They get paid for doing work. I don't think anyone needs to defend themselves for doing that.
Does anyone think when a comedian does an advert Page 2
The point about advertising voiceovers are that they are not so much work as money for old rope. And as an entertainer you are not just hired labour - you are a brand, which is why the advertisers want you, and why you should be careful about what you lend your name to, not just in terms of the product you advertise, but the adverts themselves.
The safety-first attitude of TV execs means that most popular entertainers are over-exposed to the point where their schtick starts to become annoying anyway. Prostituting your talents to naff ads just hastens the day when I reach for the remote when you are doing work you actually care about.
I think the question of whether or not comedians demean their art by lending their talent to the advertising industry should be a matter of personal conscience.
Happily, most comedians don't have a conscience. 
Quote: bigfella @ October 14 2010, 11:15 PM BSTThey get paid for doing work. I don't think anyone needs to defend themselves for doing that.
No?
What about hit men? Drug dealers? The cast of Hollyoaks...?
I think there was a similar thread before. I don't mind celebs doing ads, but I do mind when they - relatively wealthy people - are extolling the virtues of shopping at store x or buying insurance y because it will save me a few quid. I don't think the whole pretence works when the viewer/listener thinks: hang on, who are you to tell me how important this is when you don't really need to shop around moneydirectcomparison.tv to save 12 quid, Mr Voiceover?
Scruples and advertising do not go together.
Then again, I'm quite happy to take it on trust that Paddy McGuinness is a regular customer of Greggs. He should also advertise Wetherspoons, Poundland and the comprehensive school education system.
Quote: Leevil @ October 15 2010, 1:22 AM BSTScruples and advertising do not go together.
What about the guy who had to advertise the board game Scruples, eh? You can be cruel, Leevil.
Quote: Tim Walker @ October 15 2010, 1:23 AM BSTHe should also advertise ..... the comprehensive school education system.
*Does an exaggerated comprehensive-educated yawn*
Quote: Badge @ October 15 2010, 1:25 AM BSTWhat about the guy who had to advertise the board game Scruples, eh? You can be cruel, Leevil.
Quote: Tim Walker @ October 15 2010, 1:23 AM BSTThen again, I'm quite happy to take it on trust that Paddy McGuinness is a regular customer of Greggs. He should also advertise Wetherspoons, Poundland and the comprehensive school education system.
Good for him! He's just paid £1.3m cash for a house from a builder friend of mine! Not bad for a guy earning £4 an hour 12 years ago as a lifeguard at a Bolton Council Leisure Centre!
Ask yourself the question - You're worth say £10 million (maybe more) and some multinational entity offers you 100k+ for a days work - would you let any principles get in the way of your decision?
I know a comedian who was offered the role as a Weetabix in a commercial, he literally had to dress up as a Weetabix and for that he was offered more money than he would normally make in 6 months of so.
Personally I'd advertise dolphin-unfriendly land mines in the shape of children's toys for a couple of grand.
I think it depends on what they're advertising - Stephen Fry advertising Twinings is ok because it's quaint and very British - but the direct line ads just seem... a bit sad.
Saying that, Johnny Rotten got a lot of stick for the butter ads and said he did it so he could use the money for his band, which is fair enough because there's an artistic reason behind it.
Quote: Tim Walker @ October 15 2010, 1:14 AM BSTNo?
What about hit men? Drug dealers? The cast of Hollyoaks...?
But that isn't a job, its a crime, different matter. Now about the hit men and drug dealers....
Quote: buyon ferry @ October 14 2010, 7:25 PM BST..it discredits them in a way. I have been noticing Stephen Fry and Paul Merton doing voice overs for some car insurance firm and thinking they don't need to really. Ricky Gervais takes the stance that is beneath him and I would agree. However his writing partner SM doesn't seem to mind.
Thoughts?
Beneath him?
Gervais (whilst I admire his work) is only a friggin comic!
How can much of anything be below a comic? (who is a basically a bufoon who makes people laugh). Gervais has made millions out of potraying bumbling losers - so how can he say - and really mean that?
Let's keep it real and not credit these people with too much glory and admiration.