Controversial Ads: WWF and McDonald’s Case Studies
World Wildlife Fund (WWF)
Introduction
We have seen some controversial ads. Here, I am going to show you another example. This example is a WWF ad that connected the 9/11 attacks with the power of nature, creating controversy. Firstly, I want to explain to you what the WWF is. The WWF is an international non-governmental organization dedicated to the conservation of nature. They work on projects focusing on biodiversity conservation, environmental sustainability, and promoting practices that reduce the human ecological footprint.
Analysis of the Ad
The ad shows Manhattan with the Twin Towers still standing and lots of planes in the New York City skyline, comparing the mortality of 9/11 to a tsunami. Its objective was to talk about how nature can be strong, but it upset a lot of people.
Public and Media Reaction
People, especially those from New York, did not like it. Blogs and news outlets talked a lot about how it was wrong to use a sad event for an ad. They said it showed no respect for 9/11 victims.
WWF’s Response
The WWF quickly said they did not approve the ad. Even though their logo was there, they did not want it. It had been made by a Brazilian company, but the agency said that it had been approved by their customer. So, they both apologized. This had a negative impact; the image of the WWF was damaged. Even though they are not a company with a profit motive, their goal is to reach everyone’s minds, and this had the opposite effect.
Strategy
This situation makes us think if it is correct to use tragic or sad events in ads. Even though they weren’t controlling it, this has shown us that this is not an appropriate event to use in an ad. Maybe using a sad situation and turning it into a positive one with a happy ending would be a better option. Of course, it is important to be creative and try to draw the customer’s attention, but this is not the correct way because it seems it was not made with empathy for those who have lost someone or have trauma related to 9/11. So, using sad topics, in this case, terrorism, is not a good option.
McDonald’s
Introduction
We are going to see another sad ad, but in this case, it is related to a close person’s death. The ad tells the story of a boy dealing with his dad’s death. In the ad, the boy asks his mom questions about his dad. The mom answers the questions, showing how they are different. But the surprising part is when they go to McDonald’s, and the boy orders a Filet-O-Fish, which was his dad’s favorite, showing that he had something in common. This resonated with a lot of people. However, the ad got a lot of criticism, with over 150 complaints. People accused McDonald’s of taking advantage of grieving kids. Many who lost a parent did not like it.
McDonald’s Response
After all the complaints, McDonald’s said they were sorry. They did not mean to make people upset. They apologized especially to their customers, who are really important. McDonald’s took the ad off the TV.
Evaluation
Using the death of a loved one in an advertisement is a highly delicate matter and should be managed with extreme sensitivity. Using sad topics, like losing a parent, in this way seems wrong and does not think about people who went through difficult times. Companies need to be careful when choosing topics for their ads, especially if those topics have the potential to make people feel sad. When customers associate the company with negative emotions, such as sadness, they may be less inclined to place orders or to dine there.