate 93, forcing the shutdown of the station and the highway.

Later, police said four calls, all around 1 p.m., reported devices at the Boston University Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, both of which span the Charles River, at a Boston street corner and at the Tufts-New England Medical Center.

The package near the Boston University bridge was found attached to a structure beneath the span, authorities said.

Subway service across the Longfellow Bridge between Boston and Cambridge was briefly suspended, and Storrow Drive was closed as well.

Wanda Higgins, a 47-year-old Weymouth resident and a nurse at Massachusetts General Hospital, heard about the threat as she watched television news coverage while preparing to leave work at 4 p.m.

"I saw the bomb squad guys carrying a paper bag with their bare hands," Higgins said. "I knew it couldn't be too serious."

Messages seeking additional comment from the Atlanta-based Cartoon Network were left with several publicists.

"Aqua Teen Hunger Force" is a cartoon with a cultish following that airs as part of the Adult Swim late-night block of programs for adults on the Cartoon Network. A feature length film based on the show is slated for release March 23.

The surreal series centers on a talking milkshake (Master Shake), fries (Frylock) and a meatball (Meatwad).

The cartoon also includes two trouble-making, 1980s-graphic-like characters called "mooninites," named Ignignokt and Err - who were pictured on the suspicious devices. They are known for making the obscene hand gesture depicted on the devices.

[molson]

I don't understand this story yet. Did the Cartoon Network seriously put things that look like bombs all over Boston, including underneath bridges?

[st.cronin]

I don't understand this story yet. Did the Cartoon Network seriously put things that look like bombs all over Boston, including underneath bridges?

That's how I read it. If so, it has to go down as one of the most spectacularly bad decisions ever, right up there with the Bruins trading Joe Thornton.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I guess this was the next step in their marketing campaign that began with the I pooted billboards for Foster's Home For Imaginary Friends.

And no, this isn't photoshopped or anything, it's the actual board.
http://media.hamptonroads.com/images/news/poot440x279.jpg

[B & B]

http://www.sydlexia.com/imagesandstuff/worstnes/ignignokt.jpg

[SirFozzie]

Yeah. Somebody's getting fired over this. And Sued.

Who thought this was a bright idea?

[Galaril]

Yeah I hope someone..... actual abunch of people go to jail for this. Now the REAL terrorists can study how the emergency responders answered the calls and what there procedures were and such. This really should be a Federal case not state. The network I am sure thought this through and figured this would be great for free pub probably calculating that the repercussions would be minimal.

[SirFozzie]

Apparently, the things were up two weeks, it wasn't meant to cause this kind of panic, but it was "Guerilla Marketing".. trying to be edgy and hip.

I'm also laughing about the city's overreaction, but yeah.. get a permit, Turner Broadcasting, please?

[JonInMiddleGA]

The network I am sure thought this through and figured this would be great for free pub probably calculating that the repercussions would be minimal.

You're giving the clowns making decisions at Turner Broadcasting these days waaaay too much credit IMO.

The Knights of Prosperity could have been modeled on some of the people they've got in positions of authority.

[cuervo72]

Both Cheese and the Mooninites amuse me.

[14ers]

Yeah. Somebody's getting fired over this. And Sued.

Who thought this was a bright idea?
Can we at least wait until they post an actual picture?


I am a huge fan of ATHF and seriously doubt that you could confuse a Moonite with a bomb.

My money would be on some New England morons.:)

[Peregrine]

From the CNN story:

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/US/01/31/boston.bombscare/story.cartoon.adultswim.jpg

[14ers]

From the CNN story:

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/US/01/31/boston.bombscare/story.cartoon.adultswim.jpg
Funny, someone actually thought that was a bomb? :eek:

[JonInMiddleGA]

I think this picture makes it a little less obvious what the device is/isn't, at least if you're only getting a glimpse of it as you pass by.

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/US/01/31/boston.bombscare/newt1.1827.boston.wcvb.jpg

[JonInMiddleGA]

The third-party agency hired by Turner for this campaign is being identified as Interference, Inc.

The founders of that outfit include the "brains" (and I use the term loosely) behind the spraypainting sidewalks campaign for the launch of About.com a few years ago, and in his own words (http://www.atnewyork.com/news/article.php/808381)"We called 10,000 workplace phone numbers in the middle of the night when no one was there. It was simple. We left 10,000 voicemails just saying: "Hello, is anybody out there?" and hung up. It was a lot of fun. We were able to do what we do best...

[JPhillips]

Galaril: I hope that's satire.

[SirFozzie]

Apparently not.

They just said on WBZ radio up in Boston, they're about to announce an arrest in the case.

[14ers]

They just said on WBZ radio up in Boston, they're about to announce an arrest in the case.
I think you would need some type of permit to hang signs to a city bridge?



Also, does anyone know where I can buy one of these neon signs?

[SirFozzie]

Boston police said Wednesday night that one person had been arrested, and authorities scheduled a news conference later in the evening to provide details.

Probably going to charge them with some kind of terror hoax charge, to make their overreaction play better in the news

[molson]

Funny, someone actually thought that was a bomb? :eek:

Well, it had wires, batteries, and circuit panel attached, and they were put under bridges and in subway stations. I don't think it was so unreasonable to check it out. And why should Boston pay the expense of that? I don't know what the Cartoon Network paid for this "advertising", but I'm sure it was a bargain to get mentioned in the country's top news story.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Well, it had wires, batteries, and circuit panel attached, and they were put under bridges and in subway stations. I don't think it was so unreasonable to check it out.

Given the placement of the devices, it would have been the height of irresponsibility not to investigate them thoroughly.

And until the source of them could be determined, I don't think there's any justification for thinking they could be treated casually by authorities. Just because the first few you check aren't explosives doesn't mean the next one won't be. I would think that's pretty much how any bomb squad would have to operate, treat every situation as dangerous ... unless you don't have any interest in seeing the sun rise tomorrow.

I've seen the Mooninite episodes, and I have little doubt that the locations were chosen intentionally as some sort of odd "we're going to take over your world" bit of tomfoolery to tie in with the theme.

Problem is, doing it this way can get you prison time, measured by years per count.

If all that happens is reimbursement of expenses, Turner & their agency should count their blessings that they got off very lightly.

[sabotai]

"We called 10,000 workplace phone numbers in the middle of the night when no one was there. It was simple. We left 10,000 voicemails just saying: "Hello, is anybody out there?" and hung up. It was a lot of fun. We were able to do what we do best...

.........What the hell?

[cartman]

We've had these up in Austin for at least a couple of weeks now, with no public scares. I guess that 95% of the Austin population knows right off that bat the character probably helps.

[st.cronin]

I wonder if in Austin whoever was in charge of this marketing notified/got permission from the right offices.

[JonInMiddleGA]

.........What the hell?

Best I can tell, these guys take fraternity pranks & repackage them as "guerilla marketing" strategies.

[cartman]

I wonder if in Austin whoever was in charge of this marketing notified/got permission from the right offices.

I don't think there is any approval process here. Viral marketing is huge in Austin. The sheer amount of it around makes me think that it just happens without any kind of official oversight.

[sterlingice]

1) People actually think that a 4th grade science project looks like a bomb? You know, the type of stuff where you get a block of wood, an LED, wires, and a light that you can light up?

2) People in Boston are really that dumb?

3) No, really?

Yes, Cartoon Network should be taken to task for the equivalent of public graffiti. Terrorism, you're out of your freakin' paranoid gourds. This is up there with our TSA threats sponsored by Crest 2oz tubes of toothpaste and Johnson and Johnson 3oz bottles of shampoo. Idiots, all.

SI

[Pyser]

whats lost in all this....are new ATHF episodes gonna air?

seems odd to go through all this trouble to promote nothing. i thought their season ended a few months ago.

or is this for the movie?

[Glengoyne]

1) People actually think that a 4th grade science project looks like a bomb? You know, the type of stuff where you get a block of wood, an LED, wires, and a light that you can light up?

Ever see pictures of the Unabomber's work? 4th grade science project pretty well describes some of his more random work.



Yes, Cartoon Network should be taken to task for the equivalent of public graffiti. Terrorism, you're out of your freakin' paranoid gourds. This is up there with our TSA threats sponsored by Crest 2oz tubes of toothpaste and Johnson and Johnson 3oz bottles of shampoo. Idiots, all.

