Do shock ads on cigarette packs work? A blogger’s view from Canada October 30, 2006
Posted by Farrukh Naeem at copywriterjournalist.com in : Advertising, Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Ethics in Advertising, Marketing, Shock Advertising, Tobacco Advertising , trackbackIn Canada, cigarette packs feature vivid pictures of the after-effects of smoking. Rotten gums and cancerous internal organs. Really creepy pictures. Does this communication approach (shock and awe) work for smokers?
Following a comment on my post on tobacco advertising, I discovered an out-of-the-box analysis of the smoking problem on Ben and Heather’s blog from Canada. They feel that the reason why we don’t take the smoking issue seriously is because its effects aren’t immediate. Here’s what they write:
“In a world where people live with a buy now, pay later mentality (thank you Visa, Mastercard, AMEX), we are conditioned to act now and worry about the consequences of those actions later. We don’t invest in RRSPs for retirement for the same reason we don’t worry about smoking: The debt and the diseases won’t hit us until years later and by then it’s too late….What we need is something that will make us act now, without hesitation.”
- Ben and Heather of thecourtjester.wordpress.com
And what would that be? Why not visit Ben and Heather at The Court Jester and find out yourself - be warned though, it’s a crazy one!
farrukh
Technorati Tags: Advertising, Marketing, Ethical Advertising, Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Tobacco Advertising, Shock Advertising, Anti-Smoking Ads
Related posts:
- Tobacco Advertising: Will you do it? Or will you say ‘No’? An interesting post has been put up by Richard Abbott...
- Anti-smoking ad released on 9/11 in UAE - thought-provoking idea, copywriting and art direction Anti-smoking ads are never in short supply, but this one...
- Plagiarism in advertising: Copywriting legend Indra Sinha from the UK shares his views The discussion on plagiarism and copy-paste creativity in advertising continues with...
- Advertising Website Review 1: Ads of the World Gone are the days when creatives put yellow post-its...
- Social Responsibility: Is it about black & white ads and a few cents in charity? What exactly is social responsibility for a business? Does an...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Comments»
I don’t think it will matter. I don’t smoke, but comedian Denis Leary joked about this once when he said “you could have a brand of cigarettes that were CALLED ‘The Warnings’ with a giant skull and crossbones on the cover, and smokers would STILL break into your house to steal them. It’s a drug. We’re addicted.”
Seems to sum it up pretty well.
;-p
Welcome, makethelogobigger,
Yes, the comedian was right.
But what if, as ad people, we get a brief where the desired response is to make that guy leave the pack alone?
How would we tackle it?
farrukh
The bigger question is: Why would we want people to quit at all? Public life can be arranged so noone other than the smoker was bothered by it, but people would still urge him to smoke. Why? I don’t go around forcing obese people to exercise or snatch the burger out of the hands of someone who is clearly not getting the vitamins he needs.
All this hassling with smokers has only got to do with one thing: the zeitgeist allows you to. Weakness in any form is frowned upon, but by not having a tolerant and including approach to others you are making yourself a whole lot poorer. Morally that is, of course.
Peter - thanks for your comments and feedback. You have offered an interesting and different perspective on the situation.
We would want people to quit smoking because they are killing themselves and others around them. Yes, there is a school of thought out there that says that people should be free to kill themselves but I don’t subscribe to that thought. I think we do have a responsibility to help people out of fatal addictions whether it is alcohol, drugs or smoking.
You are right that we shouldn’t force anyone to do anything, but I feel that we don’t have to promote a deadly habit like smoking as advertisers and communicators.
I support you against hassling - no one deserves to be hassled. Smokers need our love and compassion - in the short time that they have.
Hehe, I enjoyed the sarcasm in that last paragraph.
I don’t think we’ll agree, but at least we have come to the core of our disagreement: I believe people should be let to their own devices as much as possible, and I think what you mean is that society should have a somewhat more paternalistic approach to it.
But there is another thing that boggles me: Why can’t we focus more on life quality rather than quantity? I may be naive, but if everyone lived the next five years as if they were their last, I really think people would concentrate more on getting the maximum potential out of life instead of just counting days and years. With that in mind: Is it really so bad if smokers die younger?
We’ll agree to disagree, Peter
I too believe everyday should be lived like it is the last. For getting maximum out of life, well being and good health could help perhaps.
It’s good to have differing perspectives on issues - you offer a valuable one - I don’t subscribe to it but I respect it.
I worked in a office couple of years back where smoking was allowed, ostensibly to go with the creative enviornment encouraged in the premisies. I dont smoke, and i needed the job, so i put up with it. That is till i got pregnant. For the next 7 months or so, i would wake up every morning wondering if i had it in me to either raise the issue (i KNEW the policy when i joined) or quit. I did niether. I have never seen myself as an activist, but here, i could not stand up for my unborn child either.
P.S. My husband smokes, though never in the house.
Seekersought - I’m pained to read what you wrote. If nicotine addicts only get their brains working after stinking up their room - that’s still no excuse to subject a non-smoking colleague to second hand smoke, that too a mother who is expecting.
I would have asked the management if it is the company’s policy to make unborn children smoke, politely of course.
Standing up for what one believes in is not easy - and it takes little steps first before you can take big ones.
I know - because I refuse to write ads for products that harm people - like tobacco - but it took a while to get to this point without worrying about the consequences.
I hope your baby is well and healthy.
farrukh