Do shock safety ads work?

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

by Tory Shepherd

110
Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

by Anthony Sharwood

210
There’s no one Thomson won’t burn to save his skin

by Tory Maguire

310
Animal experiments won’t cure me from cancer

by Helen Marston

410
If you want to get promoted, laugh at the boss’s jokes

by Kate Southam

510
Need someone to do your dirty work? Try God.

by Tory Shepherd

610
Gina Rinehart’s the least interesting thing on this list

by Lucy Kippist

710
I’ve rocked out of my generation’s la-la-loop

by Jason Tin

810
Punch on: Open thread 24/05/2012

by Daniel Piotrowski

910
If sports movies have taught us anything, NSW will win

by Anthony Sharwood

1010

by Tory Maguire

27 Aug 05:58am

Must Reads

If sports movies have taught us anything, NSW will win

Schapelle has done her time

182

Do women need to know when to walk away?

Filed under: Advertising, Health, Media

20 comments

If you have a teenager about to get their licence make them sit down in front of the computer and watch this UK public service advertisement.

Then ask them if the message sank in. I have a theory about shock ads: that the more graphic the less effective. The more extreme the outcome, the harder it is to relate to the scenario = “that would never happen to me.”

But this four minutes of chilling horror might just be the exception.

This is not an ice addict attacking his mother, picking at imaginary bugs under her skin or throwing a garbage bin through a window in the emergency room. How many teenagers can see themselves ending up like this?

It’s not a smoker with a gangrenous foot or mouth cancer, which is so far beyond what any smoker can ever see happening to them they can console themselves by switching off and thinking “that doesn’t apply to me.”

It is the unimaginable consequences of a momentary lapse of judgment by a teenager just like the ones you know. And let’s face it, unless you’re law-abiding in the extreme, if you own a car and a mobile phone you’ve probably snuck a glance at the screen once or twice when you shouldn’t have.

Shock safety ads have become one of the major tools in the authorities kit bag to tackle public health issues, driver safety and pretty much anything preventable.

The Victorian TAC has made an art form of scaring the living daylights out of young drivers, and quite often get criticised for going over the top.

And in a time when some video games and movies are more gory than anything the road safety campaigners can come up with there’s a strong argument for the impact of peer pressure, rather than shock value.

Just look at the awareness cut through of this brilliant campaign from the NSW RTA.

The most famous and memorable shock ad in Australian history is undoubtedly the 1987 Grim Reaper campaign unleashed on the Australian public at the height of the AIDS epidemic. No blood, no hospitals, no family left behind - just pure terror.

It’s widely credited with playing a major part in a concerted effort across a range of health authorities, which stopped the reach of AIDS in Australia mirroring the dire experience in other similar countries.

But I highly doubt an ad like that would have the same impact in similar circumstances in 2009. Maybe we’re harder to shock than we were 22 years ago.

Sometimes, however, we can still be moved by a graphic image. Again, show the UK text-driving ad to anyone you know between 16 and 25 - it could be the one that proves my theory wrong.

Share post:
Print page:
- Print Article

Most commented

427Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself

375There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin

353"Gifting", "journey" and other words we hate

313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking

304Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer

262Who murdered the Arts degree?

246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...

231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.

20 comments

Show oldest | newest first

- Julio Patterson says:
  
  08:38am | 02/07/10
  
  ytxxup2dojsaiqtb
  [link=http://tglqnb3752e27l3d.com/]7bfutppgms6v8qn0[/link]
  <a >qgm5250z63lrdaf9</a>
  http://jio5e8yfx2wfiqkn.com/
  
  Reply
- John says:
  
  01:48pm | 30/08/09
  
  Is anyone speeding in the RTA ad? I see one car spinning its wheels from a standstill, another in power oversteer and someone ignoring a pedestrian on a crossing. Modern cars with traction and stability control won’t let you spin the wheels or oversteer, and it wouldn’t matter if a driver was obeying the speed limit if they hit a pedestrian. There’s another thing. A lot of the ads imply that you are perfectly safe under the speed limit. Not true.
  