SI

You do know that a guy actually detonated one of those mouthwash/lense cleaner bombs on a plane a few years back...right? It killed one person, and could well have taken down the plane, had the bomber placed it/aimed it correctly.

[Greyroofoo]

Good thing terrorists now know they can't hide a bomb by placing a relatively obscure cartoon character on it.

[sterlingice]

You do know that a guy actually detonated one of those mouthwash/lense cleaner bombs on a plane a few years back...right? It killed one person, and could well have taken down the plane, had the bomber placed it/aimed it correctly.

But this is where I have a fundamental difference with the fearmongerers and the fearful of this whole debate. There are reasonable precautions and then there are unreasonable precautions. I'm sure you don't see it this way, but what you are suggesting sound to me on par with "since people can hijack planes and ram them into buildings, we should just get rid of planes". Or for the conservatives out there, "you can use a gun to hijack planes, thus we should get rid of guns".

I know the defenses of that second statement. The latter will be something to the effect of "you can't get a gun through security". And I'll contend that's a load of crap- there have been numerous tests which have shown TSA aren't all that good at stopping stuff, just at being a nuisance. We make people take off shoes after a shoe bomber, we confiscate liquids after a liquid bomb- isn't it blatantly obvious that all we are doing is closing the barn door after the horse is out to make people feel better. That doesn't even accomplish anything except the aforementioned peace of mind for idiots.

It's the wrong defense. We shouldn't be getting rid of anything that could possibly bring a plane down or we might as well all strip down and go through x-ray machines naked and not allow luggage. That's the only way to be truly safe and even then I'm sure we could come up with a way to have a plane full of naked people hijack and crash it into a building. Again, I reiterate, it's the wrong defense. You want to disallow guns, knives, and explosives on planes, fine. Do it because those are used to inflict harm- not because they "might", otherwise we're stuck in an academic place where all we are doing is trying to judge the fundamental level of nuisance some people are willing to put up with.

This should be a day to point and laugh at Boston and the government officials for taking a joke way too seriously and shutting down their city due to public nuisances, a day for the rest of the country to say "lighten up, francis" to those silly uptight New Englanders and their mile-a-minute lives, or something to that effect. This isn't a day about disaster preparedness or outrage because of a dumb joke by the stupid and sophomoric dolts at Williams Street. It wasn't a bomb, it clearly wasn't a bomb, and anyone thinking otherwise is just jumping at every shadow out there. Do people actually get up in the morning and say "I'm worried about a terrorist threat today?" Because if we've got a decent chunk of otherwise normal thinking people who routinely worry about such things, well, then I fear for any decisions made by the people under such duress...

SI

[14ers]

If this neon sign had been Homer Simpson would if of been OK? How about neon Budweiser signs are they OK, or should I just call in the bomb squad whenever I see a neon sign?



Just boggles the mind that someone did not eventually recognize the Mooninites or the Cartoon Network logo on it.

[Telle]

I'm kind of conflicted about this.

Wouldn't it be theoretically possible for some angst-ridden young adult to decide to make a bomb and slap a cartoon character on it (that happens to look like it's flipping you off)? I don't think it's THAT far-fetched.

[molson]

If this neon sign had been Homer Simpson would if of been OK? How about neon Budweiser signs are they OK, or should I just call in the bomb squad whenever I see a neon sign?

Just boggles the mind that someone did not eventually recognize the Mooninites or the Cartoon Network logo on it.

If you see a black box with batteries, wires, and a circuit board attached underneath a bridge or in a subway station in either Boston or New York, then yes, you should call the bomb squad (even if it has a familiar logo).

And are you seriously comparing how many people would be familiar with the Moonities Vs. Homer Simpson or Bud Lite (not that I think that's the determining factor here).

[st.cronin]

But this is where I have a fundamental difference with the fearmongerers and the fearful of this whole debate. There are reasonable precautions and then there are unreasonable precautions. I'm sure you don't see it this way, but what you are suggesting sound to me on par with "since people can hijack planes and ram them into buildings, we should just get rid of planes". Or for the conservatives out there, "you can use a gun to hijack planes, thus we should get rid of guns".

I know the defenses of that second statement. The latter will be something to the effect of "you can't get a gun through security". And I'll contend that's a load of crap- there have been numerous tests which have shown TSA aren't all that good at stopping stuff, just at being a nuisance. We make people take off shoes after a shoe bomber, we confiscate liquids after a liquid bomb- isn't it blatantly obvious that all we are doing is closing the barn door after the horse is out to make people feel better. That doesn't even accomplish anything except the aforementioned peace of mind for idiots.

It's the wrong defense. We shouldn't be getting rid of anything that could possibly bring a plane down or we might as well all strip down and go through x-ray machines naked and not allow luggage. That's the only way to be truly safe and even then I'm sure we could come up with a way to have a plane full of naked people hijack and crash it into a building. Again, I reiterate, it's the wrong defense. You want to disallow guns, knives, and explosives on planes, fine. Do it because those are used to inflict harm- not because they "might", otherwise we're stuck in an academic place where all we are doing is trying to judge the fundamental level of nuisance some people are willing to put up with.

This should be a day to point and laugh at Boston and the government officials for taking a joke way too seriously and shutting down their city due to public nuisances, a day for the rest of the country to say "lighten up, francis" to those silly uptight New Englanders and their mile-a-minute lives, or something to that effect. This isn't a day about disaster preparedness or outrage because of a dumb joke by the stupid and sophomoric dolts at Williams Street. It wasn't a bomb, it clearly wasn't a bomb, and anyone thinking otherwise is just jumping at every shadow out there. Do people actually get up in the morning and say "I'm worried about a terrorist threat today?" Because if we've got a decent chunk of otherwise normal thinking people who routinely worry about such things, well, then I fear for any decisions made by the people under such duress...

SI

:rolleyes:

You do realize there are people whose jobs it is to worry about terrorist threats? Are you suggesting that those jobs are pointless?

The problem here isn't that civilians couldn't tell that these weren't bombs - it's that public security people, who do this for a living, couldn't tell that these weren't bombs. I'm sorry, I want public security people to be thinking about stuff like this, and I don't want their time wasted by stuff like this.

[Galaril]

I find it annoying that any city, in this case Boston has to pay the price for this shit. People were held up in traffic for hours which caused enormous problems. My father, had a heart attack a few years ago and was in an ambulance but was stuck in traffic due to the Red Sox championship parade rerouting traffic which caused some congestion in the outer areas of the city.He almost died in route to the hospital because of the extra time. Shit like that is why we don't let college kids and TNT run the country. And as far as the terrorist thing sure they look harmless to us but in Boston people are constantly reminded of 9/11 since the terrorist flew out of Logan Airport , Boston. Also, Boston has often been thought to be a prime target for attack in the city.

[Tekneek]

I don't understand this story yet. Did the Cartoon Network seriously put things that look like bombs all over Boston, including underneath bridges?

I saw video of them being removed and they didn't look like bombs to me.

[Tekneek]

If you see a black box with batteries, wires, and a circuit board attached underneath a bridge or in a subway station in either Boston or New York, then yes, you should call the bomb squad (even if it has a familiar logo).

Even if that is your belief, does that mean anyone should be arrested or that there is a crime at all? I would love to see some government anti-terrorism expert come forward with an ounce of evidence that suggests Al-Qaeda, or any terrorist group, is likely to mount an attack using characters from an Adult Swim cartoon (or any cartoon regularly shown on US TV for that matter).

[rkmsuf]

I saw video of them being removed and they didn't look like bombs to me.

Nobody knew what the fuck they were and there were 38 of them all at key locations. That's the point. Who the hell outside of a few nerds and college kids has any clue what a mooninite is?

Great publicity though. Hope it was worth the impending lawsuits.

[Toddzilla]

Is Menino still the mayor of Boston? If so, that explains the overreaction completely.

[molson]

Even if that is your belief, does that mean anyone should be arrested or that there is a crime at all? I would love to see some government anti-terrorism expert come forward with an ounce of evidence that suggests Al-Qaeda, or any terrorist group, is likely to mount an attack using characters from an Adult Swim cartoon (or any cartoon regularly shown on US TV for that matter).

There was intelligence a few years ago that they were planning to use teddy bears. Who knows what intelligence has been received (and what attacks have been thwrated since then).

I mean, if you're a terrorist, isn't this exactly what you do?

[CraigSca]

Can Boston afford to take the chance that this was a prank?! No, they have to investigate fully and do their due diligence.

I can't believe people are saying they over-reacted. That's THEIR job.

