Comments on: SHOCKING – or De-sensitizing? http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/ just when you think you've got it all together Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:00:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: paralleldivergence http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-10056 Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:11:25 +0000 http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-10056 Great question tobeme! I remember seeing an ad where a woman gets home from the hospital, distraught because her husband was just killed in a car accident. The house is empty and she’s alone. There’s a light flashing on the answering machine. She presses the button to retrieve the call and it’s her husband telling her he’s running a little late at work, but he’ll be home soon. She breaks down.

It’s pretty powerful stuff without all the graphic blood and gore. For a lot of people, the heart rules the mind and it’s the emotion rather than the visual that’s going to have the more lasting impact in any message. I think focussing the message on the repercussions for friends and relatives might make people think twice and consider their actions.

I believe these types of ads do have a desensitizing effect and society is becoming more blase about things that were otherwise considered taboo discussions just a couple of generations ago. The further effect we see everyday is the loss of childhood that media like the Internet are bringing to the world. I alluded to this in the last few sentences of the article.

Glad you liked it.

]]> By: tobeme http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-10052 Tue, 08 Jan 2008 22:32:06 +0000 http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-10052 Good thoughts. We do need to consider the impact of these adverts and come to understand the long term impact of desensitizing the viewer. Worth considering. You gave a good example for teens, that is use shame or social non-acceptance rather then scare tactics.
What do you suggest for the other type of ads that would create impact that is desired.

]]> By: Ivan http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9893 Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:57:50 +0000 http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9893 These are some pretty amazing ads. We don’t have anything like these in the U.S. Maybe we should. I’d really like to see some shock ads in the area of gun control. But as if THAT’s gonna happen.

]]> By: Friendlypig http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9833 Mon, 03 Dec 2007 14:33:30 +0000 http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9833 What were they thinking of?

Who knows?

This is a very large municipal authority that we’re writing about, and in the 1960′s, then as now, they always knew or know best. Now of course they would have to be a little more considerate and consultative.

We laugh now but it’s not really funny. They thought that they were being pro-active; the sad thing it was all done with the agreement of the Police. I rest my case!

]]> By: paralleldivergence http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9832 Mon, 03 Dec 2007 10:25:09 +0000 http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9832 Thanks Shock and Awe. I can’t see governments stopping using the tactic any time soon.

Friendlypig, that’s terrible. What were they thinking would happen?

Elvira, that’s an important point. What impact does this horror advertising have on our children?

]]> By: Elvira http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9827 Mon, 03 Dec 2007 00:25:21 +0000 http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9827 I think Shock and Awe got it right. They are preaching to the converted – and terrorizing them. The last two ads were horrible! I’d hate for my kids to see them.

]]> By: Friendlypig http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9820 Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:15:20 +0000 http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9820 I have seen a couple of the ads before, and the first time you seen them they do shock. However the se-sensitising effect occurs with repetition.

You can only see something for the first time, once. After that the effect diminishes. So the only way they could work is hit & run.

About 40 years ago the local Council decided to so something about the accident rate on one of the major dual-carraigeways. They decided on shock!!

They went to scrap-yard and got 6 accident damaged cars. Then they went to the regional medical school and borrowed 6 (real) skeletons. They dresed the skeltons up and placed them in the cars and put the cars in the centre of the dual-carraigeway.

The local residents complained because the cars with accompanying skeletons were outside their homes. The local kids played in the cars and with skeletons and the accident rate tripled because the drivers were rubber-necking.

The idea was good but as with most local authority plans there was a decided lack of critical thinking.

]]> By: Shock and Awe http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9819 Sun, 02 Dec 2007 11:39:21 +0000 http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/12/02/shocking-or-de-sensitizing/#comment-9819 I have never seen those ads. A few of them were very stirring, but I agree, after you’ve seen them a few times, I guess it would be a lot easier to switch off. Do they get their point across? I reckon they are very heavy-handedly preaching to the converted.

]]>