What's the LAST thing a professional sports team should make light of? (TW: Domestic Violence)

(The "Trigger Warning" in the headline was a spoiler, but I really don't want to re-victimize anyone who has been brutalized by a partner.)

Salon reports that the Cleveland Cavaliers, a National Basketball Association team, decided to run a parody ad on their in-game digital scoreboard that made fun of rival Chicago Bulls.

First, here's the United Healthcare ad they were parodying:

Here's their version:

Salon's Joanna Rothkopf writes, "the spot, coupled with the recent hire of sexual harasser Isiah Thomas to run the W.N.B.A.’s Liberty franchise as president, indicates that the NBA is completely unaware and unable to address the epidemic of violence towards women plaguing professional sports."

I have to admit, when I first watched the video, for a second I thought the criticism was misplaced because it could have been intended to show that he simply (but cruelly) failed to catch her. But then, when the camera lingered on the wounded woman on the floor, there was no doubt in my mind that it was intended to show him hurting her. For laughs. Because... "go, team, go"?

The video was deleted from Vimeo, where it purportedly once had an official online home, but was captured and reposted on YouTube by basketball writer Steve McPherson, with the comment "Domestic violence is super hilarious. Right, guys? Right? Hello?"

I have no doubt that the makers of the video didn't think they were doing anything wrong. But this kind of cluelessness is inexcusable, and not just because of the many pro athletes who have been charged with partner abuse. The fans can be a problem as well.

A few years ago, The Globe and Mail's Marina Adshade wrote about research into how watching football is a trigger for domestic violence in some men:

Using twelve years of U.S. data from police reports of violent domestic incidents on Sundays during the professional football season and point spreads made by Las Vegas bookmakers for football games (as a way of measuring if fans expected the game to be a victory or loss), the authors of this paper found that when a home team was predicted to win by four or more points and instead lost the game the level of violence perpetuated by men against their wives and girlfriends increases by a remarkable 10 per cent. This violence was isolated in a narrow window immediately following the end of the game and the number of acts of family violence increases as games became more important. 

On the other hand, if the team was expected to lose, and did in fact lose, there was no increase in domestic violence; likewise for when the team was expected to lose and won instead.

So, to even lightheartedly correlate super-fandom with domestic violence (and, in the end, control) is simply appalling. And stupid for the brand.

JWT Greece mocks domestic violence victims in mattress ads

Via Ads Of The World

It's a bad year for mattress ads. First there was the appalling Malala Yousafzai one from India. Now it's a Greek campaign that makes light of domestic abuse.

Appearing on Ads Of The World, this campaign by JWT Spot Athens, carries the body copy "Don't let your mattress abuse you. Ask for help at Dimstel."

Considering that the campaign uses stock photography, it may be yet another example of vanity ads that only appear online. But if this is the way Creatives Alexandros Tsoutis, Alexis Alifragis and James Karolos want to get their names known, they clearly lack as much common sense as sensitivity.

According to Greek Reporter, one in three women in Greece is a victim of domestic violence.

Twitter protip: Research before hashtagging! #whyistayed

Via Time

It's easy to see how this happened: Whoever manages the DiGiorno frozen pizza Twitter account saw a trending hashtag, #whyistayed, and completely misunderstood it.

From the Tweet above, it looks like they assumed the meme was about staying in a tired relationship. It was actually used by survivors of domestic abuse to share their stories, like "I thought I could change him," and "I didn't know he was abusing me." It runs parallel to another hashtag, #whyileft, and both allow strangers to create a huge, virtual support group.

The DiGiorno Tweet was a huge mistake, making it as far as coverage in Time. The administrator has been performing due penance, apologizing individually, over and over again, to people who called them on it.

The moral of the story? Educate yourself. Not just about what hashtags and memes are really about, but deeper on the underlying social issues that drive them.

And when you do screw up, make it right. Even if you are just a pizza brand.

Thanks to Audra Williams (via Facebook) for the tip.

What ISN'T wrong with this violence against women awareness campaign?

Via Ads of The World

This is a real shame, in every sense of the word. I quite liked last year's "You Are Not a Sketch" campaign for this client, Star Models of Brazil, by an agency called Revolution.

But this one? Not. At. All.

