Social advertising

We are used to see commercial advertising, we all have studied it in class: the tactics, techniques,classifications, laws,... but it is not so easy when it comes to social advertising, the ethical part is too strong. There is always a big criticism: ONGs (over)using pity & guilt, using commercial techniques to raise funds,selling themselves instead of making people aware of the problem, (over)exposing the image of the victims...

Some of those arguments have been used against a campaign release by MLF (Mobile Loaves & Fishes, Inc.), this organization is a social outreach ministry based in Austin (Texas) that provides food, clothing, and lately also housing for the homeless and indigent working poor. Through the “I Am Here” Project they try to raise the visibility of the homeless and empower people to help.

They know one of the biggest problems when it comes to promote solidarity is the distance with the issue, even if people are aware of it, it is still too far from them, they don't see it or they don't know the people involved. That's why the creatives of the agency decided to reduce to the minimum their role of intermediaries between reality and receiver: here it is their simple, clear and direct campaign

A lot of controversy has grow around the campaign but no one can doubt of its effectiveness: they asked for 10$ donations through sms to buy Danny and his wife a caravan and they got it in just 2 days. Just by showing people the reality, just by transmitting a clear message "I am here" and proposing a clear deal "1200 sms = a caravan for people in needing a place to live".

I think is a good example of social advertising, effective and clear, it brings people closer the problem and involves them by showing the immediate result of their help. What do you think? Can we accuse them of (over)using the image of this man?

Rocío Leza.