  Reply
- me says:
  
  06:16am | 30/08/09
  
  These ads are not appropriate for children under 10 years old. And as a parent, I cannot censor these ads because I don’t know when they will be aired. Therefore during evening times, the TV has to be off which makes these ads completely ineffective. These ads should only be shown after 9pm.
  
  Reply
- Caitlin says:
  
  11:41pm | 28/08/09
  
  with movies and video games as violent as they are it probably wouldn’t always have the desired affect it could have created 10, 20 years ago. I remember a TAC campaign from a couple of years back called “Pictures of You” where they played a 3 minute ad on all 3 commercial channels at the same time; the ad featured real families who had lost loved ones in car accidents with a somewhat eery song in the background. I personally think these are the kind of campaigns that have the most effect because the majority of people have someone they love and care about in their life that they wouldn’t want to die and this is the type of ad that really resonates and people bring up in conversationsor remember for years (like I have). I can’t even watch most of the ads posted above because they gross me out but still if I’m driving and I hear my phone go off I don’t think back to these ads, they may shock at first but they’re too forgettable writing or reading a text message is an in the moment type of act where nothing else is really considered so maybe the answer should not be shock ads but more throughout road safety education at school, I’ve only been out of school 3 years but I can’t recall a single thing I was taught about road safety other than “look both ways when you cross the road”...and I always do
  
  Reply
- Mr Pastry says:
  
  02:32pm | 28/08/09
  
  Eric and Voxpop - settle down
  
  Reply
- Voxpop says:
  
  09:30am | 28/08/09
  
  OMG Eric - this has nothing to do with feminism. I am honoustly starting to worry about you and am serious about you needing help. It’s just not healthy for you to be so obsessed and adicted to posting this bile on every topic you come accross. I’ve encountered you on so many of them. I know how people can get stuck in a rut and hole up with their computer getting angry and frustrated at the world - you’ll end up with a persecution complex. I hope those around you can see how this would be affecting you and intervene. Talk to someone…
  http://www.menslineaus.org.au/
  
  Reply
- Catherine says:
  
  07:28pm | 27/08/09
  
  Actually there is evidence that really scary ads are a waste of money. Here’s one such study from an Australian researcher:
  
  R F Soames Job , Effective and ineffective use of fear in health promotion campaigns.
  http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/abstract/78/2/163
  
  Basically moderately scary ads that are reinforced in real life are more effective than really scary ads that aren’t.
  
  A “drink drive and you will die” can be worse than useless - it can create the opposite effect. Because you’re not dead, you start thinking you’re invincible (a real problem for young drivers which leads them to further risky behaviour). I think there was some doubt about the long term effectiveness of the Grim Reaper ad for just that reason.
  
  On the other hand, a campaign warning breath tests for alcohol (ie if you are caught drink driving, you’ll be fined and lose your licence) may be more effective because most of us have been pulled over and have been tested. Likewise, catching herpes is a more realistic fear than catching AIDS.
  
  You need something where the message is reinforced in real life.
  
  Also when a message is too scary or too unpleasant, people switch off - they change the channel and you’ve lost them. They put up psychological barriers that stop the helpful, information messages going through. The graphic smoking ads are a great example of that. They’d be far better off having one ad concentrating on how effective cigarettes are at creating wrinkles (at least for women) in a realistic and not over the top way. I noticed it was mentioned in one ad but they jumbled it all together with a whole heap of other bad things that nothing really stood out other than it was just another propaganda ad.
  
  I don’t know what research there is for ads that try to make you understand serious consequences instead of using plain fear - instead of trying to scare the living daylights out of you, they encourage thinking about a different perspective. I suspect these may be more effective if done properly - ie not a lecture that tells you how you should think.
  
  I would say that the first ad you posted fits more into the thinking about the consequences category. I’m not sure if that much crying is realistic and I don’t think they should have used music but it’s compelling film work. I hope some of my texting and driving friends (in their 30s and should know better) see it.
  
