The worst road safety shock ad you will see this week

Spoiler: They all die

Redditor JamieDrogheda shared this really dreadful PSA two days ago, for the Department of The Environment in Northern Ireland.

The Belfast Telegraph calls it "more closely resembling something like Sharknado than a traditional road safety ad." The ASA won't let it be shown on TV before 9 pm.

I'll simply call it overwrought, manipulative and misguided:



This kind of shock ad should stay in the 1970s, the golden age of driving school snuff films. Nobody, absolutely nobody, is going to drive more slowly because of this ad. Instead of seeing it as a symbolic slaughter of all the children killed by speeding, they're more likely to see it as almost comical.

Just look at the "special effects":

The teacher doesn't seem too concerned by the flattened children.

Does this Audi campaign actually encourage distracted driving?

At first sight, I thought this was a CSR campaign against distracted driving. But after reading the fine print ("Detects danger when you don't. Audi Pre Sense") it feels like the exact opposite.

In my work with the Traffic Injury Research Foundation (TIRF), one of the many things I've learned is that safety features can actually make people drive more carelessly. We did a whole campaign about it, called "Brain On Board," for the Toyota Foundation, because Toyota Canada feels the need to remind drivers not to let their advanced safety features make them less careful drivers.

This German Audi campaign, however, especially the "emails" one above, take the dangerous position that distracted driving is going to happen anyway, and that this new feature can save you from your own stupidity.

I have a message for the agency, "thjnk", in Hamburg, Germany: THINK!

Tip via Ads of The World

Another campaign tells young women "don't get raped"

Image via Ads of The World

You just have to shake your head. No matter how often people speak out against well-meaning social marketing campaigns that unintentionally (or not) normalize rape culture, people keep making them.

This one comes from Calderdale Council in West Yorkshire, produced in-house by the creative team of Stuart Kerray and Dave Follon. The Council told The Mail they hoped their campaign "will reduce crime and shock revellers into thinking twice about how much they drink."

Writing in her Wordpress blog, Karen Ingala Smith saw it differently. I'll let her take it from here:

Though the poster doesn’t explicitly mention rape,  the lines “when you drink too much you lose control and put yourself at risk” together with an image of a dishevelled young woman in a short dress, make clear that the risk is that of sexual violence. The article was picked up widely re-reported including in The Independent and Daily Mail and eventually discussed in a piece by Sarah Vine under the title “Sorry sisters, but girls who get blind drunk ARE risking rape” in which she stated her  refusal to join “the chorus of feminist disapproval” and argued that women need to take responsibility for their own safety, going on to mention “one or two nasty brushes” that made her realise how important it was to not willingly put herself in the path of danger and “stupidly” becoming a victim. 

The concept of a victim of violence ‘willingly and stupidly putting themselves in the path of danger’ is judgemental victim blaming.  Whether though an act of choosing  or not choosing to do something, a victim of sexual violence is never responsible for what is done to them. Rapists and abusers are the only ones responsible for rape and abuse. 

Rapists and abusers use excuses to justify their actions,  to discredit their victims and to shift responsibility for their choices away from themselves and on to their victims.  They use exactly the kind of excuses encapsulated in the Calderdale poster and Vine’s piece, in short: “She didn’t take care. “ or “She was asking for it.”

Is she reading too much into it? Let's look at how the same campaign advertises to male bingers:

Via Ads of The World

Via Ads of The World

Same playful concept, but no hint of sexual consequences. Instead, the ads talk about the danger of hurting yourself and others. Women as victims, men as aggressors. You've seen it all before.

The council’s Cabinet member for economy and environment, Coun Barry Collins, told the Yorkshire Post (in a classic non-apology) that the images "were not intended to cause offence."

We have used images of both men and women to raise awareness of the impacts on anyone of taking drugs and drinking too much. The aim of the campaign is to expose as many people as possible to timely advice to enjoy a safe night out.

He said the same images were used 
last year, with no complaints until now.

So perhaps some progress has been made?

