Police drink driving ad comes under fire
-
Drink driving ad receives flak for being ‘too obvious’
A public education message against drink driving by the Traffic Police and the Singapore Road Safety Council (SRSC) has received flak over its advertisement, with some saying the public service message defeats its own purpose.
The message, styled as the obituary of a teenager who was a victim of drink driving, ran with his picture and the words “Dearly missed by a loving wife, children, and grandchildren that he will never have. Denied of a future of hopes and dreams that he will never realize”.
But under this was a “disclaimer” — that the teen is a fictitious character.
Those in the business of advertising and communications said the advertisement, which ran in The Straits Times and The New Paper on Monday, deflated its own power with the disclaimer.
Mr Gan Boon Guan, the chief operating officer of global marketing services group Carat Media Services, told ST, “It creates an effect and then takes it away.”
The industry veteran with more than 20 years experience added that the disclaimer defeated the purpose, because the drama created is lost, and the message becomes almost a joke.
Advertising veteran and part-time advertising lecturer Melina Chua echoed those views saying, “When I realised it was an ad, the house of cards fell down for me. The gravity of the message was lost.”
Mr Low Cheh Chuan, managing partner of Salt Creatives, which created the ad for the Traffic Police, said the creative concept set out to show the reality of the consequences of drink driving.
“It’s not about one life. It’s about robbing the person of the chance to be a husband, a father, a grandfather.”
Defending the use of the disclaimer, he said it was necessary in the name of responsible advertising, and insisted that it did not compromise the effect of the ad.
“It’s still very real. The ad has done its work and got the reader’s attention… If a lot of people go away thinking that it is a real obituary, it creates a lot of hassle.”
The teen in the ad is an 18-year-old whose features were digitally altered “a fair bit” with his consent, and that of his parents. The “obituary” is just a teaser, said Mr Low. Today, there will be another ad that portrays the teenager as a father and a grandfather.
The SRSC who is also a partner in the ad campaign, said it supported the “bold and creative” approach that conveys the anti-drink driving message, “We want a clear message that drives home the drastic consequences of drink driving.”
Advertising lecturer Tim Clark from Nanyang Technological University (NTU) said “deception” was a dangerous tactic to use in advertising. But it was acceptable for public service messages, because “in this context, the disclaimer doesn’t change the fact that real people do die this way”.
Last year, 22 people died and 182 people were injured in drink-driving accidents, a total of 204 casualties. The number of people arrested for drink driving was 2,931. There were 267 casualties in 2009 and 235 in 2008.
Said a police spokesman, “It is hoped that the emotive appeal of the advertisement will remind the public not to drink and drive.”
Businessman Muhammad Nazran Ahmad, 30, said the ad prompted him to think about the taboos of using a living person’s face in an obituary instead of making him reflect on drink driving.
“It was clever, but not necessarily effective,” he said.
Do you agree?
-- Yahoo! News
-
yes i agree.
-
People are seriously too free...non-issue can become issue, then become debate. -,-
-
put disclaimer ppl got comments...
no disclaimer ppl will complain...
damn diff to please...
-
Originally posted by GHoST_18:
put disclaimer ppl got comments...
no disclaimer ppl will complain...
then diff to please...
And people still wonder why no one wants to (try) do anything...
-
Girl ugly comment spoil appetite...
Girl chio comprain too many chasers...
People...... haizzz......
-
i saw the ad while i was flipping the newspapers when i eating my breakfast
i was thinking, this is kinda out of place (as in, the wrong section)
till i saw the advertiseri was not impressed by it
quite tasteless, i would say.......
and i wonder how much the subject was being paid (some ppl relli pantang with this kinda thing) -
anyone got a scan or pic of the ad???
-
