| Image via bigquestionsonline.com |
Each trudges on, head down in their own field, painfully aware of the existence of the other in close proximity but ignoring the other until collaborations are necessary.
But does it have to be this way? In both veins there are faults that could best be solved by looking more carefully towards the other.
Where advertising loses its merit
As an advertiser, it's your job, not your purpose, to make your client's product or service break through the clatter of countless competitors with similar messaging. It's so easy to lose sight of the actual merit of the brand or benefit a product has to consumers. When you're sitting in the bubble that is your firm, it's easy to let your creativity fly beyond where it should be.
Suddenly you're convincing the world that your client's sponge not only cleans dishes effectively but will change their life, not their lifestyle. It's no longer a sponge, it's a representation of their effectiveness in the kitchen, as a wife, a husband or a provider. Visions of smiling husbands tackling spaghetti night dance through your head but while you're reading the brief and coming up with mood board and tag-lines in tandem, you stop. Is the long list of chemicals in the sponge product brief listed to enhance durability actually safe for use near food? You brush it off, back to the think tank.
Step back from the Cannes nomination, think about the buyer.
If you have this thought, so will your audience. Journalists are constantly trying to dig up dirt on companies, public figures and institution. As an advertiser it isn't your duty to dig up dirt on who hired you. But you also can't completely push this thought from your mind just because you have a deadline.
You aren't going to write an exposé of corporate greed but as the sole confidant to this information, do your due diligence. Follow your gut and make sure you're satisfied any product you lend your creativity to is safe and honestly marketed. Ask for clarification from the client or your supervisor that the sponge is fine.
If you aren't satisfied, do what you can to set the stage for a fix. Maybe that means proving with consumer research that customers are unsure about the safety of the product. Maybe that means stressing that safety in cleaning products should be the company's focus in their advertising, not the lifestyle of the cleaning spouse.
The AAF code of ethics stresses that one of the principles of ethical advertising is that advertisers have an obligation to exercise the highest personal ethics in disseminating information. Have an equal responsibility to the firm you work for, the company you're serving and the person you picture buying it. You aren't just lending your talents to brands, you have the unique opportunity to change big brands little by little from the inside in a way that benefits everyone.
Where journalism misses the mark
Journalists are easily picked apart in a crowd. They ask the hard questions, they don't care about being liked by their subject our their audience and they champion having an obsession with truth telling even when it isn't beneficial or prudent.
They're easily seen as rebel rousers that occasionally stir the pot for ratings, fame or just the power rush of taking down a corporation they believe isn't trustworthy. Where as advertisers lose when failing to check in with their conscious in lieu of creativity, journalists do the opposite. They often let their own moral compass completely lead and replace due diligence with a moral high ground that demands answers to the public.
Step back from the pulitzer, think about the real and lasting impact.
The world doesn't change overnight. Advertisers need to learn they can stretch their creative wings a little. That they can change the way "things are done" with effort and creativity. Journalists need to reign it in. Just because you can say it, doesn't mean you should. Sometimes you stick your foot in your mouth when you get so excited to prove a gap in the system you forget to fact check, ask the other side and make sure what you're saying holds merit.
If you aren't considering your impact, weighing the pros and cons of this information roaming in the heads of the world, you aren't ready to publish.
The SPJ code of ethics says that journalism should seek the truth and report it but also minimize harm. Neither of those takes precedent of the other and must be equally evaluated. Shortly after that, it says a journalist must be accountable for what they write. I'd shorten the whole code to go deep first but take a step back and check your honesty and impact immediately after.
In short, if the creative sellers and investigative truth tellers of the world could take one thing from each other it's to step back, re-evaluate, learn from others mistakes and realize that both sides want similar things, a better world for consumers of products or information.
No comments:
Post a Comment