All in the name of charity
13 October 2009
In an already overcrowded marketplace, it is no surprise that the battle for hearts and minds in the charity sector has been as fiercely contested as ever over the last eighteen months. Hard hitting marketing campaigns have, for a long time, played a key role in raising awareness and mobilising the public, meaning marketers in the not-for-profit sector find themselves treading a fine line between resonance and shock tactics capable of causing offence.
Accurate portrayals, based on the experiences of those subject to the issues presented, have often had complaints against them not upheld (Action for Children, Diabetes UK, Motor Neurone Disease Association). The ASA believed these three campaigns aimed to communicate positive messages which could offer hope to sufferers and serve to increase public awareness; strategic aims which outweighed the perceived distress or appeal to fear.
Targeting is particularly important in communicating hard-hitting messages. The Motor Neurone Disease Association carefully targeted 15 certificate films with a cinema only campaign. Concurrently, an anti-smoking campaign was deemed to be inappropriate for TV broadcast before 7.30pm because it was likely to be seen by children who could be distressed by its content (Department of Health t/a NHS). Marketers who use arresting or potentially offensive material in media that is largely untargeted, such as posters or internet sites without appropriate demographic filtering should be aware that the ends don’t always justify the means.
So, whilst the message and targeting are crucial, they are by no means the only criteria that the ASA take into account. Although many complaints about not-for-profit sector advertising relate to offence and fear and distress, the rest of the CAP Code will still apply. For example, one charity campaign aimed to raise awareness about the problems faced by the children it sought to help, but was judged to have re-enforced negative racial stereotypes and was unable to support claims about brain development (Kids Company).
Although it has sometimes been more lenient on charities, good causes and public awareness campaigns when it comes to aspirational messages (NSPCC), the ASA still expects those advertisers to have robust evidence for factual claims. Whatever the sector, an inaccurate or ambiguous claim presented as fact is likely to breach the CAP Code. An unqualified claim, “1 in 6 children are sexually abused”, based on figures from a report published in 2000, was considered to be inadequate substantiation and therefore likely to mislead (NSPCC). In the Charity sector, accuracy of message should also serve to ensure people are aware of the destination of their donations. The ASA has ruled that not making clear precisely where proceeds end up is likely to render an ad misleading (The Hand of Help Ltd).
There are clearly many issues to consider when creating a campaign designed to change opinion and mobilise the public. The Copy Advice team can help you perform this tricky balancing act; contact us on 020 7492 2100 or advice@cap.org.uk.