I find it interesting that this is almost expected of PSA's. Either the nonprofit is dealing with a sensitive subject, and wants to be considerate and careful, or they want to create as much buzz as possible by through shockvertising.
Funny... when big business tries to harness shock value to generate buzz, they usually get negative press (cue Burger King, United Colors of Bennetton, etc). It's the nonprofits that get all sorts of positive buzz whenever that let them get away with this sort of thing. Truth is, all advertisers want to shock you - it gets you talking about their brand. It just seems that only when it's for a good cause do people refrain from playing the "offended" card... take, for example, this anti-smoking ad:
More: Bloody Billboard, PETA (of course), Kid Eating Poop, etc.
What's more, a lot of PSA's are placed in media for free. They get great, eye-catching work, dirt cheap media, and a lot of (semi-) positive buzz.
Maybe this industry isn't as hopeless as I thought? (Check one for big morals vs big business.)
No comments:
Post a Comment