Did you know that the major banks and brokerage houses on Wall Street are in the process of moving their backup data centers 70 miles away from Manhattan (which is a boon to eastern PA and other areas). Why? Because it's not IF a dirty bomb or some other kind of terrorist attack occurs, it's WHEN.

[Mustang]

If so, that explains the overreaction completely.

I don't think the examination and removal of the items was the overreaction. I think the over reaction is by the media to pump up an event. I was in McDonalds and it was on CNN and there was a countdown of how many suspicious packages there were and # of them that were cleared. The story was running with live video streaming and various guests talking. After the first one was removed it should have been nothing more than 'They appear to be hoaxes people.. nothing to see.. go home'. But, of course, now what will happen is there will be a week long event of 'What if they weren't hoaxes.. are we prepared!??!?!?!?' stories.

Of course, CNN does coverage and it turns into this - The lady next to me was talking about they found bombs with wires and they thought they were planted by the same people that blew up the ski resort in West Virginia.. 'Umm.. maaa-huh-wha?'

[Tekneek]

I don't have a problem with them thinking they had to do their due diligence. I'm just not sure they should be jumping to arrest people and come up with criminal charges over it.

Instead of arresting people and getting angry, they should find out why they never saw these items being placed there to begin with and try to learn from the experience. It appears that they just want to bang their fists on a table and make it look like they are doing something. In six months, security won't be any tighter, better, efficient, but some people who didn't plant any bombs will be treated like they did and everyone will pretend like THAT has actually improved security.

[gstelmack]

I don't have a problem with them thinking they had to do their due diligence. I'm just not sure they should be jumping to arrest people and come up with criminal charges over it.

I do. It's no different than yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. They played a prank, cost the city thousands of dollars investigating and cleaning it up, they didn't come clean when the problem became evident thus cutting off the problem, and they should pay for the trouble they caused.

[JPhillips]

From what I've read it's not at all clear that they broke any laws other than possibly soliciting or graffiti laws. They didn't make threats. They didn't make false claims. They posted only on public property.

I expect Cartoon Network will reimburse the city and after a few days this will all go away.

[JPhillips]

dola

The comparison to yelling fire doesn't really fit. To steal from someone else, this is more like posting a picture of a fire in a theatre and people mistaking it for the real thing.

[Tekneek]

I do. It's no different than yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. They played a prank, cost the city thousands of dollars investigating and cleaning it up, they didn't come clean when the problem became evident thus cutting off the problem, and they should pay for the trouble they caused.

First, we will have to find out when the right people at Cartoon Network found out about the problem before they can be blamed for it. At least that is how I feel about it. If they didn't find out about it until 4 or 5 hours after the first calls came in about the devices, then it's hard for me to blame them for not contacting the police before that point about it. The initial reports I saw and heard made it sound like real devices, so I'm not sure why anybody should be expected to have known what they were when they weren't on the scene or may not have seen any video yet.

Besides, I still contend that the police/government should be more upset that they have no security in place to prevent this from happening than the fact that it happened. Instead of being worried about trying to drum up charges against Turner and this marketing moron, they should be coming up with a plan to prevent it from happening again. If they can't keep a man from hanging up lights that cost them $500,000 to take down, destroy, and stop traffic for hours, do they really have any chance at doing anything meaningful if someone was really out to do real damage? I think the real lesson is being glossed over out of anger. If they had done their due diligence in the first place, nobody would have to be frightened by the sight of strange devices under the bridge, right? Because they would know about everything that happened there.

[Logan]

Did you know that the major banks and brokerage houses on Wall Street are in the process of moving their backup data centers 70 miles away from Manhattan (which is a boon to eastern PA and other areas). Why? Because it's not IF a dirty bomb or some other kind of terrorist attack occurs, it's WHEN.

Just want to point out that this isn't a new development.

[wade moore]

Besides, I still contend that the police/government should be more upset that they have no security in place to prevent this from happening than the fact that it happened. Instead of being worried about trying to drum up charges against Turner and this marketing moron, they should be coming up with a plan to prevent it from happening again.
Why can't we do both?

[Tekneek]

Just want to point out that this isn't a new development.

I would be truly surprised if it was. It defeats the whole point of a backup data center if you keep it close. The company I work for had its backup data center over 700 miles away and this was BEFORE 9/11. If you keep it close, like within the same metropolis, then you've got really bad disaster planning.

[Tekneek]

Why can't we do both?

Maybe I haven't looked hard enough, but I haven't seen any articles that suggest they are trying to do both. I see articles suggesting government officials are angry at Cartoon Network and the marketer and are only concerned about getting their money back. Perhaps I've missed the articles that indicate they've got a better perspective on the situation.

[CraigSca]

You'd be surprised the number of companies that had their DR site across the river in Jersey City. You'd also be surprised about the number of DR sites for non-Manhattan companies that are within 5 miles of their main data center.

It is makes no sense to me the number of companies that go to IBM BRS or Sungard. If a regional disaster occurs, those places will be overwhelmed.

Anyway...it's my understanding that the thing that HAS changed is that there is a mandate now to move 70 miles away. Yes, that should have been a no-brainer, but sometimes these things have to have the fear or fines behind them before companies will act.

[wade moore]

Maybe I haven't looked hard enough, but I haven't seen any articles that suggest they are trying to do both. I see articles suggesting government officials are angry at Cartoon Network and the marketer and are only concerned about getting their money back. Perhaps I've missed the articles that indicate they've got a better perspective on the situation.

The "better perspective" doesn't sell papers.

[CraigSca]

First, we will have to find out when the right people at Cartoon Network found out about the problem before they can be blamed for it. At least that is how I feel about it. If they didn't find out about it until 4 or 5 hours after the first calls came in about the devices, then it's hard for me to blame them for not contacting the police before that point about it. The initial reports I saw and heard made it sound like real devices, so I'm not sure why anybody should be expected to have known what they were when they weren't on the scene or may not have seen any video yet.

Besides, I still contend that the police/government should be more upset that they have no security in place to prevent this from happening than the fact that it happened. Instead of being worried about trying to drum up charges against Turner and this marketing moron, they should be coming up with a plan to prevent it from happening again. If they can't keep a man from hanging up lights that cost them $500,000 to take down, destroy, and stop traffic for hours, do they really have any chance at doing anything meaningful if someone was really out to do real damage? I think the real lesson is being glossed over out of anger. If they had done their due diligence in the first place, nobody would have to be frightened by the sight of strange devices under the bridge, right? Because they would know about everything that happened there.

While I agree with this, is this really practical?

I haven't looked at the 38 locations to see exactly where they are, but wouldn't this entail putting up a camera under EVERY bridge (and every other structure) in Boston and having someone actively watching them, 24 hrs a day?

[Tekneek]

While I agree with this, is this really practical?

I haven't looked at the 38 locations to see exactly where they are, but wouldn't this entail putting up a camera under EVERY bridge (and every other structure) in Boston and having someone actively watching them, 24 hrs a day?

Sure, it would, but it would be far more impressive than arresting some 'guerilla marketer' and trying to figure out a way to go after Cartoon Network. It might actually prevent a real attack in the future instead of just helping them keep their budget in order.

If they agree that they aren't going to prevent people from putting items in there, and that these items were not bombs, then I don't understand the outrage. They should be happy that bad people aren't exploiting their soft underbelly and accept that losing a lot of money over bomb scares is the price of business these days until they decide to properly secure those areas.

[JonInMiddleGA]

From what I've read it's not at all clear that they broke any laws other than possibly soliciting or graffiti laws. They didn't make threats. They didn't make false claims. They posted only on public property.


Well ... maybe. There are some questions about who placed the phone calls to police notifying them about the presence of the first several devices that they had to investigate.

[Logan]

I would be truly surprised if it was. It defeats the whole point of a backup data center if you keep it close. The company I work for had its backup data center over 700 miles away and this was BEFORE 9/11. If you keep it close, like within the same metropolis, then you've got really bad disaster planning.

I don't know if I misread the original post, or if you misread mine...but I was saying that companies moving data centers 50+ miles away isn't a new development.

edit: You were agreeing with me, weren't you? :) Gotta stop coming here when I'm exhausted.

[st.cronin]

This is a pretty simple concept to me: If your way of doing business results in people dialing 911, you need to find a new way to do business.

[Tekneek]

I don't know if I misread the original post, or if you misread mine...but I was saying that companies moving data centers 50+ miles away isn't a new development.

