[agambhandari]

The girl is sitting in the back, buckled up and not peeking in towards the front (Like I always used to do as a child ) , and the dad is reassuring her that they are safer for the sake of 6 airbags, and this ad actually informs people who might not even know that "balloons" can be fit in a place other than front.

Another thing to be kept in mind is the fact that they are only showcasing that rear has curtain airbags which will only really protect the heads of the passengers at the back(or any part above the window line), but if you see the ad, the girl is clearly shorter than that and in a side collision is still likely to be under the lowest part of the curtain airbag. So even if children are supposed to be away from the airbag, that is fulfilled.

[kptraveller]

I see no reason to scrutinize Ford here. As a parent, he has buckled up his girl and let her sit at back. That itself is a message to the people out there if one wants to take it home. Having 6 airbags was the USP of ford safety variants that was shown. This is by far the best ad a company can promote than the ads that just emphasize on the gimmicky features out there. Being bhpians, if we don't understand the importance of safety and bash such ads, who else do you think will promote safety?!

[narayans80]

Originally Posted by VeluM

The ad is incredibly irritating because of the depressing expression the child has

She isn't so bad. Real life kids throw tantrums and need lot more convincing you see

Originally Posted by VeluM

We cannot assume that people are dumb though we should presume that they are uninformed.

To a large extent, people are indeed less aware of/have misconceptions on safety. Couple of aspects there should be more awareness are: rear passenger safety (buckling up, middle 3-point seat belt, side-curtain airbags) and child safety (ISOFIX, child car seats) etc.

Few years back, there was a rise is helmet and seat belt usage in Madras, not because of awareness but due to enforcement and fines.

I was scouting for highback booster (for the elder) and a convertible seat (for the younger). Selecting one with good reviews and ratings, I see the choice is much less and I do end up paying atleast twice the US prices.

[Rajeevraj]

Originally Posted by VeluM

2. The ad is incredibly irritating because of the depressing expression the child has

This is on a lighter note: I think this is a very well behaved child. Remember it is a new car and the kid is seeing it for the first time. Most kids would want to get into the front seat and play with the touch screen and frankly most parents out there would allow that.

Safety conscious dad and an obedient daughter. Yes, she is a bit grumpy initially, but from her perspective probably has a right to be upset.

Reading too much into an Ad- I know.

[invidious]

My concern is that airbags are meant to keep adults safe, not to keep kids safe - who often are actually killed by airbags.

It's like a Whiskey company advertising that one shot of whiskey a week is good for the heart and using a kid to drive home the point. I wouldn't go - "Hey - the main message here is that whiskey is good for the heart and given that most Indians don't have access to clean potable water, whiskey seems like a good alternative. Let me pour one for my 8 year old. And let us commend the company on raising awareness of the benefits of whiskey."

Well, whiskey might be good for your heart but it is not good for an 8 year old. So a firm advertising its benefits for a child, is clearly not going about marketing its product in a right manner. It is an extreme example - but that is the difference I am talking about. What is good for the adult is not good for the child.

[kptraveller]

Originally Posted by invidious

My concern is that airbags are meant to keep adults safe, not to keep kids safe - who often are actually killed by airbags.

I beg to differ here sir, If that was the case, crash tests would never be conducted keeping dummy children in the back seats. Your concern seem to say that rear curtain air bags are not for the family where kids get seated at the back. They are better off with the two frontal air bags cars?

[noopster]

I think it's a good life hack to not take advertisements literally

In this case, as many have explained before me, the girl, who I would put at around 12 years of age, is seated in the back, wearing a seat belt and talking in a general way about the car's safety. More airbags = more safety, fair enough. No need to nitpick IMHO.

I think adverts where walls built using a certain brand of cement refuse to be broken down etc. are much more misleading, under the guise of being "humorous".

[invidious]

Originally Posted by drmohitg

I hope you understand that it is an advertisement where every second counts in billing. It is not a documentary or an attempt to educate about safety and proper procedure to follow for using those safety equipments like we have in aircrafts. Ford is just trying to highlight that their car has 6 airbags and for a country like ours where safety is non existent both in the products offered and the customer's requirement, this advert will do more good than harm if we have to evaluate it in terms of social wellbeing.

Originally Posted by kptraveller

I beg to differ here sir, If that was the case, crash tests would never be conducted keeping dummy children in the back seats. Your concern seem to say that rear curtain air bags are not for the family where kids get seated at the back. They are better off with the two frontal air bags cars?

Neither. I am all for airbags - the more the merrier. I am suggesting that using young kids to market airbags is wrong because that is not whom the airbag is designed to save - it is designed to save adults. I wouldn't want Indian parents who seldom buckle their kids in to deliberately place their kids near the airbags thinking this is the safest position. It is exactly the opposite. If the kid was a 15 year old, I wouldn't have the same problem with the contents of the ad.

Having said this, I understand that this is an open ended debate. Everyone is entitled to their views.

[Chetan_Rao]

Originally Posted by invidious

.....using young kids to market airbags is wrong because that is not whom the airbag is designed to save - it is designed to save adults....

All safety features are to protect - to extent possible by Physics - all properly secured OCCUPANTS of an automobile, which would include age-appropriate additional equipment and hazard warnings for kids below a certain age/weight. Except child-specific additions like ISOFIX mounting points, I've never heard any primary or secondary restraint system marketed as adult or child specific.

