[gatsby_great]

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.

.

There is nothing wrong as such in the advertisement. I think you have made an assumption here that if the car had less airbags, the dad would make the child sit in the front seat. Going after such ads only defeats the purpose of highlighting the safety concerns in modern cars. I just hope that manufacturers make the airbags+abs+stable body as standard in all the cars.

[IMPB]

The ad is still misleading in some way - it projects as if Ford is giving front & rear airbags as standard across all its fleet which I don't think so is the case.
As far as I know - those many airbags are provided only in the highest & its next versions (well, I am talking about family type of vehicles in correlation to the ad).
So, how Ford can make the claim that as if it's selling the safest vehicle for families?
Am I missing something?

[HVSC]

It clearly says that the cars with six airbags are available. No where do they project that they have their entire range with six airbags.
If not for anything else, they should be applauded for not making fancy DRLs or any other gizmo the selling point of the vehicle.
I for one would appreciate adverts with safety as a selling aspect and not as a feature ticked in the car brochure.

[ashwin489]

It's no wonder the market leaders don't focucs on safety in their advertisements. Out of sight, out of mind. This thread feels like a classic case of shooting the messenger.

Slightly OT:
I am curious if the OP has also complained to the Advertising Standards Council of India about misleading ads from Patanjali, AXE, etc. I am wondering if he ever heard back from them.

[COMMUTER]

It is an ad not a science seminar to have a colloquy this long.
The following ads show children in cars exposed to dangers on road. We need not make a big fuzz over them. Just ignore them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txXD96PQBSU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RobQrkFn9uM

Ads can be quipped about, commented on, opined upon and glanced over but are best ignored, at least by us car enthusiasts.

If we nitpick that much then no car should be allowed to achieve a speed higher than the one it is rated safe for, 64kmph. Any higher speed means its airbag, child seats or crumple zones mean nothing at all. We maintain a higher speed than 64kmph (at least 80kmph), still we dont complain about this negating all the safety features in our cars in event of a crash, don't we?

We understand that the safety involves a lot of parameters and just a few of them can be manipulated by us to stay as safe as possible on road and avoid the crash in the first place.

As true enthusiasts, lets stop lowering our standards any lower by these arguments over ads meant for people who don't know a lot about cars!

[jayram.r]

Originally Posted by invidious

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

Sir, I think its an honest attempt by Ford to stress the importance of airbags. I don't think nitpicking if the child was sitting near the window or the center is as primary as the fact that airbags increase safety of occupants.

Seeing the Ad, the first thing that strikes an Average Indian like me that I should buy cars with airbags. The education around bolting my child at the backseat with seat belt & the required care can be accomplished in dealerships at point of sale also. Need not be explicit in the TV ad.

[bharatbits]

Shouldn't they stop selling their other cars without 6 air bags because they are unsafe?

[Abhinav6683]

I believe that Ford is actually emphasising something correct here. They haven't shown the child in the front seat. With only two passengers in the car, the child is in the back seat. I feel such advertisements are necessary in our country where seat belt culture doesn't come naturally. I have seen people buckling up the seat belts on empty driver seat and then driving sitting on top of the buckled seatbelt just to avoid the warning from the car. I saw this pamphlet in UK. Sharing it here.

[SanjayDalal]

I too, have no issues against the Ford advert. ( I may be repeating a few observations, but bear with me).
I am happy that the advert. is focusing on the safety aspect.
Airbags , as always mentioned , are SRS ( Supplemental Restraint System). The primary duty falls on the seatbelts which has to restrain the driver/ passenger. Before that, the car should have good energy absorbing, crumple zones, front and rear.
And most important of all is ABS braking which may help preventing a crash in the first place.

Let us take a case of a accident taking place. The car is in a head on collision with another car; off frontal collision; rear ends the car in front at speed or flips over a few times.
Now the air bags will ( or should) deploy in a full frontal collision. The airbags may not deploy in an off center hit, Or only the airbag closest to point of impact will deploy. If the car flips over a couple of times , the airbags will NOT deploy. So while in this thread the focus is on airbags, please remember the airbags is a very small item in the schemes of things.
I personally do not set much store on airbags.

Defensive driving, timely service of my cars, including brake pads replacement , ensuring optimum tyre pressures and buying new tyres at 4yrs or 30,000km which ever comes earlier, always wearing seatbelts, NEVER talking on a mobile phone when driving is more important to me then an airbag.