You misread mine. I was saying I would be surprised if it was a new thing. It only makes sense that backup data centers should be moved really far away. 50-70 miles isn't even really sufficient, for data that is really important.

[JonInMiddleGA]

The initial locations reported in Boston were clearly areas that would be of concern for terrorist activity (I haven't seen the list from NY yet, nor a list of the rest of the Boston locations). Tie that into the "take over the world" theme of the characters, and there's a pretty good case for these being intended to be simulated terroristic devices.

It's at least equivalent to phoning in a phony bomb threat, and somebody really ought to be looking at some prison time for this stupidity. I doubt it'll happen, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't.

[Logan]

You misread mine. I was saying I would be surprised if it was a new thing. It only makes sense that backup data centers should be moved really far away. 50-70 miles isn't even really sufficient, for data that is really important.

Beat you to it. See above :).

[CraigSca]

Of course moving data centers more than 70 miles is not a new thing. What's shocking is there are still a ton of major financial institutions in Manhattan that have not. Therefore, there's now a mandate to do so.

[Tekneek]

The initial locations reported in Boston were clearly areas that would be of concern for terrorist activity (I haven't seen the list from NY yet, nor a list of the rest of the Boston locations). Tie that into the "take over the world" theme of the characters, and there's a pretty good case for these being intended to be simulated terroristic devices.

It's at least equivalent to phoning in a phony bomb threat, and somebody really ought to be looking at some prison time for this stupidity. I doubt it'll happen, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't.

You cannot tie it into the characters, unless you seriously want government officials going into court and saying, "Yes, I know the characters are trying to take over the world. We watch the show and so we knew we had to take it seriously when we saw them under bridges."

[JPhillips]

Jon: I don't think legally it's at all similar to a phony bomb threat. Now if it turns out that the ad company placed the initial calls that's different. If, however, the ad company only placed the objects I think it will be very hard to prosecute them for much.

[Tekneek]

This is a pretty simple concept to me: If your way of doing business results in people dialing 911, you need to find a new way to do business.

That is a slippery slope. People call 911 when their cable is out, or the air conditioning goes out. By your definition, a lot of people are going to be looking for new jobs.

[JonInMiddleGA]

If, however, the ad company only placed the objects I think it will be very hard to prosecute them for much.

If you're right, then it's time for the law to change. While I've often said that you can't outlaw stupidity outright, there are ways to at least limit specific stupid behavior.

But I suspect that somewhere in the books, there's several criminal charges that would apply. And if anybody suffered because of something like the delayed ambulance situation mentioned up the thread, the charges could get a whole lot more serious very quickly.

[st.cronin]

That is a slippery slope. People call 911 when their cable is out, or the air conditioning goes out. By your definition, a lot of people are going to be looking for new jobs.

If you call 911 because your cable went out, the cops don't come to your house, do they?

[JPhillips]

Jon: You can't imprison someone because someone else thought you planted a bomb.

[molson]

Jon: You can't imprison someone because someone else thought you planted a bomb.

Unless that's what you intended.

Maybe not as direct as bomb threat, but perhaps similar to trying to sneak a gun with a Cartoon Network logo onto a plane, knowing that when it becomes a news story, you'll get free advertising.

We don't know yet if THAT was intended, but that seems to be the implication.

[JPhillips]

Well obviously if you can prove intent that's a whole different set of consequences.

[Tekneek]

If you're right, then it's time for the law to change. While I've often said that you can't outlaw stupidity outright, there are ways to at least limit specific stupid behavior.

Even you don't agree that stupid behavior should always be limited. If that stupid behavior is one you personally approve of, you think everyone should be able to do it anytime/anywhere they choose.

[Tekneek]

If you call 911 because your cable went out, the cops don't come to your house, do they?

You didn't make that distinction in your first statement, did you?

[molson]

Well obviously if you can prove intent that's a whole different set of consequences.

I think that's what John was getting at, talking about the apparent purpose in placing these things in "sensitive" areas.

Now, I'm sure Turner wouldn't involve themselves in such things, but once I heard that this was the independent work of a "Guerrilla marketing firm", anything becomes possible.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Even you don't agree that stupid behavior should always be limited. If that stupid behavior is one you personally approve of, you think everyone should be able to do it anytime/anywhere they choose.

Actually, I said that it "couldn't" always be limited, NOT that it "shouldn't" be.

That's a limitation I place because of the practical impossibility in staying ahead of the curve of stupidity, not because of a lack of desire to do so.

[st.cronin]

You didn't make that distinction in your first statement, did you?

Actually, I did make EXACTLY that distinction earlier in the thread.


The problem here isn't that civilians couldn't tell that these weren't bombs - it's that public security people, who do this for a living, couldn't tell that these weren't bombs. I'm sorry, I want public security people to be thinking about stuff like this, and I don't want their time wasted by stuff like this.


Are you Mr. Bigglesworth?

[Tekneek]

Now, I'm sure Turner wouldn't involve themselves in such things, but once I heard that this was the independent work of a "Guerrilla marketing firm", anything becomes possible.

In their defense, they can probably run an ad asking for people who saw those and knew they weren't bombs to call them and testify for the defense and parade hundreds of people who weren't fooled through the court room and greatly diminish the claims of the few who were frightened. I don't know this to be true, but I suspect there were many who saw them and never thought the place was about to be blown up. Their point of view should be weighed just as heavily as the few who called 911, if the government really wants to push the matter. Let's see if a court of law is convinced that reasonable people really thought it was a bomb, or if it was a few unreasonable people who thought it was a bomb. Surely police had driven through the area before 911 was called and they weren't alarmed, which some good attorneys would be able to uncover with a little homework.

I'm not as interested in what the police thought about them once they were told to be looking for a bomb. I'm interested in what they thought of them before they were told that someone thought a bomb was there. When a human being is told a bomb may be somewhere, they look for anything that might be one and look for any reason to consider it as one. What if they saw it without any preconceived notion, would they have thought it was a bomb then? How many people saw it, both with the police and civilians, and did not think it posed a threat? That's what I would like to determine.

[Tekneek]

Actually, I did make EXACTLY that distinction earlier in the thread.




Are you Mr. Bigglesworth?

Ok. I was actually referring to your statement about 911 calls and needing to get into a new business if your business prompts people to call 911. It did not appear to be referencing earlier statements of yours.

[Mustang]

I haven't looked at the 38 locations to see exactly where they are, but wouldn't this entail putting up a camera under EVERY bridge (and every other structure) in Boston and having someone actively watching them, 24 hrs a day?

It worked in Demolition Man...

At least until Simon Phoenix was unthawed and starting using the stun sticks to blow up cameras.

[14ers]

I'm not as interested in what the police thought about them once they were told to be looking for a bomb. I'm interested in what they thought of them before they were told that someone thought a bomb was there. When a human being is told a bomb may be somewhere, they look for anything that might be one and look for any reason to consider it as one. What if they saw it without any preconceived notion, would they have thought it was a bomb then? How many people saw it, both with the police and civilians, and did not think it posed a threat? That's what I would like to determine.

According to MSNBC those neon sign had been up for nearly 3 weeks.

[molson]

The two people that were arrested have been charged with "placing a hoax device in a way that causes panic" and disorderly conduct. Both have been released on $2,500 bail. Those aren't the kinds of charges (or bond amount) that would indicate any serious consequences.

[KWhit]

And it got an ass-load of publicity so it "worked."

Sigh.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Those aren't the kinds of charges (or bond amount) that would indicate any serious consequences.

It early yet, and if they were acting under orders, they really aren't the perps who should be facing the most serious charges anyway.

[Subby]

I love any story that has perps!

[molson]

Now you can start a bomb scare in your own town-

hxxp://cgi.ebay.com/Boston-Mooninites-LED-Adult-Swim-ATHF-Bomb-Hoax_W0QQitemZ130075581205QQihZ003QQcategoryZ363QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[sabotai]

The initial locations reported in Boston were clearly areas that would be of concern for terrorist activity (I haven't seen the list from NY yet, nor a list of the rest of the Boston locations). Tie that into the "take over the world" theme of the characters, and there's a pretty good case for these being intended to be simulated terroristic devices.

One they showed on the news last night for Philly was in an area that is a very large concern for terrorist activity. A Footlocker store.

[cthomer5000]

wait until they unleash the quad laser... people are really gonna panic

[dime]

I can't wait for the 24 episode where jack bauer beats the shit out of some cartoonist...

