Anti-smoking(and other stuff) advertising that appeals to the selfish and vain

Sinfonia

I've noticed this phenomenon a bit...

For example, anti-smoking ads/warnings that harp on about bad breath, yellow fingers, wrinkly skin and so forth.
Or the anti-littering campaign that shows the offenders all dirty and haggard even though they think they look fine - if you litter, everyone will think you look like ****, or whatever the tagline is. There's no mention of the actual negative effects of littering, bar that it's "disgusting".

When it comes to the smoking example, I think that would be more effective than most - as a smoker, I know that our mindset is 'so far, so good', and that lung cancer etc. seems a long, long, way off - nothing to worry about yet...stupid but true. So highlighting short-term problems may work a bit better.

So what do people think of this type of campaigning?
Do you think it's good if it works?
Does it say something about our society that people will only worry about themselves - and if the ad shows the negative effects upon other people, meh, it's not my problem?
Or is it simply a case that, by this stage, everybody knows the typical negative results of e.g. smoking and littering, and so they need something more fresh and personal?

Black Swan

Being into fitness, I think that more information about the health affects of smoking would be the most honest approach. Of course, the immediacy seems to be lacking in terms of health impacts (like you implied?). Perhaps addressing the ill effects of secondary smoke on pregnancy and children? Then again, such advertising approaches have occurred for so long as to desensitize people? Not sure the vanity approach of recent ad campaigns that you mentioned in this post will have much impact, but who knows?

Sherifu

I don't smoke, don't litter and don't care about ads.

I don't litter either because there was campaign when I was baby infants and I physically cant bring myself to do it ever since.
Curse those do-gooders!

gogglebok

Is there any evidence that these ads work? That would be my concern. I think they do appeal to vanity, as you say. I think they may also be an exercise in vanity on the part of the state and the advertising companies. "Look how brave and hard-hitting we are. Next year we may post a diseased lung in a bag to every smoker in Ireland."

I have serious doubts about the effectiveness of the anti-litter ads. I would bet that if they spent the money instead on hiring people to sweep up the crap, the streets would be cleaner.

boogle

Sherifu wrote: »

I don't smoke, don't litter and don't care about ads.

As above

funk-you

Sherifu wrote: »

I don't smoke, don't litter and don't care about ads.

*Claps*

-Funk

KnifeWRENCH

Sinfonia wrote:

Does it say something about our society that people will only worry about themselves - and if the ad shows the negative effects upon other people, meh, it's not my problem?
Or is it simply a case that, by this stage, everybody knows the typical negative results of e.g. smoking and littering, and so they need something more fresh and personal?

Bit of both, I would say.

I doubt the effectiveness of the anti-littering campaign though. Retards are still gonna throw their rubbish all over the place because they're too fcuking lazy to find a bin. Anyone who litters probably doesn't give a shit about what other people think of them anyway since they so casually leave their trash around for us to walk over. So in that sense the "vanity" angle may not be the wisest approach.
Anyone who litters is a twat who deserves to get caught and given a hefty fine. If the ads showed people littering and then being caught and taken to court, then perhaps they might be more effective.

Sherifu

funk-you wrote: »

*Claps*

-Funk

That'd be nice if I cared about what you thought.

Sinfonia

Sherifu wrote: »

I don't smoke, don't litter and don't care about ads.

You may have noticed from the thread title that this is what the discussion is about, so I guess there was no real need to open, read or post in it.
Unless of course you care about the selfish and/or vain...

Sherifu

The bitch is back.

Sinfonia

Sherifu wrote: »

The bitch is back.

Oh no he di'nt!:p

DublinWriter

Basically, the government want you to smoke.

Why? Because (a) you end up dying younger and end up being less of a pension burden and (b) because of all that lovely tobacco duty they get, about €6 per pack of 20 last time I checked.

But what about all the money saved by Health Services? Complete b*llocks I'm afraid, we'll mostly all end up catching a terminal illness of some sort and requiring palliative hospital care.

So back to the argument - the government want you to smoke. How do they do this seeing that how tobacco is so bad m'kay? Easy - reverse psychology.

For example, if I told you tomorrow that you could never have chocolate again in your life, what do you think the first thing you would crave would be?

An even more effective way to demonstrate how the brain does not parse negative suggestions is if I told you now not to think of a white rabbit for 60 seconds. It would be impossible for you not to think of a white rabbit within the first 5 seconds.

javaboy

DublinWriter wrote: »

Basically, the government want you to smoke.

Why? Because (a) you end up dying younger and end up being less of a pension burden and (b) because of all that lovely tobacco duty they get, about €6 per pack of 20 last time I checked.

But what about all the money saved by Health Services? Complete b*llocks I'm afraid, we'll mostly all end up catching a terminal illness of some sort and requiring palliative hospital care.

So back to the argument - the government want you to smoke. How do they do this seeing that how tobacco is so bad m'kay? Easy - reverse psychology.

For example, if I told you tomorrow that you could never have chocolate again in your life, what do you think the first thing you would crave would be?

An even more effective way to demonstrate how the brain does not parse negative suggestions is if I told you now not to think of a white rabbit for 60 seconds. It would be impossible for you not to think of a white rabbit within the first 5 seconds.

Summed up pretty well in this audio clip from about 2:00 on: [URL="mms://streaming.spokennetwork.com/sn/sn_7241.wma"]Yes, Prime Minister[/URL]

wil

I have noticed since the indoor smoking ban, you can now smell smokers a mile away.
Dont think most of the advertising really affects the regular smoker, but their kids or family might, so it is really that audience they need to address.
e.g.
YOUR MUM IS GOING TO DIE HORRIBLY BEFORE YOU ARE 12 UNLESS YOU GET HER TO STOP SMOKING
or
TRY PUKING ON YOUR STALE SMOKE REEKING DAD NEXT TIME HE HUGS YOU GOODNIGHT. IT MIGHT SAVE HIS LIFE

To spread the message, put these slogans on all cigarettes sold to kids.:D