> Very bizarre and shockingly disgusting way to advertise

Seems more direct than the alternative. If you believe you have strengths compared to your major competitor, why is it bad to lay out the comparison explicitly in your marketing? Sure, comparative advertising can go to far, but why not leave it up the company doing the advertising to make sure they don't come off looking petty?

Because they lie. Directly, or through omission, or through implication, or through some ridiculously convoluted means, but we all know it to be true; we cannot trust the advertiser.

> we cannot trust the advertiser.

Of course you can't. That's why you don't just take advertising at its word. Anyone who does is a fool. But to say that you shouldn't allow comparative advertising because of the possibility of lying is absurd. There are other laws that cover truth in advertising.

Using someone else's brand, without their permission, in a way that will damage their brand, to try to sell your own goods, in a way that everyone knows is going to be fantastically biased. Seems pretty out of order to me. :)

That isn't just culture shock. That is a clear example of the higher integrity (in general) of Danish society than the US. That is, they place a higher value on honesty, fairness, and contributing positively to society. I am from the US, have always lived in the US, and have never been to Denmark. But from my few experiences with people from Denmark, and knowledge about their political/economic/social affairs, it is clear to me this is the case. I understand the analogy about vulgar language, but in my opinion this involves issues of ethics and core values much deeper than just "offensive" words.

To those who misunderstand, it is not a problem to compare your company or product to a competitor. It is only a problem to make a comparison on anything other than a strictly objective, factual basis, which is in no way deceptive (See the comments regarding EU law). I would guess those countries that banned (or still ban) comparisons did so to avoid the hassle of trying to sort out whether something was permissible or not.

> Very bizarre and shockingly disgusting way to advertise (for someone who grew up in a culture without it)

Can you explain why you think this way? Sure, it's not polite, but I don't see how competing for market share would or should be a gentleman's game.

It's disgusting for someone who's not used to it, the same way that offensive and overtly graphical language can be disgusting to someone who grew up in a puritanical household.

It was just a culture shock from being exposed to something that seemed vulgar compared to what I'm used to.

.... and then there was the political ads... jeez :p

Right, but I'm asking you go a little deeper than just seemingly using the word "disgusting" again. I get that you find it disgusting, but can you introspect a little bit about why? I'm genuinely curious.

What is it about your puritanical household that makes an ad meant to positions oneself in a superior light vs. their competitors "disgusting"?

It wasn't just positioning themselves in a superior light, you can advertise your own strenghts without actively smearing someone else. What would you think of a person that instead of spending energy on showing off his qualities, spent all his time ragging on others?

If it was down to me and another candidate for a job then I'd have no problem saying "Look, you want to do X and Y(e.g., multitask); the other candidate doesn't have experience with X and his scores on Y weren't great (let's just say I know this). My experience and test scores are superior for what you want to do, and what you want me to."

Now, that's more civil than the world of advertising, but it's the same general principle. Commercial tend to make it a little bit more humorous. Comparisons aren't always polite, but they're often appropriate.

That's interesting. Personally, if I knew something like that, I think I'd make sure to highlight points where I'd compare favourably to the other candidate, but I'd leave it to the interviewers to actually make the comparison, rather than telling them his weaknesses.

It seems like a purposely mean way to conduct business. I also found this way of advertising gross and unappealing. It makes me think a lot less about the company advertising.

The information in the ad is biased and self-serving, so right off the bat I ignore almost anything they say.

I dont get that feeling at all when a company boasts about "best x, or won y competition" but bashing another product looks childish, mean and immature. A "my kid is better than yours" kind of debate.

I honestly embarrased for them when I see an ad that portrays competitions as mentally inept or comically retarded.

Doesn't that "gross an unappealing" apply to most US advertising.

I don't know about you, but I thought commercials in my country (Netherlands) were stupid until I watched US television. I felt my IQ dropping with each commercial.

Also: advertising prescription pharmaceuticals, and in a way that would embarrass your local street drug dealer...

I was going to mention that, but showed some restraint.

I simply cannot believe those ads are actually effective with the 20 second panic inducing side-effects enumeration.

I swear I saw an add about flew medication with "thoughts of suicide and depression" side-effects. What..the..hell. Who would buy that, and why are they advertising it.