[Tekneek]

If they decide to fight this, I doubt it will be very hard to put up a reasonable defense. The evidence that the average person, even the average cop, wasn't the least bit concerned about these things will probably be easy to put together and leave the government without much of a leg to stand on with their "puts the people in a panic" argument. They will be left arguing that a few unreasonable people called in the bomb squad, which THEN sent people into a panic, meaning that it was the bomb squad's presence that caused a panic rather than the objects themselves. It seems like a real hard sell to me.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't be concerned about bombs. I'm just saying that if you're trying to throw the book at these guys for this stunt, you'd better hope that most people agree that they looked like bombs. If they were really out there for a few weeks without incident, with lots of civilians and police officers going by routinely without incident, they will have a hard time convincing me that these objects were throwing reasonable people into a state of panic by simply being there.

[Schmidty]

Yet another reason to hate that idiotic show.

[molson]

If they decide to fight this, I doubt it will be very hard to put up a reasonable defense. The evidence that the average person, even the average cop, wasn't the least bit concerned about these things will probably be easy to put together and leave the government without much of a leg to stand on with their "puts the people in a panic" argument. They will be left arguing that a few unreasonable people called in the bomb squad, which THEN sent people into a panic, meaning that it was the bomb squad's presence that caused a panic rather than the objects themselves. It seems like a real hard sell to me.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't be concerned about bombs. I'm just saying that if you're trying to throw the book at these guys for this stunt, you'd better hope that most people agree that they looked like bombs. If they were really out there for a few weeks without incident, with lots of civilians and police officers going by routinely without incident, they will have a hard time convincing me that these objects were throwing reasonable people into a state of panic by simply being there.

If intent can be proven some other way (written business plans, etc.), then all of that is irrelevant. If someone intended to cause a panic and does, that's probably enough to meet the element of the crime.

[Yossarian]

According to boing boing ( hxxp://www.boingboing.net/2007/02/01/fake_pipe_bombs_foun.html ) Some joker actually created two fake pipe bombs but somehow he walks and these numptys get arrested.

[cartman]

If a city can be shut down and people scared shitless by randomly placed Lite-Brites, then the terrorists have already won.

[Easy Mac]

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/city_region/breaking_news/2007/02/guerrilla_ad_ag_1.html

Now how does this change the debate?

I see no reason why it should

[Easy Mac]

The initial locations reported in Boston were clearly areas that would be of concern for terrorist activity (I haven't seen the list from NY yet, nor a list of the rest of the Boston locations). Tie that into the "take over the world" theme of the characters, and there's a pretty good case for these being intended to be simulated terroristic devices.

It's at least equivalent to phoning in a phony bomb threat, and somebody really ought to be looking at some prison time for this stupidity. I doubt it'll happen, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't.

Couldn't it also be that they were higher traffic areas and therefore more likely to be seen by people and also be more of a concern for terrorism? I fail to see it as equal to a bomb threat or yelling fire.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Couldn't it also be that they were higher traffic areas and therefore more likely to be seen by people and also be more of a concern for terrorism? I fail to see it as equal to a bomb threat or yelling fire.

Could it? Sure. I'm not an expert of Boston traffic patterns, so somebody else would have to analyze that question.

I don't see it as "equal" either, I see this as more serious.

I'd like to see about 40 years worth of prison time for those who approved it, and about 10 for the two dodos who executed it. And, oh, let's say enough in punitive fines to put the ones who dreamed it up out of business for life and enough to cause a hit on the TW/Turner stock.

[Tekneek]

I'd like to see about 40 years worth of prison time for those who approved it, and about 10 for the two dodos who executed it. And, oh, let's say enough in punitive fines to put the ones who dreamed it up out of business for life and enough to cause a hit on the TW/Turner stock.

I expect we will both be disappointed. Time Warner/Turner will rollover more easily than I think they should and they won't be punished nearly as much as you think they should. That's my prediction.

[Huckleberry]

Jon rails against stupidity and yet wants the stupid people to determine what is reasonable behavior.

Be careful with Lite-Brites because some moron might think it looks like a bomb.

Then again, if the bomb scare was intended then these clowns do indeed need to go away for a very long time.

[WVUFAN]

The lite-brites were placed in 10 different cities, and only Boston considered them possible bombs? Sounds like Boston overreacted.

[VPI97]

The lite-brites were placed in 10 different cities, and only Boston considered them possible bombs? Sounds like Boston overreacted.
Bingo. And now they want to mask their embarrassment by taking it out on those two guys instead of admitting they went overboard.

[JPhillips]

I think Jon has the right answer here. Sticking lights in your vagina just to publicize nuclear power is wrong.

[cuervo72]

http://www.enlighted.com/media/electra2/fullfrontx500.jpg

[cartman]

see image above

It's a suicide bomber! Quick, put her away for 40 years!!!

[molson]

The lite-brites were placed in 10 different cities, and only Boston considered them possible bombs? Sounds like Boston overreacted.

I'm sure that Boston's anti-terror response teams are little more substantial and organized then say, Austin, TX, so it's not surprising that they'd be more involved. Not sure where else they were put (and if they were put in places like under major bridges and subways in other cities).

[Synovia]

1) People actually think that a 4th grade science project looks like a bomb? You know, the type of stuff where you get a block of wood, an LED, wires, and a light that you can light up?

2) People in Boston are really that dumb?

3) No, really?

Yes, Cartoon Network should be taken to task for the equivalent of public graffiti. Terrorism, you're out of your freakin' paranoid gourds. This is up there with our TSA threats sponsored by Crest 2oz tubes of toothpaste and Johnson and Johnson 3oz bottles of shampoo. Idiots, all.

SI

Us people from boston see this stuff all over the place. Unfortunately, the people who are under 30 who actually have some idea of whats going on, are no longer in charge. Our 75 year old mayor, Mumbles, is senile, and likes to panic.

Everyone knew what was going at like 11 am, and City hall still kept saying there were bombs till 5 pm. Thats absurd, and irresponsible.

[Synovia]

I'm sure that Boston's anti-terror response teams are little more substantial and organized then say, Austin, TX, so it's not surprising that they'd be more involved. Not sure where else they were put (and if they were put in places like under major bridges and subways in other cities).

New York City, Seattle, LA, and a bunch of other major cities. All in the same sorts of places. Only the assclowns in charge here felt the need to panic everyone.

[Synovia]

If you're right, then it's time for the law to change. While I've often said that you can't outlaw stupidity outright, there are ways to at least limit specific stupid behavior.

But I suspect that somewhere in the books, there's several criminal charges that would apply. And if anybody suffered because of something like the delayed ambulance situation mentioned up the thread, the charges could get a whole lot more serious very quickly.

Do you really think they look like bombs jon? Because I sure as hell dont.

[WVUFAN]

I'm sure that Boston's anti-terror response teams are little more substantial and organized then say, Austin, TX, so it's not surprising that they'd be more involved. Not sure where else they were put (and if they were put in places like under major bridges and subways in other cities).

From what I've read, New York was one of the cities where the Lite-Brites were placed. They didn't react in that fashion, and one would think of all the cities, NYC would have the most organized and substantial anti-terror team.

[ctmason]

I'm sure that Boston's anti-terror response teams are little more substantial and organized then say, Austin, TX,

You assume far too much. A suspicious device is a suspicious device.

[Synovia]

ctmason, they look like every other LED sign I have ever seen. THe exact same as the ones hanging in bars around here, etc. They're not the slightest bit suspicious. This sort of stuff is EVERYWHERE in college towns. EVERYWHERE.

[14ers]

I can't say this enough times, 3 weeks! Those neon signs had been up for almost 3 weeks in 10 different cities without a single complaint. So, I am guessing millions and millions of people passed by them. And then 3 weeks later someone calls the bomb squad???

Why are they not investigating the person who made the crank phone call in the first place? They should be charged with creating a riot, or something like yelling fire in a theater!

[WVUFAN]

I can't say this enough times, 3 weeks! Those neon signs had been up for almost 3 weeks in 10 different cities without a single complaint. So, I am guessing millions and millions of people passed by them. And then 3 weeks later someone calls the bomb squad???

Why are they not investigating the person who made the crank phone call in the first place? They should be charged with creating a riot, or something like yelling fire in a theater!

Why wouldn't they go after the ones who made the crank call? Because that would make sense.

[B & B]

It's a suicide bomber! Quick, put her away for 40 years!!!