I wouldn't want Indian parents who seldom buckle their kids in to deliberately place their kids near the airbags thinking this is the safest position. It is exactly the opposite. If the kid was a 15 year old, I wouldn't have the same problem with the contents of the ad....

I wouldn't want ANYONE to be within range of an exploding airbag without being properly secured in their seat with seat-belts, and no, my opinion will stay the same irrespective of the age of the occupant. Your injuries may vary based on how resistant your body is to physical damage, but Physics doesn't discriminate while inflicting said damage.


Good discussion though, shows how varied the opinions are even on a higher-than-average-awareness automotive forum.

[vb-saan]

Originally Posted by invidious

My concern is that airbags are meant to keep adults safe, not to keep kids safe - who often are actually killed by airbags.

A few points:

• It’s an advertisement to drive home the safety aspects of the car.
• The actors include a father and child; they are stressing on the point of family’s safety with the car. I did not see anything misleading there.
• Kids can effectively drive safety aspects for the family. My 9 year old girl refuse to travel in a car if she is not belted up, and insist others have to wear seatbelts. Also never have asked to sit in the front passenger seat – early education helps, and advertisements like this aid that.

[Mohan Mathew A]

1) An inflating frontal airbag can be dangerous for kids. That is why kids are not supposed to sit on front seats. That is also why many cars have an option to switch off the passenger airbag (incase due to unavoidable circumstances a child has to travel in the front seat)

2) There is no evidence to suggest that curtain airbags pose any serious threat for children. If it was indeed dangerous atleast in Europe and US (where curtain airbags are very common) there would have been an option to switch that off too. I have heard of no car which has an option to switch curtain airbags off (please correct me if i am wrong). This very fact shows that it doesn't pose any serious threat.

3) Ford has done a good thing by offering its entire range where atleast one variant gets 6 airbags, which cannot be said for any other mainstream brand. I really admire them for that.

I see the ford marketing team getting flamed for a variety of (very good) reasons in many other threads and deservedly so, but this one they have got right-atleast in my book. Keep it up Ford

P.S. There is no limit to the stupidity of parents. Every other day i see some parent or the other carrying their small children on their laps while driving and many a times on cars equipped with driver airbag. Forget the airbag, isn't it common sense that if you get thrown ahead incase of any sudden braking or minor fender bender the child will be crushed between you and the steering. What do one say to those parents?

[hemanth.anand]

Originally Posted by invidious

As a father of a baby and a concerned citizen, I have already complained to the Advertising Standards Council of India about this misleading advert.

Misleading ad? In that case all ads we see are misleading. If ads were to be believed:
Deodrants could attract females
Mountain dew couldtake away all our fears
Pan masala could put the world on your feet
Washing powders could give bright white shade to your clothes
Fevicol could paste your shadow to the wall
I can go on and on like this...

I have written to Ford and to the Mr. Gadkari heading the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways about this too.

I would suggest you to exercise a bit more restraint next time before shooting out an email to every top guy; read "more" into the topic.

[PetrolRider]

My few points:

• Neither airbags nor seat belts are suitable for children under certain ages, for which child seats are used (though the safety offered by child seat is quiet debatable). Almost all standard child seats are curtain airbag safe. I am not going into details here, as most of the time we believe what is written in the feature list and no one would dare to test those, at least not me. I am assuming the commercial is not for these young kids, the kid there is assumed fairly aged to have seated without child seat.
• If a kid is in car without properly belted (or not in car seat), car manufacturer can not be blamed for that, do they? Why blame Ford here on an assumption that parents would put their kids without seat belt or car seat.
• Even most safe cars in crash test have child safety rating below 3, means children are most vulnerable in any car any day. If Ford provides some safety with a curtain airbag, it should have been appreciated.
• In that commercial, the kid is not seated in front, fairly I can assume ford promotes to keep children at rear.

Having said this, there are my deduction from that add. Each of us can deduce different opinion from same concept.
But blaming ford here is too much nitpicking IMO.

[justwheels]

Originally Posted by Mohan Mathew A

P.S. There is no limit to the stupidity of parents. Every other day i see some parent or the other carrying their small children on their laps while driving and many a times on cars equipped with driver airbag. Forget the airbag, isn't it common sense that if you get thrown ahead incase of any sudden braking or minor fender bender the child will be crushed between you and the steering. What do one say to those parents?

Airbag deployment is technical aspect that many might not understand, but when our fellow countrymen can break signals, drive on the opposite lanes, turn without signals which are cases where fatality and probability of hapenning is higher than airbag deployment, I don't see anything changing soon.

But atleast by specifically advertising about airbags, the buzzword will set in and some sane people might understand the relevance. I often find it difficult to convince my family members to put seatbelt at the back. How many people even understand the meaning of SRS in the airbag and passive and active safety systems.

I guess we are only nitpicking on the Ford's advertisement just for the sake of it. If what is being asked for, a lot of advertisements will become documentaries. Unless something ghastly wrong is being shown, I don't see it should be of concern. Just my two cents.

[Chillout]

I agree with justwheels post above, people are nitpicking on Ford's advertisement and honestly this thread should be closed.