A move towards ethical advertising?
[i-link]
An article in the press made me chuckle at first, and afterwards, made me think..
Ads featuring Julia Roberts and Christy Turlington for a beauty product of giant L'Oreal were banned by the UK's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).
The ASA stated the retouched images misled consumers by exaggerating the results the beauty products could achieve.
The advertising agency admitted the images had been "digitally retouched" to lighten the skin, clean up make-up, reduce dark shadows and shading around the eyes, smooth the lips and darken the eyebrows. Maybelline argued that despite the techniques used, the "image accurately illustrated the results the product could achieve".
"Bullocks", said the ASA, and both ads had to go. (Source)
So... I was thinking.. After The News of the World scandal where reporters hacked mobile phones, and bribed police to "ping" locations of people through the mobile network, maybe a movement started for more ethics in the press.
After all, think about it. How many ads do we know which are NOT misleading? Which washing powder does not claim it gives the whitest or most colourful garments? Which hamburger joint does not claim to give you the biggest, juicy-est? Which deep-freeze fish manufacturer does not claim their products go straight from the sea (ploop) into the deep-frost?
I always thought it would be fun to make a TV show challenging those claims, and confronting the company executives with the truth.. Would that not be worthwhile?
Pictures courtesy L'Oreal and Photoshop.
The real thing...
[i-Vintage Coca Cola ad]
They should have told me. I have more or less given up on that stuff.
Picture courtesy Very Weird News. Discovered via The Weird Bit
MSF video: An ad too far?
The UK branch of MSF - Doctors without Borders - launched a new advertisement campaign in the movie theaters. On their website, they asked for feedback, claiming "It is our attempt to make a deliberate move away from some traditional charity advertising which can tend to focus on images of starving children."
The video stirred up quite a bit of noise on the "aid watch dog" blogs: Aid Watch and Aid Thoughts. Also the esteemed Philantrophy gave a pitch (Update: see further below for the other "usual suspects" joining in ;-) ). While the commentary has now been disabled on the MSF website (I wonder why, Mr and Mrs MSF, as you "would really appreciate your feedback on the ad." - Update: this is incorrect.. apparently there were never any comments possible on the MSF website.. Confusing.. - see updates below and Marc's comments), the discussion continues on Osocio. The MSF web editor also joined the discussion on DuckRabbit...
By coincidence, just a few days ago, I published a post about an effective UNICEF ad campaign, and praised MSF for their simplicity of this ad. As usual, BBC picked up on the trend we set on The Road (eh), and published a whole picture series about "Branding" humanitarian aid.
So, the discussion of publicity around humanitarian aid is on... Let's have a look at this (in)famous MSF video then:
[Loband: Object Removed -]
My train of thoughts were (in sequence):
My verdict: MSF: you went an ad too far. Realism is one thing. Faking circumstances just for the effect to shock, is another. And publicly claiming "the child's cries are real, but I don't see what the point is", clearly shows you guys indeed have no freaking clue what the point is. Which makes me then think: who are these people who claim to be humanitarians if they don't see the human aspect of it all?
My verdict: humanitarian ad trash.
Beeeeeeeeh!
Update 1:
Aidworkers joining the discussion: Aidworker Daily and Martyns in Africa, In Development, Humanitarian Relief.
Update 2:
I wrote to Marc Dubois, Executive Director MSF UK this morning:Marc,
As an aidworker, as a humanitarian, and as a human being, I deplore MSF UK's poor judgement and even worse, poor taste in a airing a clearly faked and sensationalistic video "The Boy".
I regret even more MSF's handling of the communications around this video:
- putting it on your website as "our attempt to make a deliberate move away from some traditional charity advertising which can tend to focus on images of starving children."..
Well, you did better than showing images of starving children. You aired the sound of it.
- Asking for feedback and then disabling comments (and deleting them) from your website
- Half-assed "I don't speak on behalf of MSF" of your web editor on different blogs, with a clear poor judgement in responses, and not seeing "the point".
What will be next? Will you broadcast live the image of a child dying? "MSF-Aid-Cam: See Children Die Unless You Donate Now"
Poor quality, poor judgement of an organisation who was judged by many to be 'different'... And up and above, I take offense of the hypocrisy of your communications. Don't ask for feedback unless if you want it. Don't claim to be un-sensational if you are.
I welcome your response which will be published on the web via http://www.theroadtothehorizon.org
Kindly,
Peter
Update 3:
I got some offline comments via Email questioning if I was not too hard on the MSF webeditor, who clearly stated to 'act on his own behalf, and not representing MSF' on different blogs...
My answer: I don't want to target anyone in particular and certainly not personally. However, I think it is a bit of poor judgement if someone enters a discussion clearly stating they work for the organisation, and expecting not to be seen as "representing that organisation" as such... If I am in the field, wearing a Tshirt of an organisation, and speak to the press, I can expect the 'general public' to link my comments to my organisation...
