Volkswagen recently yanked its "Jumper" ad off the air because of a Suicide Prevention network. In the ad, a man decides not to jump off a building after being told that there are three Volkswagen's that cost less than $17,000.
I do not see how these ads would really encourage anyone to commit suicide, but the fact that they are being pulled does increase media attention to the brand. While it may be negative press, it still keeps these companies that end up in such situations in the public eye. It seems like these are harmless ads and besides, Volkswagen hired Crispin Porter & Bogusky because of their creative energy and willingness to take risks.
We talked about the GM suicide robot ad (which was also pulled) a bit in class, but what does everyone else think about the amount of influence activist groups have in regards to these advertisements or the power they essentially have on the companies that produce these ads?
One other point is that by pulling these ads, Volkswagen and GM seem to be sending an inconsistent message. They are the ones that ultimately approve the production and airing of these advertisements, yet they cave in based on negative feedback from these activist groups. Shouldn't they stand behind their decision to take risks?
Read the news story here.
Watch the VW Jumper ad here .
2 comments:
As a suicide survivor (someone that has lost someone to suicide), I have mixed feelings about the GM and VW ads.
I did not see the GM ad and after hearing about it in class, I personally was not offended. However, I am on the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention’s mailing list and understand as an organization for suicide prevention and also a support network for suicide survivors, they felt the need to ask GM to pull the ads. There is also a write-up on the AFSP website about the VW ad: http://www.afsp.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewpage&page_id=C1F1E27C-CF1C-2465-1ED165C5B73D18B8.
I was surprised VW would even air the "jumper" commercials after the GM backlash.
Personally this is another example of the corporations' succumbing to the pressure of the minority. We are seeing the tyranny of the few/minority/special interest groups exercised more and more these days, perhaps because of the ease with which we can make their opinion be heard thanks to technology. I can not explain this phenomenon, because everything seems to be offensive/upsetting/insensitive towards some group of people, and is it up to the corporations to please everyone? Last year PETA protested a Six Flags Halloween "eat a roach" contest as "gratuitously cruel" to the cockroaches. Can anyone justify this case as any less valid than people advocating any other cause? We may not have a true spiritual connection with insects, but they may share such a bond, and if I did I probably would be upset with Six Flag’s insect slaughter fest as well…
You can’t please everyone and regardless of what you advertise or do, you will always upset someone in some way. What troubles me is that as technology further facilitates our ability to communicate and be heard people seem to think that they can increasingly hold everyone else responsible for almost anything. Think of what we have blamed video games, the internet, TV, movies, billboards, etc. to be responsible for. All these things are apparently turning our society into a dark, violent, sexual underworld void of morals and values, and there is nothing we can do about it… why Fox? Why are you raising my child in such an evil way?! Do you/anyone really feel that helpless and at the mercy of these influences? And if so – should you/they?
People appear so easily threatened these days, and most likely because big corporations like GM and VW cave and respond, enabling and encouraging further similar behavior. Companies want to be perceived in a good light, they have invested heavily in building a brand and a reputation and now it seems that anyone can threaten this. Had GM and VW not pulled the ads what would have happened? Perhaps there would have been more persistent uproar. With the right timing (i.e. lack of a political sex scandal, high profile murder/kidnapping, etc. running 24/7 on the news) the media would have given them more air time, until finally GM and VW, fearing the effects of such negative publicity, would have ended up pulling the ad anyways.
Yes, companies are under a lot of pressure to produce the right sales numbers
Yes, it is easy to pull an ad and please the loud few to avoid being put in a bad light.
Yes, this behavior by special interest groups is becoming commonplace and will eventually loose its validity and impact all together.
But, especially now, when things are so cut throat and competitive, companies can seize the opportunity and say, no we are not pulling this ad, and stand behind their decision, because they understand their brand, what it’s associations are, and the people who associate with it well enough. Doing so can help further solidify their brad perception and perhaps also put a beacon out there to those who can identify with standing up for your beliefs.
If the GM or VW brand were two popular kids and said something comparable to these commercials in the school hallway, would they then take it all back just because a few people did not agree with it? Would it make them more or less popular? Would their fan base change in a way they would want it to? Mr. GM perhaps would take it all back, but I would not expect it from Mr. VW and am a bit disappointed in them for doing so.
Post a Comment