In the latter half of March this year, advertising agencies in India were in for a rude shock. The celebrated creative director of JWT, Bobby Pawar and his team were given the sack from the renowned agency. The reason behind this move was a series of scam ads created by the team for the leading car brand Ford, which did not go down well with the audience.
The ads used caricatures of famous personalities like Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, Paris Hilton and Michael Schumacher with their adversaries handcuffed and gagged in the backseat of a Ford Figo car. The copy read: “Leave your worries behind”, which was a reference to the large boot space the car offers.
Within hours of the ad being posted on the famous advertising blog, adsoftheworld.com, the comments section was filled with negative comments for the creative. While some people called it ‘Sexist’, there were a few others who went on to call the creative as ‘Pro rapist’. When the matter snowballed and the issue got international notoriety, the repercussions were felt at JWT.
This is not the first time a brand or advertising agency has been under fire for a controversial stunt. But then, many brands have fallen back on the use of such campaigns and continue to do so even now.
The whole concept of using the shock factor to sell products isn’t all that new. In India, it all started in the year 1991 when Pooja Bedi and Marc Robinson dared to bare for the condom brand KamaSutra condoms. This ad was a massive culture shock and many media channels shied away from publishing the creative. Eventually, the ad was banned by Doordarshan and that seemed like the end of such ads.
But then, in the year 1995, an obscure footwear brand called Tuff shoes stirred up a controversy when they had models Milind Soman and Madhu Sapre pose nude (unless you count a python used as a prop) in a poster. These days, the poster has become synonymous with controversy and is often cited as an example. After Tuff’s ad campaign, many brands tried to use the sleaze factor, until the government stepped in to do something about it.
Though the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) has tried to establish stringent laws, big brands manage to find a loop around it. In the month of March 2013, ASCI’s CCC deliberated and decided on 342 complaints against 304 advertisements. The ASCI, on its website claims that, “12 out of 21 members of ASCI’s Consumer Complaint Council (CCC) represent Civil Society (i.e. are not from the advertising sector)”.
But the major question remains, what in reality is scandalous? Over the years, the mentality as well as the tolerance level of people has gone up tremendously. What was once shocking and vulgar is now common place, and this is what edges ad makers on.
Most people tend to take such ads with a pinch of salt. The ad makers cover behind the excuse that their ads are ‘intellectually stimulating’ and meant for a ‘class audience’, but they cross a boundary at times. In the year 2007, leading clothing brand Hanes got into controversy when they ran a print campaign which was racist, homophobic and just plain crass in nature. The ad was slammed by not only the public, but also the advertising community. Leading ad man, Prasoon Joshi, who was the national creative director for McCann gave an apology statement saying,
These days, most scandalous ads find their way on the Internet and at times, brands as well as agencies wash their hands off a campaign by claiming it wasn't made by them if a campaign comes under a negative glare.
To put it in a nutshell, it looks like shock campaigns aren't going to go away any time soon. And the message by the advertisers of such ads seems pretty clear: If you don’t like it, just turn your eyes the other way.
Sources:
CampaignLive
Economic Times
ASCI
The ads used caricatures of famous personalities like Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, Paris Hilton and Michael Schumacher with their adversaries handcuffed and gagged in the backseat of a Ford Figo car. The copy read: “Leave your worries behind”, which was a reference to the large boot space the car offers.
 |
| The controversial Ford Figo ad by JWT |
Within hours of the ad being posted on the famous advertising blog, adsoftheworld.com, the comments section was filled with negative comments for the creative. While some people called it ‘Sexist’, there were a few others who went on to call the creative as ‘Pro rapist’. When the matter snowballed and the issue got international notoriety, the repercussions were felt at JWT.
This is not the first time a brand or advertising agency has been under fire for a controversial stunt. But then, many brands have fallen back on the use of such campaigns and continue to do so even now.
The whole concept of using the shock factor to sell products isn’t all that new. In India, it all started in the year 1991 when Pooja Bedi and Marc Robinson dared to bare for the condom brand KamaSutra condoms. This ad was a massive culture shock and many media channels shied away from publishing the creative. Eventually, the ad was banned by Doordarshan and that seemed like the end of such ads.
But then, in the year 1995, an obscure footwear brand called Tuff shoes stirred up a controversy when they had models Milind Soman and Madhu Sapre pose nude (unless you count a python used as a prop) in a poster. These days, the poster has become synonymous with controversy and is often cited as an example. After Tuff’s ad campaign, many brands tried to use the sleaze factor, until the government stepped in to do something about it.
Though the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) has tried to establish stringent laws, big brands manage to find a loop around it. In the month of March 2013, ASCI’s CCC deliberated and decided on 342 complaints against 304 advertisements. The ASCI, on its website claims that, “12 out of 21 members of ASCI’s Consumer Complaint Council (CCC) represent Civil Society (i.e. are not from the advertising sector)”.
But the major question remains, what in reality is scandalous? Over the years, the mentality as well as the tolerance level of people has gone up tremendously. What was once shocking and vulgar is now common place, and this is what edges ad makers on.
Most people tend to take such ads with a pinch of salt. The ad makers cover behind the excuse that their ads are ‘intellectually stimulating’ and meant for a ‘class audience’, but they cross a boundary at times. In the year 2007, leading clothing brand Hanes got into controversy when they ran a print campaign which was racist, homophobic and just plain crass in nature. The ad was slammed by not only the public, but also the advertising community. Leading ad man, Prasoon Joshi, who was the national creative director for McCann gave an apology statement saying,
"We have withdrawn the ads and also apologized to McCann Worldwide, stating it was a mistake. A young team in its excitement and passion for winning awards went overboard. The intention was never to hurt anyone's sentiments and it was done in complete innocence."
These days, most scandalous ads find their way on the Internet and at times, brands as well as agencies wash their hands off a campaign by claiming it wasn't made by them if a campaign comes under a negative glare.
To put it in a nutshell, it looks like shock campaigns aren't going to go away any time soon. And the message by the advertisers of such ads seems pretty clear: If you don’t like it, just turn your eyes the other way.
Sources:
CampaignLive
Economic Times
ASCI
ReplyDeletesuch a very very informative blog thanks for sharing this with us Buy condom online in India, which will be safer to use and also medically approved and branded condoms. Buy female condoms online , Buy small and large condoms was served by condomking.in with tisfied quality.
Heya¡my very first comment on your site. ,I have been reading your blog for a while and thought I would completely pop in and drop a friendly note. . It is great stuff indeed. I also wanted to ask..is there a way to subscribe to your site via email?
ReplyDeleteKamasutra Condoms Online