Sexualizing safe driving with "Listen to Bridget"

I somehow missed this campaign, which launched last summer, when it made the rounds of Canadian media.

The woman above is the face of a Halifax Harbour Bridges traffic safety campaign by M5. (Although it looks more like a Roxy Music album cover to me.)

"Bridget" uses sultry looks and saucy puns to appeal to drivers to slow down and keep their eyes on the road.

The complaints were fast and furious.

Halifax's Avalon Sexual Assault Centre wrote to Steve Snider, CEO of Halifax Harbour Bridges, that the campaign  “sexualizes and uses women as a means for the commission’s message... The ‘Listen to Bridget’ Twitter feed has resulted in responses that actively promote violence against women including Tweets that suggest that the worth of having a woman as the face of this campaign is that you can throw coins at her as you cross.”

Via The Herald

Soon, a petition went up at Change.org, demanding that HHB "Stop Using Sex to Educate Drivers on Safety." It attracted fewer than 500 signatures, but it managed to keep the protest in the news.

Of particular concern was the fact that the Twitter portion of the campaign was bringing out sexual harassment trolls as well:

Bea LeBlanc, chair of the Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women, said, "You know, I guess when you're looking at putting women down in that way, you're looking at all kinds of different things that could come out of that. Women shouldn't be portrayed in that way at all. Men certainly wouldn't be portrayed in that way."

HHB spokesperson Alison MacDonald responded that she didn't feel the campaign was using sex to sell. I think we're using risqué humour. (Using sex) was never our intent ... It's not targeted towards just men. It's targeted towards all adults.  I think that we're pleased with the feedback that we're getting. It is generating conversation. I think people are getting the message."

(Openfile reports that the campaign was created by an all-female team at M5.)

So, how bad is this? Well, I don't think the intentions were awful. If it was, in fact, created by women, they may have misjudged the way people would respond to a sexually aggressive female stereotype that they actually liked. After all, isn't that a kind of empowerment? And of course, "edgy" shit wins awards and notice from the circle-jerking advertising world.

This is a typical ad creative (and strategic) blind spot: You are not your audience. I'm sure there were a few young women who found the campaign cool. Or young men who found it amusing. But this was not a youth-oriented campaign that runs above the toilets in nightclubs. It is a public service campaign on two major arterial bridges in a major Canadian city. All kinds of people are bound to encounter it — male and female, young and old, laissez-faire and socially concerned — and it was inevitable that the sexualized imagery and tone would rub several of them the wrong way.

Sex appeal is a very easy way to get attention in advertising. But that doesn't mean it's the right way. 

I've been talking a lot recently about the power of sexuality in advertising, even calling in a judgement-impairing intoxicant for some consumers. I'm not convinced that it mixes with safe driving.

I'll close with an interesting perspective about the campaign from @kinga_p from Fuse Marketing Group:

Maybe it's because I've been working in marketing for so long or maybe it's due to my nonsense Polish upbringing, but I am just not the type of person who gets up in arms over every little thing that COULD be perceived as offensive. But, since I too can get sucked in by the online whirlwind of anger over a company’s/brand's/celebrity's insulting or insensitive comment or action, I have developed a rather scientific approach to help me determine if something is indeed offensive and if I need to do something about it, like write a letter or a blog post. I call it Kinga's Should Have Known Better Offensive Scale and it is compromised of the following tests:  

Test #1: Is this offensive to the intended target market?Test #2: Is this offensive to the majority of the population?  Test #3: Does this treat a group/subject with disrespect/insensitivity?  

With a piece of marketing, I give more weight to test #1, but if the campaign in question gets a "yes" to any of the above tests, it is offensive and you should have known better. 

The mindless tyranny of the "Rule of Three"

School House Rock - Three is a Magic Number - The most popular videos are here

We are all obsessed with threes. Blame School House Rock. (That, and centuries of myth and numerology.)

Ever since I began my career in advertising, the number 3 has been a pain in my creative ass — particularly when it comes to print campaigns. We sit down to brainstorm a campaign, and unless it's a one-off, we always feel compelled to try and make three equally awesome versions of the same "big idea".