Via Ads of The World

Let's ignore the fact that it wasn't translated well into English. (Interestingly, the same campaign on Coloribus gives a different version: "It was the cleavage" and "It was the behaviour") I can't seem to find any Portuguese versions, which leads me to suspect that the agency, Revolution Brasil, created them specifically for international Web sharing.

But these are only shareworthy for how misguided they are. The assumption, that the woman in the middle of each ad is the type of person the viewer would assume was "asking for" sexual violence, and the two on the sides are not, is trying to push a point that no victim is to blame. But in doing so, it uncovers the agency team's prejudice against certain women and in doing so simply reinforces the idea that religious people, mothers, and soldiers are "better" than women who dress "slutty" or dare to have tattoos and pink hair. (WTF is that anyway? An indication that she's rebellious?)

This is not the way to address serious problems, which are commonly known in the present dialogue as "slut shaming" and "victim blaming".  You may be sick of those words, but they represent concepts that clearly are not getting through to everyone. Especially in the ad industry.

Paddy Power provokes with "Oscar" ad, succeeds

It's not easy to be a more insensitive and offensive advertiser that PETA, but online betting outfit Paddy Power does it on a regular basis.

This time, it's an "Oscars" ad that features accused murderer and elite athlete Oscar Pistorius. And oh, did they get what they wanted:

Paddy Power's controversial ad campaign featuring Oscar Pistorius, which offers "money back if he walks", is to be investigated by the UK's advertising watchdog after receiving nearly 50 complaints. 

The adverts, which offer refunds for losing bets if the South African Paralympian is found not guilty of the murder of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp, has been criticised for being in bad taste. 

The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) received 46 complaints in two days and has now decided to launch a formal investigation.

Now there's a Change.org petition to "please remove your offensive betting on the outcome of the Oscar Pistorius trial and donate any profits so far to a women's charity fighting violence against women." It has, of this writing, 122,610 digital signatures.

Not that any of the offended are in Paddy Power's target market. In fact, I wonder if they actually get more business from stunts like this (and this, and this) than they ever had the potential to lose.

It's a cynical adworld out there.

Agency recruitment video has unfortunate context #FdAdFriday

Boone Oakley of Charlotte, NC, produced clever-clever little recruitment video that offers to help interviewed candidates explain their absence from their current agency by fabricating tragedies and injuries with the hep of a makeup artist. (Via AdFreak)



They mean well, but when I first looked at the still (above) on the AdFreak link, I immediately assumed it was a domestic violence awareness campaign. Especially with the "excuses" onscreen.

It also just so happens that this week, a real domestic violence awareness campaign launched, in which a makeup artist shows women how to hide the signs of physical abuse on their faces:



Not that Boone Oakley intended anything negative by it. But it just goes to show that portrayals of battered women — even in jest — are loaded with unintended cultural context.

The most offensive ad you will see this week #FdAdFriday

AdFreak explains,

Adweek's resident Portuguese expert, Nick Mrozowski, who sent us this link about the spot, tells us the attack is supposed to be a play on the site's name: "Vai Bater can translate literally to 'go hit,' but the name of the site is more likely a reference to a heartbeat, as in 'a sua coração vai bater,' or 'your heart will beat,' as in, these events are exciting … and maybe you'll find a better girlfriend there.

Vaibater. There's a brand the world could do without. And I wonder how Apple feels about the iPad product placement...

Think different (about domestic abuse)

Cars are women, women are crazy...

And crazy Italian cars are... supermodel Catrinel Menghia?

A new series of Fiat 500 Arbath ads was just produced by Sapient Nitro. The first two are pretty typical "hot woman/ hot car" mindless series of beauty shots.

But the third... well...



When Ms. Menghia walks up to the photographer and caresses him, she asks (in Italian) "wanna go for a spin?" After he beats her in a road race, she slaps him and screeches "just who do you think you are?"

And then she flirts again, because Italian women are pazze that way.

