Case on shock advertising in public health campaign
Citation preview
1. Shockvertsing
2. Omstreden film
3. Concept
A campaingby Regenbogen ("Rainbow"), a Germanchartiydesigned in
advance to World AIDS day, 1 december 2009.
We wanted to give the virus a face, not the victims of the virus,
says Dirk Silz, creative director at Das Comitee (responsible ad
agency).
4. Critics
Spokesman of British National Aids Trust: I think the advert is
incrediblystigmatizing to people living with HIV whoalready face
much stigma and discriminationdue to ignoranceabout the virus. The
organization is concernedthatthis kind of campaignwill discourage
peoplefrombeingtestedfor the diseasebecausetheymayfeel as
thoughtheythemselves are "massmurderers."
Furthermore the videos have been
criticizedfornotgivinganyrealinformationabouthow to prevent the
disease.
5. What does research say?
Research fromDahl et al 2003 shows thatshocking content in
anadvertisementsignificantlyincreasesattention, benefitsmemory, and
positivelyinfluencesbehavior.
Consumers are more likely to remember shocking advertising content
over advertising content that is not shocking.
However, there is stilllittleinformationonwhether shock
advertisingdirectlyleads to changes in behavior. There are
criticswhofearthatoverexposure to shock advertisingwillresult in a
public that is desensitized to advertisementsthatemploy shock
tactics, particularlythosewithovertlysexual and violent
images.
Source:
DW Dahl et al (2003). Does itpay to shock? Reactions to shocking
and nonshocking content amonguniversitystudents. Journal of
Advertising Research 43(3), p. 268 280.