The first one is usually great. The second can be also. But the third — that extra push to make it a nice, round numbered campaign — is too often a compromise.

I believe this obsession with three execution print campaigns is universal. I see it all the time in places like Ads of The World, where agencies try to clone one or two good ideas into a "full campaign".

Here is a perfect example:

Some very creative people at  DDB, Sydney, Australia, came up with a clever (if gory) visual idea to communicate the dangers of crossing the road with earbuds on. It's a little shocking for my taste, but it is original (as far as I know) and the execution is solid.

But is it "campaignable?" is always the Creative Director's question. They most likely then looked into other deathly representations of various types of headphones and other peripherals for music players and smartphones.

But what did they come back with?

The same... bloody... ad. But with a man.

What a waste of photography and art direction to duplicate the first idea. (I don't actually know in which order these were conceived, but stay with me here.)

I understand that sometimes clients feel that viewers cannot identify with a person in an ad who is not like them — sexually, ethnically, age-wise or whatever — but I would have argued that the concept was strong enough to overcome that. And the duplication just dilutes the "wow" factor of the original.

But they kept going:

There. Now we've increased the age and ethnic diversity of the campaign. But at this point, I don't even process the concept anymore. I just think that the creative team stubbornly stuck to the one good idea they could come up with.

Damn Rule of Three. It totally ruined an otherwise impressive campaign.

A really, really depressing bicycle safety campaign

The concept works, I think, in conveying the idea of "distance". But at first I wasn't sure who it was talking to, cyclists (keep your distance from cars) or car drivers (keep your distance from cyclists). I was also unsure whether the 1.5 m was supposed to give me a mental image of a car tailgating a bike, or vice versa, or whether it was how much clearance drivers need to give a bike while driving past one. But at least it got me thinking about the issue, I guess.

What the campaign succeeds at is conveying the emotions of sadness and regret. It is quite honestly the most depressing ad campaign I have seen in quite some time.

And that too can be a problem. Many ad consumers simply can't cope with negative emotions. They protect themselves and their consciences by mentally separating themselves from the ad. ("That's not me!") This is called defensive processing, and it is the sworn enemy of hard-hitting social marketing.

That said, I was still moved by this campaign. When I am behind the wheel, I try to be as respectful and cautious as possible of both cyclists and pedestrians. 

And as a cyclist? Let's just say that this campaign just confirms my fears about riding a bike in traffic.

Campaign by Y&R South Africa
Spotted on Ads of The World

Not the typical gruesome distracted driving ad

If you're freaked out by going to the dentist, don't watch. This very strange ad about distracted driving by the US Department of Transportation may be a little too extreme in its goofiness and gore to actually get its point across:



My other question: Is this campaign real? Or is it another spec nightmare?

Via Illegal Advertising

Pothole season is here. Distracted driving remains a year-round problem.

While checking his iPhone for a pothole-free route, he killed 4 pedestrians.

Montreal's Taxi came up with a clever campaign called "Pothole Season" that includes a site where drivers can report the winter's ravages on their roads online, which can be avoided by using an iPhone app.

The only problem is, you aren't supposed to be using your iPhone while driving.

You are also not supposed to be drinking coffee...

Or eating donuts...

 Or putting on make-up.

If you're trying to drive safely in Montreal with these folks on the road, potholes might be the least of your worries.

Via Ads of The World.

UPDATE: Taxi tells me the app has a hands-free function:



The ads are still a problem, though.

Look at that asshole in the bike lane

A new Tumblr documents cars driving and parking in one of Toronto's busiest bike lanes in front of Sam James Coffee Bar and Speakeasy Tattoo, on Harbord St.

I'm not sure how effective a shaming strategy it will be, since the cars and drivers are hard to identify, but I'm sure it at least makes them feel some sense of justice.

Especially when they bust the TTC

What do you think? Is this a good way to start raising awareness of bike-friendly cities?