  One ad that I saw at a cinema was just a series of notes written by people just before they died in a speeding related crash - like “running late for my interview, see you tonight” sort of thing. No hysterics, nothing out of the ordinary - in fact it was so very ordinary - they were just the sort of thing you might write yourself. Whenever, I’m late for something, I remember that ad and remember that whatever it is, it’s not worth risking anyone’s life for and I calm down and concentrate on driving at best I can rather than getting somewhere as fast as I can (even within the legal speed limit, a stressed driver is a bad driver). I don’t think the ad got such a wide screening which is a pity.
  
  Reply
- Eric says:
  
  04:09pm | 27/08/09
  
  Interesting how men—the scum of the earth according to feminists—are depicted as the ones who clean up after a female-caused disaster.
  
  Reply
- Keith says:
  
  03:36pm | 27/08/09
  
  The ad is not bad, but not realistic enough. Australia could make an improvement of this video, for example;
  1. take the dramatic music out altogether,
  2. people don’t “scream” after trauma, the only noise they make are groaning sounds from pain, others are mute with shock.
  3. it needs more gruesome but realistic make-up, e.g, broken twisted bones, impacted skull fracture, metal impalement, facial disfigurement, less blood that looks unreal.
  4. The introductory scene with the girls fooling around with mobile phones should be filmed inside the car, as if one of them was using her phone video,
  5. The second scene could appear to be from a fixed traffic surveillence camera, with a few seconds of nothing happening, when the crash scene would come into view, then switch to a handheld, but not until after emergency vehicles arrive in the view of the traffic camera.
  5. delete the scene of the motorist who stopped to help, unless he’s in view of the traffic camera. He’s not going to film the carnage himself.
  6. keep a general air of silence, only the background sounds, and the voices of emergency workers, and vehicles, and muffled the sound of real pain from victims,.An emergency road trauma unit could coach a film crew,
  7. The last scene could be from the traffic camera, fade out/fade in, showing roadside crosses being erected by grieving relatives.
  7. A national tv broadcast campaign should be captioned only, no voices. This tends to capture the attention of viewers, and have a more dramatic and lasting impression.
  
  Reply
- Mondo Rock says:
  
  02:19pm | 27/08/09
  
  I’ve got to agree with Chris.
  
  All this “do they work or don’t they” chatter is pointless speculation - particularly when you consider that there are statistics that will prove whether of not these ads are effective.
  
  Tory - come on mate, you’re paid for this journalism gig, inform your readers!!
  
  Reply
- Noishe says:
  
  01:39pm | 27/08/09
  
  The ad didn’t do anything for me, seen worse in movies. I guess as I know it’s fake as all ad campaigns are…they just don’t ‘hit the right spot’.
  
  I don’t know what most teens/young adults would make of this ad either…are they desensitized or not??!!
  
  Reply
- wolf says:
  
  12:27pm | 27/08/09
  
  A good ad as you see how little the safety devices can help when multiple collisions are involved, hopefully it gets the message across. The RTA ads are great too as they hit at the same thing that makes young male drivers do stupid things - their ego.
  
  However I really dislike the TAC ads as they are too predictable, and someone always dies whether they deserve to or not.
  
  TAC example A - the guy who partakes of a ‘herbal cigarette’ at a party, then after initially doing the wrong thing and commencing his journey he realises he is affected. so he does the right thing, pulls over, waits, opens the door, steps out gets killed by a clearly negligent tool in the car behind. But then he took drugs and all drug users will DIE a horrible death so it’s ok and the other car is absolved.
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb692b-V7z4
  TAC example B - guy is doing 5km over, stupid girl steps into the road without looking, girl dies. Scenario is repeated but at 5km/hr less and the girl lives. If you have that little sense youre going to be removed from the the gene pool sooner or later regardless of whether someone is travelling the speed limit or not.
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6Mrv5WqVrI
  
  Reply
- Old Clive says:
  
  12:07pm | 27/08/09
  
  Occupational Health and Safety and driving techniques should be taught in schools from primary right through to uni, it is the only way we can put old heads on young shoulders.
  Cut out the car games and adds showing cars restored on the next game, so that p[eople will know that injuries and damage always has an after effect.
  
