Arnold on ethical marketing

CHRIS ARNOLD

This years DMA awards Grand Prix winner for Friends of the Earth by CHI is a fantastically engaging idea that got almost 200,000 people taking action – now that’s effectiveness.

By contrast The Barnados ad got almost 500 complaints. That’s neither good for them or the industry. In my house we find it irritating, so on goes the mute button. Most ads on TV these days are just boring or bad, but to be irritating has to be a dubious way to market a message.

10 years ago that approach may well have worked but today we are different. Advertising is now pull not push and intrusion is the last way to engage consumers. It's a powerful ad (as you’d expect from one of the world's best creative agencies) and well meaning (along with a million other causes) but couldn't it put it's point across in an engaging way rather than one that leaves you cold?

It feels like a social issue our government and social services should be tackling (and I think there’s a topical reason it’s been run). There's also a problem with getting people to be sympathetic rather than defensive and even critical of another class of people. Is she a victim we want to help or does she reflected the decaying standards of an underclass? Far better would have been to get this idea across via a soap – Eastenders for example.

If this was part of just one episode it’d get a brilliant reaction. Tucked between two Christmas themed ads during an entertainment programme it jars, but not in a good way.

It's the equivalent of someone throwing up in a nice restaurant. There are many smarter ways Barnardos could have executed this message, and many examples of similar causes being marketed in a way that engages consumers – just look at the Saatchi work for NSPCC – cartoons. 500 complaints says the public isn’t responding in a positive way.

Don’t kid yourself that people “are talking about the ad”, it’s a negative response. And just because people talk about an ad doesn’t mean they are going to respond. I feel using a sledgehammer to crack a nut rarely has good long term results. It’s the TV equivalent of those aggressive in yer face charity workers you meet in the street who try and use guilt to get you to sign away £2 a month.

Given the message, I wasn’t sure what I should be doing or how Barnardos was going to (borrowing NSPCC’s line) STOP the cycle. You told me the problem, so what’s the solution?

As it’s Xmas this seems a far less relevant message than St Mungos, Crisis or many other charities. I think the age of shock tactics (always defended by the reality claim or we need to shake people up) is past.