I also want, from my personal perspective, add that sometimes, as aidworkers, we are in a bit of a bind as to up to where we are representing (and are loyal to) ourselves, our values, our beliefs and up to what point the organisation's. Up to what point we should speak up or be quiet if we don't agree. Certainly if there is a situation which is not right, or goes against our convictions... A particularly tricky point if it involves media or any other public means of communicating.
Update 4:
Quite a bit of offline comments going around via Email. A correction/adjustment is in place: Apparently there were never comments enabled on the MSF UK webpage with the video. Even though the blog on which MSF asks to leave comments says: "You can give your comment here on Osocio or on this page at the MSF website." Beh...
It seems originally MSF requested for feedback by Email to their head of communications directly, but the pure volume of response was too high. See also the comments on this blog.
Anyways, if you want to call or email anyone at MSF UK, you can find all their details here.
But let's not diverge from the main topic of the discussion: "Did this ad go too far or not?"
Update 5:
Paul @humanitarian.info and Amanda @feucontinu, Transitionland and Stop Genocide also joined the discussion on their blogs.
Picture of the Day: MSF in a message
[i-link]
I previously posted how a UNICEF ad gave a clear, simple and hard message. This -almost blank- ad for Medecins Sans Frontieres or Doctors Without borders beats anything on simplicity.
More Pictures of the Day on The Road
Picture courtesy La Cocina Creativa and Agencia McCann-Erickson.
Burger King: Food or Sex?
[i-Singapore Burger King ad sexually inspired]
Seems everything is sold through sex these days. This Singapore Burger King ad promises "the Super Seven Incher" will "blow your mind away".
The smaller text reads:
Fill your desire for something long, juicy and flame-grilled with the NEW BK SUPER SEVEN INCHER. Yearn for more after you taste the mind-blowing burger that comes with a single beef patty, topped with American cheese, crispy onions and the A1 Thick and Hearty Steak Sauce.
Did they forget to add: "Don't squeeze it too hard or the mayo will run off your hands"?...
Discovered via Global Voices Online Read the full post...
Interested in sponsoring my blogs?
Background information:
If I were to blog for money, I would have gone broke a long time ago :-), but I do accept ads for the different sites I manage.
They pay for the costs of hosting the sites, subscriptions to different Internet services and for the tools I use. Whatever is left over, I invest in microfinance projects for the developing world.
I take blogging seriously and with pride, trying to serve my readers' community. Since we started the blog projects in January 2007, our readership steadily increased. All sites together get about 60,000 unique visits per month. The Road to the Horizon, my main blog, has 12,000-15,000 visitors/month. Humanitarian News, my main aggregator now gets about 30,000 unique visitors/per month.
What ads do I take?
I take any ads as long as they are not advertising adult, illegal or clearly dubious content.
Which sites do I manage?
Here are the different sites I manage, indicating their Google Page Rank (PR) as of March 1, 2011:
- The Road to the Horizon (PR3) the main blog
- Have Impact! (PR4): Our social project
- Humanitarian News (PR3): Mega nonprofit news aggregator
- The Signs Along the Road (PR4): my clips
- The Other World News (PR5): Aid News aggregator
- AidBlogs (PR4): aidworker blogs
- AidNews (PR4): aid news
- Change Thru Info (PR5): aid aggregator
- BlogTips (PR3): blogging tips
- Verslaafd aan de Horizon (PR2): eBook in Dutch
- De Weg naar de Horizon (PR4): Random clips in Dutch
- Ander Nieuws (PR4): Aid News aggregator in Dutch
- Scribbles (PR4): my notorious writings
- My House on the Road (PR4): my home page
- You and Us and Me (PR4): Green News aggregator
- The NonProfit Blogs (PR4): NonProfit Blogs aggregator
- The Weird Bit (PR4): odd news aggregator
- Shot from the Hip (PR4): Pictures from "life around me"
- The NonProfit Press (PR4): nonprofit press releases
- Blogging Today (PR4): latest articles about "blogging"
- Aid Resources (PR4): latest articles from aid reference sites
- News on Green (PR4): latest articles about the environment
- The Weird Bit on Tumblr (new domain - expected PR4): weird news on Tumblr
- AidNews on Tumblr (New! expected PR3): aid news on Tumblr
- NonProfitBlogs on Tumblr (New! expected PR3): nonprofit blog aggregator on Tumblr
- Aidworker blogs on Tumblr (New! expected PR3): blogs by aidworkers on Tumblr
- Blogging news on Tumblr (New! expected PR3): blognews aggregator on Tumblr
- News on Green Collector (new domain - expect PR4):environmental news
- The Nonprofit Blogs (new domain - expect PR4): latest nonprofit blogs' headlines.
- The World of NonProfit (new domain - expect PR4): latest nonprofit news
Where are the ads placed?
Dependent on the blog layouts, the ads are either put in the side column or at the bottom.
I don't use pop-ups, Flash, animated GIFs or other intrusive methods of advertising. Ads are clearly marked with a "Site Supporter" header. To separate ads from the blogs' contents, I don't embed ads within the blogposts, and don't write pseudo reviews about advertised products or services.
