A Bloody Intense Ad Campaign
Warning: Don’t click ‘More’ if you’re unable to handle images a tad on the morbid side. Seriously. This is nothing if not controversial.
That aside, this is possibly the most eye-opening ‘don’t talk and drive’ anti-cellphone campaigns I’ve ever seen, and I’m sure you’ll agree. The idea of this campaign, by the Bangalore Traffic Police, is that if you dare call a friend or relative while he/she is driving, their peril is just as much your fault as it is theirs. Talk about a guilt trip.
Personally, I tend to disagree with the message this campaign is sending: If I order a hamburger at McDonald’s, I’m not responsible if the line cook burns himself on the grill.
I’d actually like to know if I’m alone, here – what do you think? Is this campaign effective? Is it correct in its accusations? Is it speaking to the soul of every man and every woman who’s ever been in love?
[Via Dyvantity]
What’s powerful about it is that, as a driver, I will be reminded of the image of the other person splattered with blood. When I am tempted to pick up the phone while driving, that becomes my blood and my loved one being splattered.
The little tag line tells me everything I need to know, “helping” me articulate what I am seeing. This is about the impact on the other person of calling and driving. The impact created is cleverly on both parties in the conversion, although worded at the non-car person. It manipulates my theory of mind.
So getting worked up about the implied responsibility misses the point. In the case of me as a potential phoning-while-driviing person, I have been impacted and it will affect my choices. Job done!
I think it’s a little off to imply responsibility. When I see these ads, I’m reminded of the inherent danger of talking on a phone while driving and the obvious guilt, hardships, etc that can be avoided by both parties involved in the conversation. I’m not instantly hit with the feeling that the ads are suggesting you are responsible for the accident of the person driving. It blatantly suggests you are affected by it, and I’d think we’d all agree on that one.
Good point, Chris. It’s definitely working on that level. Hell, horrifyingly so – the last thing I need to be reminded of, having hypothetically lost a loved one in a car accident, is their insides squelching through their out. That being said, the copy’s flat, imperative statement, ‘don’t talk while (s)he drives’, would seem to come across more as a command, rather than a plea – perhaps implying more than mere passive involvement on the part of the non-driver. I’m wondering if, were they trying to shock the viewer out of being a potential victimized family member rather than accusing him/her of being responsible, they might at least try to tone down the implicit violence a LITTLE. I mean, look at that blood! Total liquefaction! Where is this car accident taking place? Quake 3?
…But, then again, shock and awe.