Fixed.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Do you really think they look like bombs jon? Because I sure as hell dont.

Honestly, I'd say it depends upon how you're seeing them.

Looking at a still photo, not moving, sitting here in the comfort of my batcave, and with knowledge of what they are? If they're an explosive device, they're one that's disguised as something else, enough so that I wouldn't have thought of it. I'd have been much more likely to think "WTF is that supposed to be?"

But catching brief glimpse while driving past, stuck in an odd place (like under an overpass), in daylight hours when they weren't lit & the pattern wasn't as obvious, with no advance knowledge of what they were? It would definitely have registered as "unusual", could very well have qualified as "suspicious".
I don't know that I would have immediately thought "bomb", but reporting to authorities would have probably at least crossed my mind.

[molson]

I can't say this enough times, 3 weeks! Those neon signs had been up for almost 3 weeks in 10 different cities without a single complaint. So, I am guessing millions and millions of people passed by them. And then 3 weeks later someone calls the bomb squad???



I don't see what difference that makes. When the day comes when there's another attack on US soil, I'm guessing that whatever clues exist beforehand will avoid detection because they are subtle.

It's not so much what they look like as it their location. Is it too much to ask for marketers simply NEVER place black boxes with circuit panels under interstate bridges and in subway tunnels (where they have no license to do so). It is too much too ask that placing objects in such sensitive areas to have somewhat greater consequences than illegally posting such advertising on say, a tree? (Because that's all the currently arrested folks are looking at - I'm guessing fines and community service).

I would have been way more uncomfortable with this scenario:

Officer #1: We've gotten a couple of calls about these black boxes with circuits attached, they have kind of cartoon character on them
Officer #2: Where are they?
Officer #1: They're all over the city, one was found under the interstate bridge, another in a subway tunnel, another near a hospital.
Officer #2: I'm sure that's nothing, stop bothering me.

[Greyroofoo]

I think any politician would say its better to overreact than underreact

[Easy Mac]

I think any politician would say its better to overreact than underreact

That's like saying a tabacco company wants kids to smoke instead of trying to keep them from smoking.

[WVUFAN]

I don't see what difference that makes. When the day comes when there's another attack on US soil, I'm guessing that whatever clues exist beforehand will avoid detection because they are subtle.

It's not so much what they look like as it their location. Is it too much to ask for marketers simply NEVER place black boxes with circuit panels under interstate bridges and in subway tunnels (where they have no license to do so). It is too much too ask that placing objects in such sensitive areas to have somewhat greater consequences than illegally posting such advertising on say, a tree? (Because that's all the currently arrested folks are looking at - I'm guessing fines and community service).

I would have been way more uncomfortable with this scenario:

Officer #1: We've gotten a couple of calls about these black boxes with circuits attached, they have kind of cartoon character on them
Officer #2: Where are they?
Officer #1: They're all over the city, one was found under the interstate bridge, another in a subway tunnel, another near a hospital.
Officer #2: I'm sure that's nothing, stop bothering me.

More like this scenario:

Officer #1: We've gotten a couple calls about these black boxes with circuits attached. I went and looked at one, and it looks like a Lite-Brite.
Officer #2: Lite-Brite? Sounds like terrorists to me!
Officer #3: It has the logo of some place called "cartoon network". Not sure what that is ...
Officer #4: Sounds like an Al-Qaeda front to me! Send out the bomb squad!!

[WVUFAN]

I think any politician would say its better to overreact than underreact

Then if you overreact, don't blame others. Accept the fact that you overreacted and move on. No, Boston is blaming the marketing guys for something that was CLEARLY the fault of the city.

[Galaril]

Us people from boston see this stuff all over the place. Unfortunately, the people who are under 30 who actually have some idea of whats going on, are no longer in charge. Our 75 year old mayor, Mumbles, is senile, and likes to panic.

Everyone knew what was going at like 11 am, and City hall still kept saying there were bombs till 5 pm. Thats absurd, and irresponsible.

New York City, Seattle, LA, and a bunch of other major cities. All in the same sorts of places. Only the assclowns in charge here felt the need to panic everyone.

First off who the fuck put YOU and your people (who's that umemployed 27 yer olds living in there parents attic) "in charge". Yeah, Menino is a jackass and I wouldn't vote for him, but if more of " your people" as you put it voted then one of "your people " would be mayor now, huh? Geez, when the fuck were kids under 30 in chrage of the city of Boston?

[14ers]

Officer #1: We've gotten a couple of calls about these black boxes with circuits attached, they have kind of cartoon character on them
Officer #2: Where are they?
Officer #1: They're all over the city, one was found under the interstate bridge, another in a subway tunnel, another near a hospital.

Imagine that, advertising signs in populated areas. :)


You do realize that signs are generally placed in areas where people gather right? Now, show me a brand new neon sign that is placed in the middle of no where and I might be willing to call that a bomb.

Or, do you want to ban all signs that are near highways, in stadiums, or any other place people gather?

[molson]

Imagine that, advertising signs in populated areas. :)

You do realize that signs are generally placed in areas where people gather right? Now, show me a brand new neon sign that is placed in the middle of no where and I might be willing to call that a bomb.



You do realize that it's illegal to place advertising on public property without a license, right? It's not like the police walked by a bar and picked this sign out of 10 others that were hanging on a window. In an advertising sense, these signs were absolutely placed in "the middle of nowhere", since NO advertising is permitted where those signs were. THAT'S what made them suspicious. In the early stages of this, I'm sure they saw the Cartoon Network logo but thought, "I'm sure it wasn't Turner that put this here though, because they don't have a permit for that".

[WVUFAN]

In the early stages of this, I'm sure they saw the Cartoon Network logo but thought, "I'm sure it wasn't Turner that put this here though, because they don't have a permit for that".

And in the 3 weeks they were put there, their opinion changed ... how? I mean, if they're put there for 3 weeks and DIDN'T blow up, chances are they won't blow up now.

Again, I say this is a blunder on Boston's fault, and they're trying to deflect blame. They look, in nearly every way, like a LiteBrite. That was put in 10 cities.

And ONLY Boston sent out bomb teams -- 3 weeks AFTER they were placed. Yeah, this is the marketer's fault. :rolleyes:

[JonInMiddleGA]

I'm sure they saw the Cartoon Network logo but ...

Seaking of which ... is there a picture out there somewhere that shows the logo visible? I've yet to notice it on any of the half dozen different pictures I've seen of the device.

It's come up twice now, so I don't doubt that it could have been there, it just struck me a little odd since their earlier billboard campaign typically didn't include a logo.

[molson]

And in the 3 weeks they were put there, their opinion changed ... how? I mean, if they're put there for 3 weeks and DIDN'T blow up, chances are they won't blow up now.

Again, I say this is a blunder on Boston's fault, and they're trying to deflect blame. They look, in nearly every way, like a LiteBrite. That was put in 10 cities.

And ONLY Boston sent out bomb teams -- 3 weeks AFTER they were placed. Yeah, this is the marketer's fault. :rolleyes:

I have grasped the fact that they didn't look like bombs, I really have. But that's irrelevant to my point. The "first look" approach to terror management isn't a good one. The Lockerbie bomb looked like a tape recorder. The 9/11 hijackers looked like computer nerds. Deception will always be the tool. I'm not asking for prison for anyone. Boston may have been too slow is ending the investigation. But for gods sake, why can't we just keep bridges and subway tunnels off limits - how can anyone argue that??

[WVUFAN]

But for gods sake, why can't we just keep bridges and subway tunnels off limits - how can anyone argue that??

I agree. Boston should pass a law banning lite-brites on bridges and subway tunnels, because evidently their "anti-terrorist" group can't tell the difference between that and a bomb.

The other 9 cities who had these in subway tunnels and bridges could, but Boston needs to take a stand against the evilness of the Lite-Brite.

[Tekneek]

You do realize that it's illegal to place advertising on public property without a license, right? It's not like the police walked by a bar and picked this sign out of 10 others that were hanging on a window. In an advertising sense, these signs were absolutely placed in "the middle of nowhere", since NO advertising is permitted where those signs were. THAT'S what made them suspicious. In the early stages of this, I'm sure they saw the Cartoon Network logo but thought, "I'm sure it wasn't Turner that put this here though, because they don't have a permit for that".

Then why didn't somebody say something prior to the bomb calls if this is such a big deal? At this point, I am really curious about who made the call(s) to 911 and whether their motivation was really as genuine as we've been led to believe.