Of course, if you follow advertising (or the NFL) you'll recognize this approach from Fiat's 2012 Super Bowl ad:



That one was ranked the second most sexist Super Bowl ad of the year by Fem2.0, with the comment:

"This ad not only objectifies a woman’s body, it hyper-sexualizes a car as a woman’s body. Fiat asserts women and cars are interchangeable. Duh! A fast car is like a fast woman and they’re both commodities men want. So men can “own” women…you know, cause they’re just objects (oh, I mean sex objects) after all. But this ad goes a step further. The Italian-speaking Romanian model Catrinel Menghia slaps the man for leering at her as she’s bent over. In reality, women face leering, ogling and street harassment on a regular basis. But in the ad, she shifts from anger to sexuality and quickly starts seducing him. Contributing to rape culture, Fiat’s ad associates and normalizes violence with sexual arousal."

In the new ad, she's the one who initiates the sexual play (as well as ending/inflaming it with violence) and it doesn't actually say that she's an object, but it's not much better than its predecessor.

F'd Ad Fridays: Boyfriend forgot Valentines? Sexually assault him!

This video by the always-classy Agent Provocateur manages to insult man and women alike. I guess that's sort-of equal opportunity.




That said, imagine the scene with the roles reversed.

F'd Ad Fridays: Free set of knives with Amanda Knox issue!

In Italy, where open air magazine stands are still on every other corner, the competitive market leads publishers to continually try to top each other with novelty giveaways. Often it's a CD or DVD.

But as AdFreak reports, the issue of gossip mag Oggi with Amanda Knox on the cover features a set of knives (and inexplicably, a pizza cutter):

Knox spent four years in an Italian prison after being convicted of killing her roommate with a black-handled kitchen knife. She was just recently released after much legal wrangling, but The Daily Mail says that Oggi continued to imply she was guilty and that prosecutors had flubbed the case.

Via The Telegraph

One thing is for sure: Oggi is guilty of insulting the memory — and the family and friends — of a young murder victim.

F'd Ad Fridays: Offensive salon campaign confuses ads with art

Progressive ad professionals are faced with some real conflicts. On the one hand, we want to be socially responsible contributors to a society of equal rights and respect for all. On the other hand, as part of the creative class, we despise censorship of artistic expression.

So when this months-old campaign from Edmonton suddenly exploded on the ad blogosphere this week as a Copyranter post, it caused quite a bit of anxiety:

The ad appears to make the joke that even though this woman is in an abusive relationship with a man who both beats her and gives her expensive gifts, at least she has a stylish hairdo.

Quite predictably, it caused outrage. How could anyone be so insensitive to such a horrible problem?

The advertiser, however, instead of taking the usual about-face, actually defended the approach:

Store owner Sarah Cameron said the point of the ads was to spark controversy, but they were never meant to target or attack anyone.

“It might strike a chord, but as the way our society and community is getting, we keep tailoring everything because everyone is getting so sensitive,” said Cameron.

“Anyone who has a connection or a story behind anything can be upset or have an opinion. We are not trying to attack anyone.”

Adland provided some context by showing the complete campaign:

Look good even when being frightfully blue collar.

Look good even when turning tricks in an alley.

Look good even when having to deal with icky old people.

Look good even with road rash.

Look good even when... WTF?

The salon accuses detractors of not appreciating the ads' artistic merit:

“We wanted to push limits,” said Cameron.

“You see the picture, you think it’s a nice photo and then you see the controversy.”

“We just like art, and it’s also objective.”

I think she meant subjective. And that's where I see that cognitive dissonance coming into play.

If confronted with this project as a photo essay, and told that someone wanted to stop it from being exhibited, I would probably defend it. Yeah, really. It's disturbing and upsetting and offensive, but that's part of what "art" is supposed to do. Like Mariel Clayton's psychopathic cannibal Barbie work. Art is supposed to make us think and feel things, sometimes awful things.

But this is advertising, and that is the problem. Advertising is not art, no matter how hard we try to claim it is. Advertising is a commercial message designed to promote a brand. And it doesn't have the same protections that "real" art does, because it is bounded by other regulations and expectations.

If unbranded, this photo essay would make a social statement about the superficiality of a looks-obsessed culture that's falling apart. As an ad campaign, it is sleazy and misjudged because it is cynically selling the very looks-obsessed culture the photos would otherwise be critiquing. The headline transforms it from provocative statement to tasteless joke.

What a confusing world we live in.

