When a lack of ideas becomes a lack of taste
Ads that rely on sensationalist shock tactics reinforce the prejudice that, in the communications industry, the only thing that matters is the impact—at any cost. Guest commentary by Kaspar Loeb, CEO of the Swiss advertising agency Saatchi & Saatchi Simko.
The good cause seems to justify all means. Because it is laborious and intellectually exhausting to find a truly captivating, touching and convincing idea, creative people like to take a mallet to shake people up for a noble cause.
Even if two examples don't make a trend, two commercials have been the talk of the town in recent weeks that are hard to beat in terms of tastelessness and gimmicky shock value. In Germany, the agency responsible, which was commissioned to design an awareness campaign for the infection by the AIDS virus, could think of nothing more clever than zooming in on the lover after a hearty love scene, whose grimace shows an embarrassing double of Adolf Hitler. You don't have to be a purist to find the parallel between the greatest mass murderer in history and the destructive Aids virus tasteless, unimaginative, unimaginative and stupid.
The tragic deaths of thousands of people in the attacks on the World Trade Center towers on September 11 eight years ago are abused in the other spot shot by DDB Brasil, which first shows the iconically horrific images of the planes crashing into the towers, before showing a whole fleet of passenger planes hurtling towards the New York skyline. As a resolution, we are then told in an inserted text that around 3,000 people lost their lives that day, but that many more people die every year due to the exploitative and ruthless treatment of the planet by humans.
In both cases, the clients and agencies argued that they wanted to shake things up, shock people and thus draw attention to these controversial topics. This column could therefore be proof that the concept worked, because both campaigns did indeed trigger a debate. However, the debate did not and does not revolve around the content, but rather the staging.
History is not taboo and instrumentalizing it to convey a subtle and relevant message to the people commonly referred to as the "target group" can evoke associative images and stir things up. However, the misfortune of thousands of people cannot be weighed against each other, not even and especially not for a "good cause".
Placing shocking human tragedies and fates in the context of an advertising message in this way, even if it is only to persuade people to change their behavior, cements prejudices against an entire industry that we cannot afford. Time and again, the communications industry and its exponents are accused of recklessness, carelessness and thoughtlessness and criticized for only focusing on the effect at any price.
Anyone who deals with communication on a daily basis knows that this is not true. In the selective perception of the public and customers, however, a few examples of crude tastelessness are enough to put an entire industry under general suspicion. And this is especially true at a time when, in the digital age with its multimedia complexity, the comprehensive strategic and creative expertise of excellent communication specialists is more decisive than ever for the commercial success or failure of brands.
Entertainment, the surprising effect, the amazing idea are the core of every successful campaign, and this will not change in the digital world. What will change is the choice of touch points and the way in which the idea is executed. At the same time, however, communication is more crucial than ever for sales, efficiency and margins, and all serious exponents in the industry are looking for direct contact with the top floor, where the relevant decision-makers sit, even once past the marketing managers, who are in an uncomfortable sandwich position. We want to be able to discuss and contribute our expertise on an equal footing and break away from the image of promising fast-talkers for whom their own fame is more important than their contribution to the client's success. We simply want to be taken seriously. Of course, we will only succeed in this if we distinguish ourselves through subtlety, great ideas and economic expertise and not with spectacular tastelessness that attempts to conceal our own lack of ideas.
Even if two examples don't make a trend, two commercials have been the talk of the town in recent weeks that are hard to beat in terms of tastelessness and gimmicky shock value. In Germany, the agency responsible, which was commissioned to design an awareness campaign for the infection by the AIDS virus, could think of nothing more clever than zooming in on the lover after a hearty love scene, whose grimace shows an embarrassing double of Adolf Hitler. You don't have to be a purist to find the parallel between the greatest mass murderer in history and the destructive Aids virus tasteless, unimaginative, unimaginative and stupid.
The tragic deaths of thousands of people in the attacks on the World Trade Center towers on September 11 eight years ago are abused in the other spot shot by DDB Brasil, which first shows the iconically horrific images of the planes crashing into the towers, before showing a whole fleet of passenger planes hurtling towards the New York skyline. As a resolution, we are then told in an inserted text that around 3,000 people lost their lives that day, but that many more people die every year due to the exploitative and ruthless treatment of the planet by humans.
In both cases, the clients and agencies argued that they wanted to shake things up, shock people and thus draw attention to these controversial topics. This column could therefore be proof that the concept worked, because both campaigns did indeed trigger a debate. However, the debate did not and does not revolve around the content, but rather the staging.
History is not taboo and instrumentalizing it to convey a subtle and relevant message to the people commonly referred to as the "target group" can evoke associative images and stir things up. However, the misfortune of thousands of people cannot be weighed against each other, not even and especially not for a "good cause".
Placing shocking human tragedies and fates in the context of an advertising message in this way, even if it is only to persuade people to change their behavior, cements prejudices against an entire industry that we cannot afford. Time and again, the communications industry and its exponents are accused of recklessness, carelessness and thoughtlessness and criticized for only focusing on the effect at any price.
Anyone who deals with communication on a daily basis knows that this is not true. In the selective perception of the public and customers, however, a few examples of crude tastelessness are enough to put an entire industry under general suspicion. And this is especially true at a time when, in the digital age with its multimedia complexity, the comprehensive strategic and creative expertise of excellent communication specialists is more decisive than ever for the commercial success or failure of brands.
Entertainment, the surprising effect, the amazing idea are the core of every successful campaign, and this will not change in the digital world. What will change is the choice of touch points and the way in which the idea is executed. At the same time, however, communication is more crucial than ever for sales, efficiency and margins, and all serious exponents in the industry are looking for direct contact with the top floor, where the relevant decision-makers sit, even once past the marketing managers, who are in an uncomfortable sandwich position. We want to be able to discuss and contribute our expertise on an equal footing and break away from the image of promising fast-talkers for whom their own fame is more important than their contribution to the client's success. We simply want to be taken seriously. Of course, we will only succeed in this if we distinguish ourselves through subtlety, great ideas and economic expertise and not with spectacular tastelessness that attempts to conceal our own lack of ideas.