[Tekneek]

But for gods sake, why can't we just keep bridges and subway tunnels off limits - how can anyone argue that??

That's fine by me, but even the City of Boston isn't trying to do that. If the concern is really about the safety of these structures, simply trying to get your cash back is a really strange way of making them safer in the future. I'm still awaiting the first article that talks about how they will prevent this from ever happening again, or at least even mentions that they intend to prevent it from happening again.

[Tekneek]

I agree. Boston should pass a law banning lite-brites on bridges and subway tunnels, because evidently their "anti-terrorist" group can't tell the difference between that and a bomb.

The other 9 cities who had these in subway tunnels and bridges could, but Boston needs to take a stand against the evilness of the Lite-Brite.

Faced with educating their police and anti-terrorism units, or simply banning items that they are unable to differentiate from explosive devices, they might as well just ban them to keep it simple for the citizens. However, they need to publish what is banned so people don't accidentally confuse the police forces and end up on the news and in court.

[JonInMiddleGA]

At this point, I am really curious about who made the call(s) to 911 and whether their motivation was really as genuine as we've been led to believe.

After watching the two nutjobs who planted these things, I'm really curious about that myself. I've wondered more than once if they decided to get a little more mileage out of their involvement than just a paycheck.

[st.cronin]

I wonder how many people posting in this thread that the city of Boston overreacted actually have any expertise in the field of law enforcement/disaster management.

[sterlingice]

It worked in Demolition Man...

At least until Simon Phoenix was unthawed and starting using the stun sticks to blow up cameras.

:D

SI

[sterlingice]

I wonder how many people posting in this thread that the city of Boston overreacted actually have any expertise in the field of law enforcement/disaster management.

Congrats for bringing out this thread's equivalent of "Clearly, since you don't have kids, you can't comment" with the implication that since you aren't in those exact shoes, you can't possibly understand the thought process that goes into such things.

SI

[Tekneek]

I wonder how many people that work directly for the Mayor have any expertise in those areas. Maybe he should shut up, too.

[st.cronin]

Congrats for bringing out this thread's equivalent of "Clearly, since you don't have kids, you can't comment" with the implication that since you aren't in those exact shoes, you can't possibly understand the thought process that goes into such things.

SI

There are plenty of times when that's perfectly valid. If you spout off on some topic that you nothing about, you are going to sound like an idiot.

[molson]

I wonder how many people posting in this thread that the city of Boston overreacted actually have any expertise in the field of law enforcement/disaster management.

I don't know - are you sure people in those fields don't immediately discount devices in suspicious areas that have no business being there if they don't look exactly like the bombs they saw in Rambo movies growing up (Complete with timer clock and dynamite wrapped in wire)?

Like I said, when and if a terrorist attack of this nature occurs, it's going to be in a big city, and thus, the bombs are NOT going to look like bombs. They are going to be subtle enough for most ordinary people to pass by, perhaps for weeks, without sounding an alarm. THAT'S THE POINT. The best we can do is keep sensitive areas off limits for retarded marketing, etc.

[14ers]

I think only former suicide bombers should be allowed to comment in this thread. :)

[cartman]

Now, you too can save Boston from the scourge of terroristic Lite Brites!

hxxp://www.dyewell.com/saveboston/

[Galaril]

I wonder how many people posting in this thread that the city of Boston overreacted actually have any expertise in the field of law enforcement/disaster management.

I having been an officer in the US Air Force and an OPSEC Officer as well as being in IT Security specifically Risk Assessment I am quite familar with disaster recovery and incident handling. This includes physical security matters like this. I would say the city didn't overeact if someone had called in bomb threats but if not it might have been a slight over eact. Still people with little remorse should be fined at least. The city of Boston has put aprice tag of 1 million dollars on emergency response lost man hours. TNT or those losers who put these things up should get the bill.

Also, why does evryone say that Boston overreacting based on the fact that the other 10 or so cities didn't react this way. I am guessing that none of the other cities reacting because no one noticed or cared to notice in the various city departmental dept. such as fire, police etc. They may have never knew these things were there. The city of Boston didn't know for three weeks!

[MrBigglesworth]

I wonder how many people posting in this thread that the city of Boston overreacted actually have any expertise in the field of law enforcement/disaster management.
I agree, I think you need a doctorate in disaster management and five years experience, at a minimum, to come to the conclusion that closing down an entire city district and spending $1 million to remove LiteBrites of a cartoon character is overreacting.

They had some of these up in Philly, and after the incident in MA my friend in the local FBI spent the past couple days tracking them down. That's right, the FBI was wasting its time tracking these down because of Boston. Way to go.

[molson]

For such an obvious over-reaction, Turner sure is willing to fork over the cash. There's an imminent settlement.

[molson]

They had some of these up in Philly, and after the incident in MA my friend in the local FBI spent the past couple days tracking them down. That's right, the FBI was wasting its time tracking these down because of Boston. Way to go.

So after it was revealed as advertising, the FBI still told your friend to spend a couple of days tracking them down. THAT sounds like an overreaction (either that or this is the FBI's version of "busy work" for low level employees).

[MrBigglesworth]

So after it was revealed as advertising, the FBI still told your friend to spend a couple of days tracking them down. THAT sounds like an overreaction (either that or this is the FBI's version of "busy work" for low level employees).
He is the new guy, so he is definitely on Donkey Sh!t duty. But I think they wanted to avoid the panic that happened in Boston, and better safe than sorry.

[Tekneek]

For such an obvious over-reaction, Turner sure is willing to fork over the cash. There's an imminent settlement.

PR. They're just trying to make it go away quickly and quietly, like most large corporations would (they are part of Time Warner, you know). Disney routinely settles with people that they might beat in a courtroom just because it is easier on the PR to try and reach some form of settlement as long as it doesn't break the bank.

[Tekneek]

He is the new guy, so he is definitely on Donkey Sh!t duty. But I think they wanted to avoid the panic that happened in Boston, and better safe than sorry.

Unless he put up signs that said "Inspected by FBI Agent #xxx. This is not a bomb.", how can they be sure some moron won't suddenly think one of them is a bomb on some random day in the future? Or were they being removed?

[MrBigglesworth]

Unless he put up signs that said "Inspected by FBI Agent #xxx. This is not a bomb.", how can they be sure some moron won't suddenly think one of them is a bomb on some random day in the future? Or were they being removed?
Yes, he took them down, sorry for not being more clear. I told him to save me one, but I don't think he could smuggle one out...

[Tekneek]

Yes, he took them down, sorry for not being more clear. I told him to save me one, but I don't think he could smuggle one out...

Damn. That hardly seems right. What was the reason for their removal? Simply the fact that people in Boston thought they looked like bombs and they feared people there might become scared of them now, as well? Don't we have the freedom to be frightened of signs, or are we now protected from that? Can I have any sign removed by simply thinking it looks like a bomb and then any similar sign in other big cities must be removed as well?

I know it's not your fault, I'm just questioning the thinking here. It just reminds me how absurd it is when people claim that terrorists hate us for our freedoms. Whenever I hear or read that, I have to think they must like us a lot more these days than they used to.

[cartman]

The incident has seemed to have opened up a ton of new marketing opportunities for the show:

hxxp://raplica.com/store/shirts/Adlt_Swim/mooninite

[MrBigglesworth]

The incident has seemed to have opened up a ton of new marketing opportunities for the show:

hxxp://raplica.com/store/shirts/Adlt_Swim/mooninite
The best shirt I saw was, 'Our moon advertising is far superior to yours'.

Ignignot: You and your third dimension.
Frylock: What about it?
Ignignot: Oh nothing, it's cute. We have five.
Err: Th-thousand.
Ignignot: Yes, five thousand.
Err: Don't question it!
Frylock: Oh yeah? Well, I only see two.
Ignignot: Well that sounds like a personal problem.

[JonInMiddleGA]

http://www.ajc.com/hp/content/shared-gen/ap/TV/TV_Suspicious_Devices.html

NEW YORK — So much for the notion that any publicity — even bad publicity — is helpful: Ratings hardly went up for the Cartoon Network show with the ad campaign that briefly paralyzed Boston.

Blinking electronic devices planted around Boston to promote "Aqua Teen Hunger Force" caused authorities, who were worried they might be bombs, to shut down bridges and highways on Jan. 31.