  Reply
- Mikael says:
  
  10:49am | 27/08/09
  
  The thing is, this is probably as good as those campaign can get. What else are you gonna do ? Just not talk about it ? Any other ideas ? I think that one thing that’s for certain is you can’t scare off a kid with ‘death’. He doesn’t even come close to understanding the concept; it’s unreal to him; even I don’t believe in death quite yet and I’m 34. However, If you show teenagers what happens when you don’t die but you’re life is screwed anyway (disfiguration, paralysis, amputation, losing friends or family, killing a person you don’t know) that might ... might get to them ... a little ... idy bit
  
  Reply
- Greg says:
  
  10:43am | 27/08/09
  
  Hasn’t the 1987 AIDS ad with the Grim Reaper been criticised since then because it didn’t give any recommendations? All it said was along the lines of “Look out for AIDS, it’ll get ya” (Not verbatim).
  
  There are more fully licensed drivers than P-platers in this country. Until the RTA/TAC/RACV/RACQ tests everyone every 5 or 10 years nothing will change.
  
  Imagine the revenue they could rake in from that…..... Not that that would be their main duty, obviously….
  
  Reply
- Mr Pastry says:
  
  10:22am | 27/08/09
  
  Impressive piece and certainly affected me, but I am not the target audience. These advertisements have no impact on the ones that need to change their driving habits. The agencies are either naive or need to be seen to be doing something and what easier way is there than make a TV ad. Effective policing and punishment (permanent vehicle confiscation) for dangerous offences. But speeding probably the most damgerous offence is now acceptable, look at the amount of fuss and complaint over speed cameras. Driving at or under the speed limit is not difficult but many drivers seem to have a problem with this and want the cameras removed so they can continue taking risks with others lives.
  
  Reply
- Julie Coker-Godson says:
  
  09:01am | 27/08/09
  
  I am 57 yrs of age and have been driving for over 20 years. After 2 and a half minutes of this ad I had to turn it off as I felt quite queasy. I hope the ad works but somehow I’m a little pessimistic given the types of films young people enjoy seeing this days. I believe they have become desensitised. Remember the Grim Reaper(Aids and protected sex) and the combi van that slams into a truck head first (driving when tired)? They didn’t seem to work then and were ultimately retired. As I said earlier, I do hope this works.
  
  Reply
- Jessy says:
  
  08:29am | 27/08/09
  
  Advertisements like the UK example shown above should be distributed virally in the hope that it is only seen once - there is no doubt that the target audience are immune to shock tatics, but a message like this is so profoundly confronting that showing it repeatedly to a zombied television audience will desensitize the viewers even further. Hauntingly well exectued.
  
  Reply
- Chris says:
  
  08:13am | 27/08/09
  
  Nice words - but they are just words. You haven’t included any facts in your article at all. And I think you’ll find is that facts and research drive advertising spend. Organisations like TAC just don’t go out and spend millions of dollars in advertising campaigns without doing some research. So, just because you can go out there and write an article without doing any research at all, please don’t assume that others don’t.
  
  I’m not saying that I think these ads are perfect or not losing some of their effectiveness. But, I think if they were, we would have seen a decline in their use and not an increase like we have. But, any education campaign, should not just rely on one communications channel. And I’m pretty sure that each of these ads that you mention doesn’t just rely on the scray ads. There are a range of other initiatives that back them up and do make them effective.
  
  Next time you write an article, it would be good to see a face or two.
  
  Reply
- Jolanda Challita says:
  
  07:59am | 27/08/09
  
  I have two young drivers a green P plater and a red P plater and I called to make sure that they had watched. My green one had already seen it.
  Do I think it will make a difference? I really hope so because some young people really do think that they are just so good at everything that it will not happen to them. I hope that even if it doesn’t get the driver to stop using the mobile, maybe they might feel more uncomfortable if they have passengers and maybe if these passengers will, after seeing the AD, summon the courage to say something to the driver if they are on their mobile or at least keep their eyes on the road and let the driver know if they see them drifting. Every bit helps. I thought the AD was good and that all young people should see it.
  
  Reply