[Revvmaster]

I have been a vocal critic of this advertisement since day one and have reasons to be.

Going purely by the merits of the advertisement, yes the child is seated in the rear and buckled up, which is great in theory, considering how children have been shown in car commercials in the past. However, this commercial would have been pulled down in Europe or US for showing a child without a supplementary restraint - i.e. a child or booster seat.

From there commercial one can deduce quite clearly that the child is under 12 years of age and under 4 feet tall. Look at the October 2017 BNSVAP code and it becomes mandatory for additional restraint systems to be used.

In case of a side impact, adults are well protected by curtain airbags. However small children aren't and can be flung against car trim with great impact if they aren't in a child/booster seat. You can see numerous videos by Euro NCAP and other NCAP organisations around the world to get a sense.

It's majorly ignorance and to an extent, irresponsible on the part of Ford India to not have done their research on this commercial. I have written an extensive article on child safety in India and done a fair bit of research on it. In fact I mentioned the commercial at the time of writing without taking Ford's name. I am glad more people are offended by it.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/child...-rohin-nagrani

[vigvr]

Originally Posted by Revvmaster

Going purely by the merits of the advertisement, yes the child is seated in the rear and buckled up, which is great in theory, considering how children have been shown in car commercials in the past. However, this commercial would have been pulled down in Europe or US for showing a child without a supplementary restraint - i.e. a child or booster seat.

I get your point of view. This is something that crossed my mind.

1. My assumption - for a child seated in the rear, having 6 airbags is better than 2.

2. So, in a vehicle having 6 airbags - is there a certain age/height/weight suggestion metric that qualifies a child to be in the regular seat if not a child/booster seat? Because all children may not be as comfortable in special seats and this also qualifies for frequent changes as children grow. Case in point - the girl in the TVC.

[selfdrive]

Originally Posted by vigvr

So, in a vehicle having 6 airbags - is there a certain age/height/weight suggestion metric that qualifies a child to be in the regular seat if not a child/booster seat? Because all children may not be as comfortable in special seats and this also qualifies for frequent changes as children grow. Case in point - the girl in the TVC.

There are height and weight restrictions supplied with car seats. Different sizes are available based on age/ size of the child

In my honest opinion, I would prefer to ensure safety of my occupants over their comfort. At the end of the day, it is a car. Not a couch or recliner. In fact, it is much easier to convince children to be buckled up in child car seats by showing them how much more of the world they can see from a little higher

It would also ensure that when I ferry more people, the child would not be, say, the 6th person in a 5 seater car.

[vigvr]

Originally Posted by selfdrive

it is much easier to convince children to be buckled up in child car seats by showing them how much more of the world they can see from a little higher

Nice touch there

I think the only irritant there would be that child seats would have to continuously be changed as children grow. Calls for more investment, but safety shouldn't be ignored.

[SanScorpio]

Don't think the thread even deserves to be opened to start with where a person is cribbing that a car manufacturer is raising awareness of the Safety aids available in the car and someone says its misinformation.
The main reason i bought a Eco sport instead of the Renault Duster was the number of Airbags in the Ecosport whereas the "TOP END" petrol on the Duster had only a driver airbag.
Have a Booster seat for my 6 year old daughter and she is quite content to being the safe child as taught in her school too, insisting that she is belted up and the doors locked before we start off.

[Revvmaster]

Originally Posted by vigvr

I get your point of view. This is something that crossed my mind.

1. My assumption - for a child seated in the rear, having 6 airbags is better than 2.

2. So, in a vehicle having 6 airbags - is there a certain age/height/weight suggestion metric that qualifies a child to be in the regular seat if not a child/booster seat? Because all children may not be as comfortable in special seats and this also qualifies for frequent changes as children grow. Case in point - the girl in the TVC.

Vigvr, my article specifies some of the basic requirements (at least 35 kg and above 4 feet in height before they move to regular seating), although thorough research into child seats online should give you a better sense of height, weight etc.

I find calls for closing the thread ridiculous. Half baked knowledge is worse and incomplete understanding of physics in case of an impact is dangerous. Remember, 5 per cent of all road accident deaths in this country are children under the age of 14. Just because it is single digit percentage, doesn't mean their statistics are less important.

And what makes me sad is how child safety in cars is considered even by an educated, well heeled and travelled lot. Good car seats can range between Rs 10,000-25,000 with up to three changes required during a kid's life, depending on growth. That (in total) is far less than a year's school fees in a good IB/ICSE school in a metro city.