The cartoon averaged 386,000 viewers last week among its targeted demographic of 18-to-24-year-olds, according to Nielsen Media Research. The previous week, the show averaged a virtually identical 380,000 among young viewers.

The devices were removed from Boston and nine other cities where they had been planted after the incident.

The Cartoon Network's corporate parent, Time Warner Inc.'s Turner Broadcasting Systems, and an advertising agency agreed to pay $2 million in compensation.

[MrBigglesworth]

I think it's going to help the movie more than anything.

[sabotai]

I think it's going to help the movie more than anything.

That's what I was thinking. I hardly think a show that airs after midnight on a Sunday on the Cartoon Network is going to have their ratings affected, one way or the other, by advertising.

[Pyser]

sorry if this was already posted in the thread:

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWUaQVZHzyI

24 meets aqua teen. literally.

[JonInMiddleGA]

http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/stories/2007/02/09/0209bizturner.html

Cartoon Network chief quits over Boston scare
Jim Samples says 'gravity of the situation' compels him to leave

By SCOTT LEITH
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 02/09/07

The head of the Atlanta-based Cartoon Network resigned Friday because of the cable channel's role in a terrorism scare last week in Boston.

A marketing promotion for a Cartoon Network program called "Aqua Teen Hunger Force" went awry Jan. 31, causing Boston area officials to shut down parts of the city.

Turner Broadcasting System, the parent of Cartoon Network, apologized and agreed to pay $2 million in a settlement.

On Friday, Cartoon Network chief Jim Samples said he will leave the company, citing the mess in Boston.

"As general manager of Cartoon Network, I feel compelled to step down, effective immediately, in recognition of the gravity of the situation that occurred under my watch," he said in a statement that was sent to staffers

[rkmsuf]

"And in his last act as Cartoon Network chief, Staples stuck a stick of dynomite in his ass and lit it. It was an explosive exit. The Road Runner was unavailable for comment."

[14ers]

From the CNN story:

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/US/01/31/boston.bombscare/story.cartoon.adultswim.jpg
November 2007

Anyone know where I can purchase one of these for a Christmas gift?

[DanGarion]

November 2007

Anyone know where I can purchase one of these for a Christmas gift?

There's a wall clock...

http://cgi.ebay.com/AQUA-TEEN-HUNGER-FORCE-MOONINITE-WALL-CLOCK-adult-swim_W0QQitemZ130174924657QQihZ003QQcategoryZ363QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[sterlingice]

Are we safe enough after the fact now that we can look back and laugh our asses off at stupid Bostonians or does "terrorism", even obvious non-terrorism, have no expiration date for comedy?

SI

[Big Fo]

Are we safe enough after the fact now that we can look back and laugh our asses off at stupid Bostonians or does "terrorism", even obvious non-terrorism, have no expiration date for comedy?

SI

22 years until it becomes funny iirc

[sterlingice]

(to be fair, I was laughing my ass off at the time, but some people thought this was a really big deal)

SI

[molson]

Are we safe enough after the fact now that we can look back and laugh our asses off at stupid Bostonians or does "terrorism", even obvious non-terrorism, have no expiration date for comedy?

SI

Yup, we've learned that you shouldn't investigate anything suspicious unless you're damn sure it's terrorism. I guess that would include preppie-looking middle-easterners with box cuter knifes. And such objects should only be checked out if they look like bombs from TV, instead of ones that have been used in real life, like Lockerbie. And yet we should continue to blame the government for ignoring much less subtle clues before 9/11, and yet be angry that they didn't clear the skies the very moment we received a memo that stated "Bin Laden determined to attack US soil", when we had known that fact since at least 1996. and probably earlier.

Hanging things that at a distance looks like black boxes with flashing circuits underneath bridges in a major northeast city still seems like a stupid thing to do to me, worthy of a minor criminal punishment - I guess I'll never get it. I think some people generally don't grasp the concept of hindsight - they think if something happens, everything before it should have been obvious, and it nothing happens, everything before it should have been ignored.

It would make a very cool Christmas present though.

[sterlingice]

I had a nice long post about how it's not about hindsight, how condemning an ad agency for something that in other cities was already known to be fake, and how I didn't say anywhere that things shouldn't have been investigated, but once they were found out to be completely harmless that we could have let the hysteria die down and be able to take a joke but how cries of terrorism have turned a paralyzing, polzarizing idea at any corner.

But, clearly we haven't reached that point yet.

SI

[jeff061]

Laughing then, laughing now.

Silly Boston.

[molson]

but once they were found out to be completely harmless that we could have let the hysteria die down and be able to take a joke but how cries of terrorism have turned a paralyzing, polzarizing idea at any corner.

SI

They briefly closed down a couple of bridges and subway stations and then got Turner to foot the bill for the inconvenience.

The over-reaction here is in the perceived reaction of Boston, not the investigation. This wasn't a huge deal.

The became a political discussion - the same people mocking Boston's response are the same people who mock airport security in general. A media story like this becomes a rallying cry to those types. National security is a difficult business - balancing protection with inconveniences to our lives and civil liberties. Everyone has a different opinion as to where on that spectrum we should be, but mocking a prompt response to a perceived and potential that turns out to be nothing just seems incredibly retarded to me. Things like this are brought up in arguments to scale back security and that's just not the way we should be thinking.

As far as other cities not responding the same way - I've never read anything about where these things were placed in other cities, except on two overpasses in NYC, which were not noticed until the company actually sent the city a list of locations where they could be found. Unless they were placed on similar busy bridges and subways in urban areas in those other cities (and not on trees and vacant buildings), then it's a moot point.

[14ers]

There's a wall clock...

http://cgi.ebay.com/AQUA-TEEN-HUNGER-FORCE-MOONINITE-WALL-CLOCK-adult-swim_W0QQitemZ130174924657QQihZ003QQcategoryZ363QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
LOL. Do not believe what you see.

First there is this.(clock frame may vary slightly from picture)

OK, I can live with a different frame, but then come this****CLOCK DOES NOT HAVE LIGHT UP LEDs*****

This is a neon sign that does not light up? I wonder if the clock even works? It may just be an 8x10 picture of the sign that their selling?:)

[14ers]

As far as other cities not responding the same way - I've never read anything about where these things were placed in other cities, except on two overpasses in NYC, which were not noticed until the company actually sent the city a list of locations where they could be found.
Seriously? How could you miss all the people making fun of those idiots in Boston for blowing up lite-brites? Just search anywhere and you will find out these devices had been in place for over 2 weeks in 10 different cities.
10 cities: New York; Los Angeles; Chicago; San Francisco; Philadelphia; Atlanta; Seattle; Portland, Oregon; Austin, Texas; and, obviously, Boston.

[sterlingice]

As far as other cities not responding the same way - I've never read anything about where these things were placed in other cities, except on two overpasses in NYC, which were not noticed until the company actually sent the city a list of locations where they could be found. Unless they were placed on similar busy bridges and subways in urban areas in those other cities (and not on trees and vacant buildings), then it's a moot point.

I remember Austin ran a couple of stories about how they had been in place for a couple of weeks and were a joke.

SI

[molson]

Seriously? How could you miss all the people making fun of those idiots in Boston for blowing up lite-brites? Just search anywhere and you will find out these devices had been in place for over 2 weeks in 10 different cities.

I left out a word or two there - what I meant to say was that I never read anything about these things being placed in subway tunnels or overpasses in these other cities (and most of those other cities don't have subways). They were all over Boston, and the only ones that were deemed "suspicious" were the ones that were placed in areas where NO ONE has the legal right to place anything, and places were there certainly isn't advertising of any kind.

There's a difference between hanging these things up under a bridge where there's no pedestrian access v. hanging them in front of a downtown bar. All the pictures I saw of these things in other cities showed them in heavily traveled, downtown areas.

I guess we'll agree to disagree that hanging a black box with electrical tape and lights underneath a bridge overpass in a major city is a bad idea. I just don't get what the big issue is - the checked them out and got rid of them. No one was killed in the process. Everything was cleared up in a matter of hours. Why do people get so worked up over Boston's response? People are talking like the city was in lockdown or something.

[molson]

I remember Austin ran a couple of stories about how they had been in place for a couple of weeks and were a joke.

SI

If they're on trees, abandoned buildings, lamp posts, then they're a funny joke. In a subway tunnel and under bridge overpasses? Not so much. I think that's what distinguishes Boston here.

The advertising company hired a different punk kid to hide these in every city. The kid in Boston just happened to be retarded.