First, whether it's politically correct or not, the fact is that certain social problems are more prevalent in some demographics than others. There's more domestic violence among high school drop out first generation immigrants cohabiting than there is among married white college grads in Vermont. There's more AIDS among gay drug users than among heterosexual non drug users, etc.
However, it's remarkable that the public service messages are often targeted at the wrong demographics (both in content - e.g. the white middle-class couple in this photo, and in medium - e.g. in bus shelters in middle class areas).
Why is this done?
The vast majority of people involved in organizations that create public service ads are politically of the left, are innumerate, and hate admitting that problems are not spread evenly across all demographics.
So we get anti-HIV ads aimed at safe demographics instead of at-risk demographics.
This ad not only compounds that problem, but goes for the "clever" hook.
The excellent book _Tested Advertising Methods (Prentice Hall Business Classics)_ by John Caples and Fred E. Hahn talks about "clever" hooks - how, when they're A/B tested, they always fail. Creative types love funs, plays on words, etc.
...but all the evidence shows that this DOES NOT RESULT IN RESULTS.
The fact that this new poster is deployed is yet more evidence that the people involved in non-profits are innumerate.
The unstated goal of almost every non-profit is NOT to resolve the problem under debate, it is to maximize the span of control and the comfort of the people working at the non-profit.
You're deeply confused about what "working" means.
Ads work when they lead to conversions.
Public service ads work when they lead to a change in behavior.
Anyone want to bet $100 that there's absolutely no process in place to determine if all the money spent on this ad campaigns results in any change at all?
Of course, this advertisement is in Germany. A quick google search for domestic violence demographics in germany didn't pull anything immediately useful (and neither did wolfram alpha). I'm willing to bet, though, that the demographic range for domestic violence there is a little bit different than in the USA (especially considering their racial demograph is quite a bit different: 2.1% turkish, and 6.x% 'other', mostly other european countries).
Considering that we probably won’t see this kind of ad used in any kind of widespread way – it’s probably more about winning awards or getting linked from sites like this one – I’m not all that sure whether if this kind of ad works in the field or not is really an interesting question to ask. That is probably not its purpose.
I recently attended a talk from Markus N. Beeko, Director of Campaigns and Communications of the German section of Amnesty International, and he sort of hinted at that. TV ads or poster ads are expensive to run. The second are also very limited in their reach. With a agenda as busy and particulate as AI’s it is moreover impossible to have any sort of huge centrally coordinated and closely monitored communication strategy. Being responsible for communications at AI means warming up to the idea that you cannot and should not want to control everything.
So instead what they do (well, obviously among other things) is doing stuff like this. Stuff that spreads on its own. He showed three TV spots produced by AI and guess what: I had seen every single one of them before on YouTube without ever following AI closely. This seems to be a useful way of doing this kind of thing.
Concerning your comments about the appropriateness of the content and placement of this ad: I don’t know where you get the idea that this ad is placed in a bus shelter in a middle class area. There is a Saturn in the background, big electronics retailer in Germany, so I guess there are either no (middle class or else) houses in the vicinity of this bus shelter or not the best ones.
And, as it was already pointed out, this is a ad for Germany.
11 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 35.1 ms ] threadFirst, whether it's politically correct or not, the fact is that certain social problems are more prevalent in some demographics than others. There's more domestic violence among high school drop out first generation immigrants cohabiting than there is among married white college grads in Vermont. There's more AIDS among gay drug users than among heterosexual non drug users, etc.
However, it's remarkable that the public service messages are often targeted at the wrong demographics (both in content - e.g. the white middle-class couple in this photo, and in medium - e.g. in bus shelters in middle class areas).
Why is this done?
The vast majority of people involved in organizations that create public service ads are politically of the left, are innumerate, and hate admitting that problems are not spread evenly across all demographics.
So we get anti-HIV ads aimed at safe demographics instead of at-risk demographics.
This ad not only compounds that problem, but goes for the "clever" hook.
The excellent book _Tested Advertising Methods (Prentice Hall Business Classics)_ by John Caples and Fred E. Hahn talks about "clever" hooks - how, when they're A/B tested, they always fail. Creative types love funs, plays on words, etc.
http://www.amazon.com/Advertising-Methods-Prentice-Business-...
...but all the evidence shows that this DOES NOT RESULT IN RESULTS.
The fact that this new poster is deployed is yet more evidence that the people involved in non-profits are innumerate.
The unstated goal of almost every non-profit is NOT to resolve the problem under debate, it is to maximize the span of control and the comfort of the people working at the non-profit.
Phil Greenspun touches on that here:
http://philip.greenspun.com/materialism/early-retirement/
So, in conclusion:
BAH! This ad embodies everything that is wrong with non-profits and public service ads.
Ads work when they lead to conversions.
Public service ads work when they lead to a change in behavior.
Anyone want to bet $100 that there's absolutely no process in place to determine if all the money spent on this ad campaigns results in any change at all?
http://www.metafilter.com/70806/There-really-are-no-accident...
When a native German looks at it, it's in German.
I recently attended a talk from Markus N. Beeko, Director of Campaigns and Communications of the German section of Amnesty International, and he sort of hinted at that. TV ads or poster ads are expensive to run. The second are also very limited in their reach. With a agenda as busy and particulate as AI’s it is moreover impossible to have any sort of huge centrally coordinated and closely monitored communication strategy. Being responsible for communications at AI means warming up to the idea that you cannot and should not want to control everything.
So instead what they do (well, obviously among other things) is doing stuff like this. Stuff that spreads on its own. He showed three TV spots produced by AI and guess what: I had seen every single one of them before on YouTube without ever following AI closely. This seems to be a useful way of doing this kind of thing.
Concerning your comments about the appropriateness of the content and placement of this ad: I don’t know where you get the idea that this ad is placed in a bus shelter in a middle class area. There is a Saturn in the background, big electronics retailer in Germany, so I guess there are either no (middle class or else) houses in the vicinity of this bus shelter or not the best ones.
And, as it was already pointed out, this is a ad for Germany.
http://www.metafilter.com/82659/Domestic-Violence-Women-Abus...