"Pervert" Glitter's £100k telly ad...

Pervert Glitter's £100k telly ad

By EMILY SMITH US Editor

POP pervert Gary Glitter has been handed a £100,000 payday by bungling
advertising chiefs.

Computer giant Hewlett Packard is using Glitter’s 1972 hit Do You
Wanna Touch Me to promote a new touch-screen model.

The song features in a major marketing campaign, with TV adverts being
screened all over America.

The ads actually use a 1982 cover version sung by US rocker Joan Jett.

But because the song was originally written by Glitter, the 64-year-
old paedophile collects all the royalties.

Lucrative

And his windfall could be even bigger if the ad sparks a surge in
internet downloads.

US campaigners are now demanding Hewlett Packard axe the advert. Child
Abusewatch.net said: “It shows a distinct lack of sensitivity.”

The song was chosen by HP’s advertising company, although bosses at
the computer firm would have approved the ad.

Experts say it will earn Glitter about £100,000. A source at the
American Society of Composers said: “Any song used in a major campaign
costs tens of thousands. It’s very lucrative for the artist.”

Glitter already enjoys income of about £200,000 a year thanks to his
back catalogue of ’70s hits.

His records are never played on UK radio any more following his child
sex convictions, but they remain popular in the US.

The cash allowed Glitter to live a life of luxury before he was jailed
for child sex in Vietnam.

He was deported back to Britain, but then went into hiding after
complaints from neighbours forced him out of a £2,000-a-week bolthole
in Mayfair, central London.

The computer ad is not being shown on British TV, but could be viewed
online. Hewlett Packard said it pulled the internet ads as soon as it
was told of the Glitter link.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... 868317.ece

Abusewatch.net said: “It shows a distinct lack of sensitivity.”

Insensitivity towards whom? Kids in America who, even if they are watching the adverts (doubtful), would surely have no idea that the song they are hearing (sung by a woman) was actually penned by a long-forgotten old 70's glam-pop star? Or insensitivity towards preteen girls in some remote Vietnamese backwater who, in likelihood, would have no idea this advert even exists?

Who, exactly, is supposed to be offended by this - apart from the usual lynch mob at The Scum?

Glitter has served his time, lost his career (such as it was) and will never be permitted public redemption. Should we also change the law to deny him his performance rights royalties?

Hewlett Packard......

Don't see anything wrong with it.

Even you Cal must be able to see that having the worlds number one kiddyfiddler's track as you anthem for your new touch screen device probably wasn't the wisest move....

I love your use of quotation marks over the word "Pervert", Cal. Are you still clinging to some ridiculous belief that he's not, in fact, a paedophile?

It'll pay for his next trip to South East Asia...

Brerlappins little hat wrote:
Gandalf wrote::fp:

Hewlett Packard......

At least it wasnt PC world..

More to the point was, I work for them!

DML wrote:Even you Cal must be able to see that having the worlds number one kiddyfiddler's track as you anthem for your new touch screen device probably wasn't the wisest move....

I find it funny, actually. But seriously, I hardly think we need hound the man further. Three years in a Vietnamese prison cannot have been much fun and now he will be watched by The Fuzz here for the rest of his life (probably not long) and refused travel abroad just about everywhere. I say leave him alone now. Watch him, but just leave him alone. The Scum brings nothing useful to the Glitter debacle - just a rather distasteful and unhealthy voyeuristic fascination for the man's predilections, imo.

Eighthours wrote:I love your use of quotation marks over the word "Pervert", Cal. Are you still clinging to some ridiculous belief that he's not, in fact, a paedophile?

Gary isn't a paedo and if it was up to Cal you'd be stoned to death for accusing him of it.

$ilva $hadow wrote:
Eighthours wrote:I love your use of quotation marks over the word "Pervert", Cal. Are you still clinging to some ridiculous belief that he's not, in fact, a paedophile?

Gary isn't a paedo and if it was up to Cal you'd be stoned to death for accusing him of it.

You're right, Gary isn't a paedo. It's that sick banana split Paul Gadd that's the paedo...

Cal wrote:
DML wrote:Even you Cal must be able to see that having the worlds number one kiddyfiddler's track as you anthem for your new touch screen device probably wasn't the wisest move....

I find it funny, actually. But seriously, I hardly think we need hound the man further. Three years in a Vietnamese prison cannot have been much fun and now he will be watched by The Fuzz here for the rest of his life (probably not long) and refused travel abroad just about everywhere. I say leave him alone now. Watch him, but just leave him alone. The Scum brings nothing useful to the Glitter debacle - just a rather distasteful and unhealthy voyeuristic fascination for the man's predilections, imo.

You are correct. He should be left alone and forgotten about. His life, his music - everything.

Surely using the track is bad because it drags him back into the media spotlight (like it obviously bloody would!) and he can't escape. I personally do NOT think its acceptable for his music to be used though, you wouldn't hear it on the radio, why should it front a major ad campaign?

Eighthours wrote:I love your use of quotation marks over the word "Pervert", Cal. Are you still clinging to some ridiculous belief that he's not, in fact, a paedophile?

I have no idea if his 'guilt' has any more legitimacy in it than the verdict of a criminal court in one of the world's most notoriously corrupt judicial systems. Do you? And what are the chances we'll ever know?

This isn't about insensitivity. They couldn't care less whether a song written by him is used in an advert. They just don't want him to receive £100,000. Because it's not 'fair'. Because it wouldn't be 'justice'.

A Curly Wurly says that if he wasn't being paid royalties, no one would care.

Igor wrote:This isn't about insensitivity. They couldn't care less whether a song written by him is used in an advert. They just don't want him to receive £100,000. Because it's not 'fair'. Because it wouldn't be 'justice'.

A Curly Wurly says that if he wasn't being paid royalties, no one would care.

Well exactly, but thats human nature though isn't it? Its not wrong to run the story for that reason.

I didn't see any outrage a few years back, when half the ads on TV used songs by Moby, who I assume is also a paedophile.

Cal wrote:
Eighthours wrote:I love your use of quotation marks over the word "Pervert", Cal. Are you still clinging to some ridiculous belief that he's not, in fact, a paedophile?

I have no idea if his 'guilt' has any more legitimacy in it than the verdict of a criminal court in one of the world's most notoriously corrupt judicial systems. Do you? And what are the chances we'll ever know?

Of course the pictures on the hard drive of his PC are fake too, right?

Cal wrote:I have no idea if his 'guilt' has any more legitimacy in it than the verdict of a criminal court in one of the world's most notoriously corrupt judicial systems. Do you? And what are the chances we'll ever know?

You honestly think there's a chance he is in fact not a peadophile? Because Vietnamese courts or not, he's quite clearly a peadophile.

rinks wrote:I didn't see any outrage a few years back, when half the ads on TV used songs by Moby, who I assume is also a paedophile.

Is this a joke I'm not getting?

If no, what do you base your assumption on?

Stig wrote:Don't see anything wrong with it.

The US don't have a clue about who and what Glitter is. His music is used daily in US & Canadian sporting events.

Steve wrote:
Stig wrote:Don't see anything wrong with it.

The US don't have a clue about who and what Glitter is. His music is used daily in US & Canadian sporting events.

To this day, his songs are STILL sung at US sporting events. :lol:

"Pervert" Glitter's £100k telly ad...

Who is online

Affiliates