How long do the ads run?
The ads are prepaid and run for one year minimum, after which they can be renewed.
What are the rates?
The rates have remained the same in the past years. They differ dependent on the number of sites you advertise on. Contact me via peter (at) theroadtothehorizon (dot) org for the current price list.
How does this normally work?
- a potential sponsor contacts me, we agree the rates (dependent on the formula the sponsor wants).
- the sponsor sends me a text, with the links.
- I edit these into an ad, and put them up on the site, as a "draft".
- the sponsor pays via my Paypal account
- The sponsor can always change the ad during a running year.
- When the advertisement period is about to expire, I contact the sponsor for renewal. Every sponsor is free to extend or terminate their ads after a year.
Rumble: Gorbachev and Louis Vuitton. The end of communism as we knew it. Or not?
Gorbachev, Louis Vuitton and the Berlin Wall[i-Gorbachev, Louis Vuitton and the Berlin Wall]
Apparently this ad has been around for a while, but I only noticed it yesterday, spread over two pages of the Alitalia inflight magazine: Former Soviet leader and USSR president Mikhail Gorbachev now makes publicity the French luxury label, Louis Vuitton.
The ad shows Gorbachev in a car with a Vuitton bag at his side. The picture is rather dark, suggesting the gloomy ages of the Cold War and Communism. Gorbachev looks through the window at the Berlin Wall, depicted in the background.
link[i-link]There is an interesting twist to the whole thing:
Poking out of the bag is a publication with the headline (in Cyrillic): "The Murder of Litvinenko: They Wanted to Give Up the Suspect for $7,000.", referring to Alexander V. Litvinenko, the former KGB spy who died last November after being poisoned with a radioactive isotope. On his deathbed, Litvinenko accused Russia's President Vladimir Putin of orchestrating his murder. The British authorities accused one of Litvinenko’s associates, Andrei Lugovoi, of the crime and requested his extradition from Russia. The Kremlin refused.
So it looks like Gorbachev outsmarted everyone: He (being well paid, no doubt) used a luxury "Western" fashion label to give a hidden critical message to the current Kremlin rulers. Maybe communism has not died after all... Or he is just trying to follow the footsteps of Putin, who is after all, said to be Europe's richest man...
Picture courtesy photographer Annie Liebovitz, Louis Vuitton and AP. Source: NY Times
Tips & Tricks: Have Your Blog Make a Difference!
I don't know about you, but I want to use the "soapbox opportunity" my blog offers, to "make a difference in this world". That is not just in the content of the posts I write, but by making some publicity for the good causes". You have probably seen these icons in the right column of my blog:
Support Amnesty International[i-Support Amnesty International]
link[i-link]
Well... if you are interested in re-using some of these icons (with the links), here is the HTML code for them. Feel free to copy/paste, and alter the code as you see best fit for your blog!
| <center><small> <p><a href="http://irrepressible.info/pledge" target="_blank"><img border="0" alt="Sign Amnesty International's pledge on Internet freedom" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2151/1964428866_ef20405ee7_o.gif"/></a> </p><p> <a href="http://www.amnesty.org" target="_blank"><img border="0" alt="Support Amnesty International" src="http://www.amnesty.org/images/banners/banner1-grey/banner1-120x60-eng.jpg" title="Support Amnesty International"/></a> </p><p> <a href="http://www.freerice.com/" target="_blank" title="A word game. For each word you get right, they donate 10 grains of rice!"><img border="0" alt="" src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2310/1935145691_f561cc4cfb_s.jpg" title="A word game. For each word you get right, they donate 10 grains of rice!"/></a> </small></center> |
More Blogging "Tips and Tricks", you find here. Read the full post...
Rumble: The Intelligence of a Human Being - Part #2
[i-link] I re-state:
A machine can never replace the intelligence of a human being.
(even though the picture might make you think otherwise)
Most of the Google advertisements on this page are generated automatically, based on the contents of the blog. I do have to monitor it though. Sometimes I have to block some ads which seem weird or inappropriate within the context of the story. Like the short story about the Taliban in Afghanistan (In Pace) was generating an ad about 'Meeting Afghan Woman Online"...
The funniest is that my post about The Day I got Deported from the US generated an ad:"
Do you think "They" are monitoring? You know, "Them" ? :-) Do you think "They" are trying to send me a message that "they" have forgiven me?
Visit the US visa-free for 90 days. Download application guide.
www.usimmigrationsupport.org
"
"They" must be, as even within the time of writing this blog, the deportation story generated three more similar ads on one page claiming "they" can get me a US visa 'trouble free'. Wow! Too clever for a machine. "They" must have been a human watching over my shoulder. Eh?! What was that noise? Who was that? Anyone there? Hellooooooo?!?!?! Anyone therrrreeeeeee?)
(And yes, the picture above was taken in the US. Can anyone guess where? Put it in the 'Comments' underneath this post. Just don't have your computer generate the comment! ;-)