Tip via Treehugger

Espesciall

It's national drunk driving night in the USA

According to Gawker, tonight (Thanksgiving Eve) is the night most Americans drink and drive. There's not much point in me saying "don't do it". Those of you without access to decent cab or public transit services will have to face the prospect of having to find, or be, a designated driver. Why would anyone want to do that?

1) You can still perform when you finally get a chance to hook up with that high school regret.
2) Tomorrow, you can be thankful that you don't have to stuff a turkey while blindingly hung over.
3) You will survive the night.
4) That old lady down the road who walks her dog in the dark will survive the night.
5) The loved ones you spend the next few days with will not be your new besties in jail.

Be safe.

A smarter way to stop drunk driving

Copyranter just featured this NZ anti drunk driving spot, and I'm reblogging it because I really love it:



Here are all the things it gets right:

• It accepts that teens like to get drunk
• It recognizes the social pressure not to take a stand
• It's funny and culturally relevant
• The language, characters and setting realistic

Here are things it didn't do:

• Guilt
• Preach
• Shock
• Tell youth not to drink

Through my work with the Traffic Injury Research Foundation I've come to understand that positive reinforcement is the only way to really get through to anyone. To completely denormalize drunk driving, you've got to normalize the culture of refusing to participate in it.

This isn't the first time New Zealand has taken a more progressive approach to encouraging responsibility. The "4 Mates" series, aimed at men, also showed that being a designated driver for your drunken friends sucks, but is sometimes necessary.



(There is something wrong with the vid, though. It shakes.)

F'd Ad Fridays: Don't get distracted by the headlights behind you

And by headlights,  I of course mean "headlights" in the parlance of our times.



This British (?) distracted driving PSA was a related video to the Farrah one from my last post. But whoever put it on YouTube cut off the branding and call-to-action. Does anyone know its origin? It certainly looks real, and of fairly recent vintage.

The poster claims it was "banned", but they all say that. It actually makes some pretty good points about both the passengers' and the divers' responsibilities when it comes to preventing distracted driving.

What not to do in the back of a boy's car. (Not while he's driving, anyway.)

Have a safe weekend.

Parents of young kids: How terrifying is this coffee ad?

Via adwomen.org

I get that this ad by Leo Burnett, Hong Kong, supposed to be funny. But if the bus driver is in such bad shape, I don't think another cup of coffee is the answer. As both a parent and a road safety social marketer, I hate being reminded of real life problems like this in a silly consumer ad.

Not your average road safety PSA

Although it starts out that way. Watch to the end.



Via Buzzfeed

The bleeding ear cell phone concealer

Ridiculous from start to finish. But then again, so is driving while talking on a cell phone.

(Warning: bleeding dick joke included)

The Bleeding Ear Cell Phone Concealer	UCBcomedy.com
Watch more comedy videos from the twisted minds of the UCB Theatre at UCBcomedy.com

But all the stupid was worth it for this little social commentary:

"Also available in Not White"

Via Upright Citizens Brigade Theatre

Probably the cleverest sick posthumous OBL ad you will see

Yes, it's still tasteless, but at least it's intelligently tasteless enough to pull me out of my self-imposed "don't join the Bin Laden death party" moratorium*:



Yes, it appears to be a brandless spec piece. But it may turn out to be a stealth campaign. Who knows? It still managed to surprise me — unlike this one.

Via Illegal Advertising

*For the record, I'm glad he's out of commission, but I don't celebrate revenge killing.

Now THIS is how you do a bloody drunk driving PSA!

This. Is. Awesome.

Posted today by Copyranter, this brilliant little Danish teleplay of organized crime (Directed by Adam Hashemi) gets the drinking and driving message across in a totally unexpected way:



...which is fantastic, because at first I thought it was going to be a ripoff of this MADD spot:



It's always great to be reminded that there's always new territory to explore in social marketing.

Melodrama? In my PSAs?

I frequently snark against over-dramatic PSAs, but in this case it actually makes sense:



Thes PSAs, from the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), is aimed at the Hispanic community in that state. Taking the form of "telenovelas" (Latin American soap operas). the campaign deals with the consequences of drinking and driving with all the over-the-top acting you would expect, in context.



