What motivates people in terms of health issues, from diabetes to smoking, can be a fascinating topic – all the more so for anyone with marketing on the brain. So, I’m guessing a lot of us take note of any new approach or ad campaign that might inspire change for the broader populations dealing with such concerns.
It was with that in mind that I considered the newly launched, and already much-discussed, No-L-ita jeans, “No. Anorexia.” campaign (created by Oliviero Toscani). Note: the images are hard to see, so be prepared if you decide to check out the site.
As reported by Rosamaria Mancini (with contributions from Cheryl Lu-Lien Tan and Christina Passariello) in the Wall Street Journal, the Flash&Partners Group (Tombolo, Italy) brand is using controversial images of a 27-year old, emaciated, nude woman for the effort. The images are indeed shocking, but there may be something more to it.
I dug back into my copy of Robin Hood Marketing</em> by Katya Andresen to see how she described the steps taken in developing the American Legacy Foundation’s anti-smoking campaign for youth (truth).
Andresen describes how to connect causes to values of the audience rather than the needs of the organization. In that case, the teenagers were more likely to act on their values (to protest against big tobacco companies that were manipulating them) than they were to care one iota about the Foundation’s grander goal to keep them from smoking. Same end, different means.
So, if a cause marketer is more likely to achieve a step in the right direction (toward an end goal) by appealing to the audience based on their values, perhaps the No-L-ita campaign, though shocking to a lot of people outside the core audience, will very effectively reach its specific target, young women, around their values. Hmmm. (Note: I realize that No-L-ita may well see traditional sales-increase results from the “No. Anorexia.” effort, but wanted to isolate the cause aspect here.)
I will continue to mull it all over, and hope to explore this No-L-ita approach more via an interview with Katya Andresen in the near future (Or, you can also join the MarketingProfs book group which happens to be reading Robin Hood Marketing right now).
In the meantime, maybe we should all take the words of someone who should know, as quoted in the WSJ article, under consideration:
“Diane von Furstenberg, president of the Council of Fashion Designers of America, who spearheaded the discussion in the U.S. about the issue of ultrathin models, saw the ad featured on a TV news segment in Paris, where she is planning for her fall 2008 collection. ‘It’s a horrible picture, but I think it may be very good in the end,’ she said.”
It is quite a shocking set of photos but effective? I guess yes.
I think when it comes to health, very young people think they are immortal. It requires shock to make them realize what can happen, whether it be Anorexia, smoking or Meth.
I think footage of someone gasping for breath because their lungs are ruined would be a great ad against smoking. Shock is good when the cause is good.
Andrea, it’s shocking and brilliant. I imagine that it will have young women and teenage girls disgusted with the image. And just maybe, that would be a good thing.
By the way, congrats on the AdWeek article.
I didn’t have time to load all of the site’s Flash pages to get a more complete story – but I think what does work well about the very shocking image of an obviously unhealthy woman (who seems to be standing in for the whole industry) is that is shows something REAL. Sometimes people need a jolt to understand the real, and very unpleasant, flip side behind image-building that is not so real.
Milton Glaser wrote a great article a while back called “The Road to Hell” about how bending the truth can be a slippery slope for graphic designers. Of course the same thing applies to advertising (or any mode of communication). The ad is very hard to look at, but maybe people need to get that. It would have been a good reality check for my high school friends and I to see an ad like that back in the days when we were sure that our lives would be improved if only we were thinner and prettier like the artificial airbrushed images that filled magazines. Back then, lots of people thought the anorexic and bulimic girls looked good – until they ended up in the hospital.
Hopefully, the campaign doesn’t start and end with only a shock-value level of communication, but deepens the story to build a truly meaningful message and create action. As Julie mentions about the execution… there is certainly a lot more to be done.
The shocking-ness of the image is definitely going to keep a few possible new customers from lingering on the site, other than to see what all the ad campaign fuss is about. Another point to consider, that we in the adv/marketing businesses need to get out more and see if sophisticated, arty images are as effective in campaigns as they might be buzz-worthy among our peers… Put on that consumer hat – and.. hmmm, why would your eyes rest on that image long enough to even see which brand was affiliated with it?
Andrea,
In this case, it could be a public service.
To put it in self-interested terms, a company that does public service does itself a service: good publicity.
If a company did that regularly, I think the brand associated with the public service would get out there. They can do good service and increase the reputation of their brand at the same time.
Sorry to post again but good works does help with image and marketing, too.
For example, I used to think of Microsoft and Bill Gates as pure greed. But the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has increased my respect for Microsoft and for Mr. Gates considerably.
I am not the only one. I think that having a reputation for doing good in this world (beyond just your products) and making a profit is a good combination.
I think partly because of the good works of the Gates family, Microsoft is going to do better as a company.
Neil – perhaps then the idea is that, with this particular campaign, we shall see if they brand carries it out – takes it further, keeps affiliating with this cause, and then – over time, possibly builds that Gates Foundation/Microsoft connection. There’s another story in the news right now about how Dove has a new “self esteem” campaign, and I think that they are a company that now has that helping girls esteem/Dove connection going – but it did take them a few years to build it.
I definitely agree that when a brand does gain an affiliation like the Gates Foundation/Microsoft, consumers will stay loyal longer or give the brand a try where they may not have had the trust before.
Yes, agreed. They need to keep it going or no association will be made.
In the spirit of John Locke and Adam Smith, I don’t much care if Bill Gates is giving money for selfish reasons or if a clothing company educates in a shocking way with the ultimate goal to sell more.
I am guessing that the company that did that shocking Anorexia ad really does want to make a difference in addition to selling more. Most people, even in business, have multiple motivations. Human beings are complex.
If the interests of reducing Anorexia, Dengue fever, Malaria, AIDS, etc., lines up with the self-interest of capitalists, then that is great.