Toronto Argonauts accidentally make a bad joke

CBC reports that this season-opener ad for Toronto's football team has been pulled due to complaints:

Toronto city councillor Mike Layton wrote a letter to the Argos president Bob Nicholson, stating:

“While I understand the intended meaning, my concern is the unintended consequences. In the context of domestic violence, the ad insinuates that domestic violence in the home is acceptable or normal. The ad may also trigger traumatic responses in the many survivors of domestic violence who are courageously moving forward with their lives.”

David Bedford, the Argos' VP Marketing replied, "It's very clear it's a football player in a football uniform talking about promoting the opening game for a football team. I think it's pretty common knowledge that football is a contact sport and a physical game."

He did, however, add:

"We didn't look at it in the context of domestic violence and we probably should have, given that we've had a handful of complaints."

It's pretty understandable, both how the ad got approved and why people complained — especially considering the links between pro sports and domestic violence. Perhaps we can just chalk it up to learning experience.

It's a great PSA... if you can stand to watch it

I had a hard time not looking away, but then again I have a young son at home.



Jarring, heartbreaking and moving at the same time. I hope this makes a difference for the Irish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children — and for kids worldwide.

By Ogilvy, Dublin.

Via Copyranter

Contextual advertising fail: Real life edition

It's not the most tasteless ad I've ever seen. Perhaps a little creatively lazy, and not exactly sensitive to the feelings of people who have experienced violence.

My issue is that this billboard is attached to the back of Cornerstone / Le Pilier Women's Emergency Shelter in downtown Ottawa.

Don't look now...

Reader Patrick B. sent me an interesting item on an experimental "aware" ad in Hamburg, Germany, that "sees" when it's being viewed.

Placed by Amnesty International, it uses a camera to determine if it's being looked at head-on, then changes the creative from a contented-looking couple to a man battering his partner as you look away. (I have no idea what happens in a crowded bus stop, BTW...) The headline reads "It happens when nobody is watching".

Here's what it looks like:



Powerful stuff, with a focussed message. And while it won a silver at Cannes, Copyranter points out that it's a one-off intended for that sole purpose.

Hopefully, though, this technology will add to the arsenal of social marketers trying to make a real difference. Although its consumer applications could get annoying (remember the urinal ads that talked to you while you peed?) the international press this ad is garnering should at least add to awareness on the issue.

Award info and full credits are here.

Anti-violence ad banned for being too effective

Yeah, that's right. The shocking and powerful British cinema ad for Women's Aid, starring Keira Knightley, is apparently inappropriate for UK TV audiences.

Oh, you haven't seen it yet? Then watch before reading on:



This is social marketing at its best: surprising, gripping, and memorable. And stomach-churning. Just like the issue it portrays. But censors want to cut out the violence.

The ad was directed by Atonement's Joe Wright for Grey London. It quickly made the viral rounds via YouTube and has gained notice in advertising and entertainment blogs.

The censors in question are from Clearcast, the non-governmental organization that has to pre-approve all TV commercial scripts prior to broadcast. Here's their policy on violence:

6.2.2 Violence
Violence, cruelty and injury are themes which must be handled with great care and only in cases where they can be justified are they likely to be acceptable. These cases are likely to arise in public service messages, newsreel footage, film trailers and some charity advertising. Cartoon, theatrical and slapstick treatments may also be acceptable if they are clearly divorced from reality. However care must be taken not to give young viewers the impression that copying such violence would be safe or harmless fun.

The boldface is mine. How is this not justified as a public service message? Women's Aid says that:

1 in 4 women will be a victim of domestic violence in their lifetime – many of these on a number of occasions.

One incident of domestic violence is reported to the police every minute.

On average, 2 women a week are killed by a current or former male partner.

This decision by Clearcast, an agency that's just over a year old, is obviously a bad one. But at least the commercial is "out there", having reached over a million viewers worldwide so far. And the additional publicity that this mistake will generate can only increase that reach.

One of my causes wasn't so lucky, a few years back, when a client panicked and killed an ad we created to tell people to obey speed limits in residential areas, showing a child's funeral. We can only hope that there is enough show of support for brutal honesty in social marketing, in cases like the Women's Aid ad, that clients and regulators decide that "bold gets told"...