I am somewhere in between. I think the use of two of the most tragic events in the past 10 years is very cold, insensitive and thoughtless, but at the same time it got our attention and that was the point right? I in no way condone the funding or airing of these commercials, but at the same time, sometimes shock value is the only thing that can ignite the flames underneath us and get people to at least think a little deeper into things.
This particular ad has caused quite a stir, and lots of people are talking. Talking isn't necessarily what they were looking for, but it can definitely lead to some type of change. However, I don't think this was they type of attention they were looking for.
I think it is truly tragic that they felt this approach was their last resort and in a sense I think of it as a cry for help. Are we that consumed in our own lives, with our own personal day to day safety that we have to be reminded of tragedy in order to make us aware of our impact on the earth?
This also makes we wonder: Had they decided to use the tsunami approach WITHOUT the 9/11 reference, would it have been as controversial? And would have been as effective. Advertising is meant to get your attention, make you aware, push the limits, but the challenge is to keep from crossing those boundary lines because when those lines have been crossed, all credibility goes right down the toilet. They wanted to inspire change, make people realize that every day people kill people, and every day people pollute, waste, overuse energy, etc. that can kill even more people than the cold blooded murders of 9/11.
It's a tough issue because it deals with vulnerability and emotions, but again, that's what advertising is meant to do...tap into your emotions, get you questioning things and ultimately help us make informed decisions.
Thank you DDB Brazil, we have been informed, but next time use a little more humanity in your decisions.
