if the print campaign was so successful, new york’s health department reasoned, wouldn’t a video just bring it home?
so they took this very startling and very controversial subway ad and turned it into a video.
the video follows the same script as the print campaign: hit the emotions, not the head. but does it work? not for me. instead of being grossed out by the concept of putting gobs of fat into my body, i’m grossed out by the video itself, and i turn away.
communication lesson: what works in one medium doesn’t always work in another.
f
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
Powerful. That gets at what the Heaths called “The Elephant.” Nice…and yucky.
true, and companies can easily “shape the path” at work by removing soda from cafeterias and vending machines. i still prefer the print campaign. even here, some things are better left to the imagination.
f
I agree with you. The print campaign works, I cringed and turned away when I watched the video. I wonder what reaction my teenage sons would have? I’ll have to ask them. Maybe the video appeals to a different audience.
Oh YUCK! My “elephant” just threw up! I agree, can’t watch it.
janet, your sons will probably think it’s gross-cool.
elizabeth, your elephant threw up. ha!
f
My Rider is trying to figure out a) what they used to create the “fat” which looks more like vomit and b) how they could have built on the print concept to make video more effective. Not quite as gross, but still powerful…
Great post, as always Fran!
My 17-year-old son said the video was more effective because it’s nastier.
i’m not surprised! if they’re trying to reach teens, they’re probably set.
f