The $180 million Tourism Australia advertising campaign
“Where the bloody hell are you?” was banned worldwide and caused an uproar,
especially in Australia.
Here is the television commercial that was banned, which
features scenic images of Australia and its beautiful landscapes, rainforests,
oceans, cities, beaches and deserts.
The television commercial was first banned in the United
Kingdom in 2007 because of the use of the profanity “bloody” in the commercial.
What a double standard coming from a country where they allow the FCUK
billboards!
In a reading by Hong, she talks about how Australians use
“bloody hell” in their casual conversation. But from an intercultural point of
view, saying “bloody hell” may be perceived differently.
I personally do not find the word “bloody” or the phrase
“bloody hell” offensive in any way. I grew up on a cattle station in a very
remote area and I have become accustomed to certain profanities due to the
nature of my father’s work and the environment in which I grew up. Dad is your
typical Aussie farmer – laidback, friendly, and hard-working. Most of the time
he is using “bloody” as an intensifier, like “What the bloody hell was that?”
or “I saw that bloody stray cat earlier.”
I do, however, understand that different cultures perceive
the word as offensive, just as we perceive some gestures in other cultures as
offensive. Hong mentions that the word “bloody” may be considered impolite in
other cultures, however it has been part of Australian culture for longer than
we can remember.
I agree with Hong, that the phrase “bloody hell” is part of
the Australian culture and it should be respected as one of the common and
casual phrases. The Tourism Australia advertising campaign should never have
been banned, as it would have done wonders for the tourism industry in
Australia.
References
Hong, M 2008, "Where the bloody hell are you?": Bloody hell and (im)politeness in Australian English. Griffith Working Papers in Pragmatics and Intercultural Communication, vol.1, no.1, pp33-39.