Fear-vertising
Great pisstake.
Where are the boundaries in frightening people on behalf of a large corporation?
Obviously we ad people are unofficially paid to elicit emotional reactions from those who ‘enjoy’ our output, but no one ever seeks to define those reactions beyond what is considered to be against the wishes of Clearcast.
Real tear-jerkers, such as the new Sainsbury’s and John Lewis ads, are completely fine, but if you tried to put a brain-munching zombie in your commercial you wouldn’t stand a chance. Despite that, these ambient fear-based stunts never seem to be subject to the same kinds of strictures as their TV cousins.
Of course the ambient stuff has no regulatory body to insist on what’s right or wrong, but how far can we then go in scaring, swearing or stimulating the genitalia of an unsuspecting public?
Would anyone like to give it a proper go and report back?
Carlsberg did something along those lines a while ago:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS3iB47nQ6E
Another great pisstake video of a “trend”, just like they did with the pink pony birthdays.
I’ve never been a fan of eliciting emotional responses just for the sake of it. The LG flatscreen TV and the cafe girl with fake superpowers are excellent examples.
It just follows the formula of “show real people (actors) reacting to impossible/dangerous/unreal/upsetting scenarios”.
The whole point of the ad/video becomes about their responses and not the product, even though they might be involved.
Afterwards it’s a discussion about whether it’s real or staged and where one can see the green screen they forgot to edit in post.
Well, it’s not a very scientific answer. But I think it comes down to your own code.
You should never cross the line you draw for yourself. If others make you cross that line, you should leave, or else you are a bona fide coward.
If other people want to shit people up and make the world a scary place, well, that’s their call. I suppose we’ve all got to make a living.
But for me it comes down to having the courage of your own convictions. Regulating yourself so that others don’t have to.
@Anonymouse: for me it’s a case of being lazy and not having a good idea to sell your product. Just do some pranks on people and loosely tie it to the product. Job done, please turn left to collect your awards.
@steakandcheese I agree. I despise the whole approach. It made bad TV, it makes worse ads.
I meant more the ethical side of it.
But yeah, creatively it sucks the banger.
Also, in the cold light of evening, I think I may have misread the question.
i think it’s a reaction to the reality that the good old days of a guaranteed captive TV audience are gone. And this is one way to crank up the viewing excitement and viral potential.
personally,I think it’s more fun to do than regular contrived advertising. and obviously some are better than others. and so long as nobody dies i don’t see a problem.