I was watching Fox45 Morning News (this is the only Fox news I watch, honest) and they aired an story about a new Aids awareness campaign launched by the Baltimore City Health Department. This campaign encourages African American men to get tested for HIV and pictures pictures of African American men with red bandaids on their bodies. The controversy is not with the images but with the tagline: "Have Balls, Get Tested." A Baltimore resident who was walking her grandson saw the ad on a passing bus and finds the language offensive. According to the Fox 45 story, the resident says, '"They could have said
Get on Board or
Be Brave, Get Tested. That is not sending the right message to our children. It was very vulgar. Very vulgar."'
This article is very fitting since we are finalizing our campaigns and have spent much time identifying the right tagline that will epitomize our call to action. This Baltimorian was theoretically correct--the campaign could have used those other words. But would those other taglines be effective in getting the target audience to notice the campaign and to take action? And when health, safety, and education is involved, can something be considered vulgar? I don't believe so. Even if one considers it offensive, isn't the more important issue getting people the health care they need? And if this campaign gets even one person to get tested, it is successful.
Here is one of The Baltimore City Health Department's campaign posters:
This is a very interesting topic. I wonder the same things you do? I am not sure it is too vulgar, although I can definitely see why the lady would. At the same time, not to encourage it, but everything in our media seems to be portrayed in a way that makes kids grow up faster. Again, this doesn't defend the vulgarness of the verbiage. Also, I think these words definitely show us the age of the target audience, which is good to be defined. And I think it is aiming towards a generation that needs the message. The words the lady in the article suggested would have a difference target and then te poster would not be doing what it was intended for.
ReplyDeleteTo me, this tagline calls its audience's masculinity into question, and that is far more provocative than a prosaic term for male genitalia. I can almost guarantee you that the people this campaign is calling to action don't care what word you use to describe them, but they DO care if you infer that they don't have any if they're to afraid to get tested.
ReplyDeleteThat said, the offended viewer certainly has a right to her opinion, even though she can't claim to be a part of the targeting demographic. My question is this: what responsibility do the campaign designers have to viewers outside of their intended audience?
Beth, I completely agree with your comments about the intended audience and what will cause them to take notice and react. I do not think designers have a responsibility per se to unintended audiences, but they do have a moral obligation not to misrepresent information or use gratuitous shock value. In this case, I think the designer of the campaign acted within his or her rights and responsibly.
Delete