Most stupid ad concept, bar none.
|
Jeff Brooks, creative director at TrueSense Marketing, has served the nonprofit community for more than 20 years, working as a writer and creative director on behalf of a variety of organisations, including CARE, Bible League International, World Vision, Feeding America, World Relief and dozens of urban rescue missions and Salvation Army divisions. He blogs at Future Fundraising Now, podcasts at Fundraising is Beautiful and is a columnist for Fundraising Success magazine. In previous careers, he's been an English teacher and a classical musician. He lives in Seattle in the USA. More from this author:
|
Here is an advert for Amnesty International Poland that might just make your brain implode. The ad industry seem to rely on visual puns to communicate things (you seldom win awards by just coming out and saying something). Given the assignment of getting people to care about human rights violations, a normal person might consider showing those violations and what other fellow human beings are going through at the hands of corrupt governments. No. Clearly that is too straightforward. The brief must have said, ‘Make the viewer feel the pain of the victims’. But rather than communicate that pain by vividly telling the truth, they had to find an indirect, abstract way to say it. Like when they’re selling a product that is large, they show an elephant instead of the product itself. So, in this instance, the designers decided to make us ‘feel the pain’ by creating a visual vibration, something that most people dislike. It’s utterly fatuous to compare the suffering of the victims of human rights abuse to the mild discomfort we get from looking at this ad. But worse than that, the pun makes no sense. Close-set vertical bars don’t actually hurt you. Being jailed, tortured, or killed for your beliefs on the other hand, do. The comparison is even less apt than an elephant standing in for the idea that something is big. And most importantly, the viewer doesn’t know – rationally or emotionally – one iota more about the violations against human rights taking place all over the world. The barely-visible face in this ad is the Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Ky, who was imprisoned by the junta in Burma for many years. You may have recognised her, but I wouldn’t count on one in ten average people knowing her by her image alone. Burma is a repressive police state that uses torture, rape, slave labour and many other kinds of violence to keep its people down. Rather than mention any of that or help us feel the pain this ad serves up an obscure portrait of someone most people won’t recognise. Could they have gone any farther away from actually communicating, much less motivating action?
Reality and truth are powerful. You can use them to get people to care, to give, or to volunteer. Abstract visual puns? Not so much. © Jeff Brooks, 2011 |
You can compare this advert to a very different and highly successful Amnesty campaign also featured on SOFII. |
I think it's quite good
I think it's quite good actually. Maybe not everyone will recognise Aung San Suu Ky, but most will know who Amnesty are, what they do and therefore what this advert means. It's virtue is that it's very eye-catching.
I think it's quite good, too
Wow -- it does hurt to look at the image. In fact, one tends to glance at it only briefly till the 'ouch' starts again -- just as one averts one's eyes from images (and, metaphorically, thoughts) of human suffering. We all know what Amnesty is about; being reminded for one second of the pain of imprisonment and torture is a great way to impel us to keep up our support. Or to stop assuming other people are supporting Amnesty for us. And no, I don't work for them!
I like the idea of mixing
I like the idea of mixing straight telling with alternatives, but I don't think this works. It might remind us that Amnesty work to help people who are imprisoned, but I had to force myself to look back at the ad to see what the writing said. And I did that only because it's on this page as an example of an ad. If it was in a paper, I'd probably have ignored it altogether.
The proof is in the results
Personally I quite like it but not sure how well it will do. I hope Amnesty will share the results. If not actual at least a ratio to some of their other creatives.
I like this ad!
I think the fact that Suu Ky is barely visible adds to the effect - hinting that she is out of sight and so somewhat forgotten. And it makes people (or me at least) look at the ad for quite a while and reflect. True, a lot of people wouldn't recognise her and may not get it, but for those who do - and they might be the target audience - I think it works well. It's also intriguing and if I didn't know who she was, it might make me curious to find out.
Eeek. Amnesty has created
Eeek. Amnesty has created some of the best and most creative campaigns out there. They have very real and attention grabbing material to work with, and they chose something abstract and difficult to look at? Such a disappointment coming from an organization that does such great work and (usually) has such fantastic fundraising materials.
Post new comment