Stupid nonprofit ads

Some people will buy anything. Especially nonprofits that want in on the glamorous world of advertising. Here are a couple of notably bad ads. (Sorry about the quality; I scanned them from Creativity magazine. To see the images online, you have to subscribe to Ad Critic.)

This magazine ad for the World Food Programme shows a clump of green grass growing on what looks like a dry lake bed, flanked by a knife and fork. Message? Um ... if you're really, really hungry, you'll eat anything, even grass, and ... um ... that's really sad, and, well ... it's sad and bad and stuff.

This one's even weirder. Part of an awareness campaign for the Campaign Against Landmines (New Zealand), it's a ketchup packet with a picture of a kids' legs. When you open the packet, you tear off the kid's right foot. And then it "bleeds" ketchup ... which you proceed to eat. Maybe. Message? Hey! Don't you even think of enjoying those fries, because kids are stepping on landmines, and it's really gross when that happens. Do you feel terrible enough yet? The creative director on the project is laughably quoted as saying, "I defy anyone who sees this communication not to be deeply moved." How about deeply revolted?

Why do some nonprofits insist on entering the world of "clever" (i.e., ineffective) advertising? It's like it's a drug. They just can't stay away from these confusing, off-point, no-action projects. Anyone with more than a few months in nonprofit fundraising could tell them that cleverness doesn't motivate giving. Clarity and emotion do.

But they're just so clever!

Both of these ads were produced by shops owned by Publicis, a large international ad conglomerate. So I'm guessing they were done pro bono for these nonprofits. If that's the case, then at least they aren't paying for this unmitigated crap.

But even if it's free, it's not worth it. Spend your marketing time and money actually speaking to donors! Just say no to pointless cleverness.

(See How to shock donors for more cleverness-victimized nonprofit advertising. And here, where you'll see a nutrition facts label placed on an Atlanta trashcan -- somehow meant to motivate people to help the homeless!)

Technorati Tags: nonprofit advertising, world food program, campaign against landmines

Comments

[Ted Grigg]

This is truly a case where the creative gets in the way of the goal.

Do we really want people to think? Or would we rather have them act decisively and make a contribution of their time and money?

Everybody knows the horrors out there. Just show me how I, a lonely individual, can make a difference. These ads did nothing to prompt me to give time or money. In fact, where is the call to action?

All these ads did for me is chase me away with the futility of it all.

What a complete waste of time, money and effort.

[Layla]

Your blog provides very interesting insights about marketing and advertising for non-profits. I actually came across a fundraising blog that is used as part of an advertising scheme for a fundraising website. I thought that was a creative way of marketing your fundraising project, especially when its an online project. The blog's address is: http://www.crashutah.com/fundraise/

[Jeff Brooks]

Chuck, you are almost certainly right that the goals of these campaigns are too vague to be measured. That's the problem. Nonprofits have no business doing anything that sloppy and ill-directed. I'm sure the interns who did the work are very thrilled by their own cleverness. But a direct-response campaign would do much, much more to "raise awareness" than these obtuse things can.

James: I think that landmine spot is pretty good. It makes the topic real for Americans. My only quibble: once you go to the website called out at the end, you have to hunt around to find a way to take any kind of action. So while they may have succeeded in making viewers think, they fell short in helping them take action. Too bad.

[James Hathaway]

Agreed...revolting. What is your opinion on the UN's Anti-landmine TV spots featuring a soccer game in America suburbia?

video posted here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iExA-ry7E8

[Chuck W.]

"Spend your marketing time and money actually speaking to donors!"

Does all communications need to be donor-focused?

The trashcan and ketchup packet seem to be "awareness raising" efforts so people say, "wow, I really didn't know landmines are affecting civilians that way."

And I'm guessing that a lot of existing donors liked it, "we already know it's an important issue, what a great way to let others know."

Now, I'm not saying these are necessarily effective campaigns. In fact, I suspect their goals are so vague it would be near impossible to evaluate their effectiveness. But if they are not donor-focued communications, I don't think they should be mearsured on a donor power scale.

[Kristine]

Wow, that second one is in such horrible bad taste that I am speechless. What were they thinking? Talk about trivializing an atrocity!