KHOU reports: "According to TxDOT, telenovelas have worked in other countries in getting important messages across.  An episode where a character gets a mammogram or participates in a census can get a viewer to do the same."



While TxDOT admits they had some reservations about being perceived as playing with ethnic stereotypes, they say they have had no complaints from the Anti-Defamation League, the League of Latin American Citizens, or the Greater Austin Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

“I don’t think they’re offensive,” said Celia Israel, a board member with the chamber.  “I think it would be perceived as a fun way to help us make a very serious point ... We’re just grateful that they are doing some advertising in Spanish.”

36 percent of all DUI fatalities in the state last year involved a Latino driver who was under the influence of alcohol. It has become a leading cause of death within the community.

Call it a "sensitivity disability"

I get these anti-distracted-driving ads from Romania. And they're well art-directed. But I don't like them.

It's quite simple, to me: These ads are offensive to people with disabilities.

Okay, so blind people should not be driving. But amputees can, and do, drive without any problems.

The message that you're disabled from driving when you're texting is clear enough, but I just don't believe that a social marketing campaign to raise awareness and compassion for one issue should be inconsiderate towards another.

I wanted to get a local cultural opinion on this campaign, for balance, but the only person I know in the Romanian ad industry just had a baby (Felicitări, Roxana!) so she's busy.


The campaign is by Publicis Bucharest, for Bucharest City Police. Via Ads of the World.

Who you gonna call?

MADD Canada recently announced that it is partnering with the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary to take more impaired drivers off the roads by launching their "Campaign 911" in the province:



Launched three years ago, the campaign uses signs, billboards, public service announcements, postcards, bookmarks and other material to try to convince the driving public that it is appropriate to call the emergency number if you suspect someone is driving impaired.

According to MADD's press release:

"When MADD Canada started this program in 2007, there was a widespread public misperception that impaired driving was not an appropriate reason to call 911, that it was not a true emergency ... we are pleased to say that programs such as Campaign 911 are changing that. We are seeing more and more reports of impaired drivers being taken off the roads because concerned citizens called 911."

The following are the warning signs that good citizens are supposed to watch out for:

1. Driving unreasonably fast, slow or at an inconsistent speed
2. Drifting in and out of lanes
3. Tailgating and changing lanes frequently
4. Making exceptionally wide turns
5. Changing lanes or passing without sufficient clearance
6. Overshooting or stopping well before stop signs or stop lights
7. Disregarding signals and lights
8. Approaching signals or leaving intersections too quickly or slowly
9. Driving without headlights, failing to lower high beams or leaving turn signals on
10.Driving with windows open in cold or inclement weather

This gives me some concern. On one hand, I would and have called 911 in cases where I suspected another driver on the road was driving with extreme recklessness — drunk or otherwise. I hate impaired driving with a passion, and have dedicated myself to combating the issue both personally and professionally. (Once, after a call, the OPP had my pregnant wife and me tail a car all the way from Carleton Place to Ottawa!)

On the other hand, there are already a lot of people out there who abuse the 911 emergency service, and others who are self-styled "hall monitors" of the roads. I hate it when people tailgate, speed excessively, cut off other cars, fail to lower highbeams, etc. But only a few of them I suspect of impairment. Most are just asses.

And then there's "driving with windows open in cold or inclement weather". Have you ever driven with a smoker? This is standard operating procedure.

That said, there have been significant cases of 911 callers stopping drunk drivers — even on a bus!

And the campaign is working. In Calgary, where it was launched 5 months ago, the number of calls has jumped 60 percent — resulting in a seventeen per cent increase in impaired driving charges.

There was no information given on the increased cost to 911 resources, or the number of mistaken or spiteful calls. But it seems that police forces and municipalities are embracing the new culture of non-violent citizen vigilantism.

Hopefully, common sense will prevail. And they'll at least pull over to use their phones, lest they add to the dangerous driving statistics.