Phila. newspapers run ads about fake airline Derrie-Air

Readers of The Philadelphia Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily News opened their papers Friday to see ads for a new airline called Derrie-Air, which purportedly charges passengers by the pound.

But the new carrier will never get off the ground. It's a one-day advertising campaign about a fake airline by Philadelphia Media Holdings, the papers' owner, and Gyro ad agency.

In light blue banners throughout the papers — as well as on their Web site, Philly.com — Derrie-Air cheerily trumpets its policy: The more you weigh, the more you pay. The ads direct readers to the Web site http://www.flyderrie-air.com.

Derrie-Air's sample rates range from $1.40 per pound to fly from Philadelphia to Chicago to $2.25 per pound to fly from Philadelphia to Los Angeles.

Those who scroll to the bottom of the home page find out the truth behind Derrie-Air.

A disclaimer labels the ad campaign "fictitious" and says it is designed "to test the results of advertising in our print and online products and to stimulate discussion on a timely environmental topic of interest to all citizens."



although its a fake airline

I have to wonder how far off the airlines are from charging its passengers by how much they weigh.. they are already charging for your bags

What a Great Ad!!!
Thanks for posting that, it needs to spread around.

I love this part:
How will you help the environment?
We will plant trees in deforested acres around the world to absorb all the carbon that our planes release into the atmosphere. We plan on having over 128,000 sycamores in Derrie Forest by 2010. The practice, known as "carbon offsetting" has been adopted by a diverse array of credible entities such as famous Hollywood actors and actresses.

It makes you wonder how long it would take before they are ripping up WalMart parking lots to plant trees?

None of the actual activists seem to pressing people to plant trees. Although there is group here trying to get people to plant gardens on their roof, maybe to free up their yards for trees?

Planting trees to off-set carbon emissions? Last time I heard trees are responsible for forest fires which pollute the air, kill furry little animals, and burn houses to the ground....which requires more trees for the rebuilding of.

Trees cause problems, not solves them.

I think you're on to something there, squeezer.

LOL.

It's worth mentioning that there are more trees in the U.S. today than 100 years ago.

Environmentalists often scoff at the idea of offsetting the supposedly dangerous carbon emissions for the reasons that Squeezer mentioned...

...except, of course, when it comes to purchasing "carbon credits". Then, suddenly, plainting more trees is fine.

There are many, many practical methods that can be used to improve our environment while simultaneously promoting a more amenable lifestyle for most Americans. Many of these ideas simply involve more care regarding urban planning, and simply integrating more walking and biking pathways into future plans for our infrastucture, which is already in need of repair. Tax incentives and encouragement of innovation would be productive too.

(Many times, you can't easily walk or bike to a destination even if you want to, simply because of poor urban planning.)

Really, if the U.S. Government was looking for innovative solutions to our high fuel costs and our depedence on oil from the private sector, all they need to do is ASK. There are seemingly ten bazillion people with ideas regarding this.

Instead, we get weak answers from opportunistic politicians with an agenda to push. They want to punish everyone for utilizing the very system that they are completely dependent upon.

Originally posted by WinstonSmith:

"It's worth mentioning that there are more trees in the U.S. today than 100 years ago."

There's less than you think. One of mine died recently.

"Environmentalists often scoff at the idea of offsetting the supposedly dangerous carbon emissions for the reasons that Squeezer mentioned..."

Someone really uses that argument? LOL

"There are many, many practical methods...simply integrating more walking and biking pathways into future plans for our infrastucture..."

Every solution seems to bring with it its own problems. Bike/walking trails means less land to soak up rain. This leads to flooding. Flooding leads to lost homes and trees required to replace them. Those trees were meant to offset carbon emmisions. Ergo, bike paths cause global warming. (I just made that up but it sounds true. LOL)