Is viral publicity worth the backlash? Prolific North

“It is clear to see with Dead Happy’s latest advertising campaign that some of these rules were disregarded, with them potentially focusing only on the reach this campaign may have received. There appeared to be no sensitivity to the sentiment that surrounds Harold Shipman, and a fairly careless ignorance towards the fact that they were creating content that is likely ‘triggering’ for many of his victims and those people that have been affected by similar events. This has likely damaged brand trust, which will take time to repair.”

Is Viral Publicity Worth The Backlash? Prolific North

Although DeadHappy might have seen a significant uplift in organic search volume and the campaign certainly has people talking on social media, is a viral moment ever worth fuelling outrage?

Is Viral Publicity Worth The Backlash? Prolific North

“We’ve all heard the saying ‘all publicity is good publicity’, however, we have to question whether this is the case with DeadHappy,” said Brown.

Is Viral Publicity Worth The Backlash? Prolific North

“On one hand, the campaign has got people talking and has certainly placed the brand in the limelight… in the Google Trends data of people searching for DeadHappy and there is a significant increase in organic search volume for the brand. So the campaign has certainly got them noticed. However, at what cost?”

Is Viral Publicity Worth The Backlash? Prolific North

 

Is Viral Publicity Worth The Backlash? Prolific North

“It’s a good example of how social media can impact your brand positively if marketing is done right, and negatively if it’s done wrong. They’re certainly not the first brand to make this mistake in the service of chasing impactful campaigns, and likely won’t be the last.”

Is Viral Publicity Worth The Backlash? Prolific North

When all those likes and retweets start to roll in, pushing the boundaries might seem like a great idea. 

Last year, a Crown Paints advert about ‘Hannah and Dave’ and their baby journey, which was created by Cheshire agency driven, went viral but was painted as ‘offensive’. It sparked hundreds of complaints of misogyny and sexism to ASA. At the time, Crown Paints said in a statement: “whilst the ad has been broadly well received, we appreciate that people have differing views on humour and we apologise if any of the lyrics have caused offence.”

Cheshire-based Moneysupermarket has had its fair share in the limelight too, once holding the title as having the UK’s most complained about advert for Dave’s dance off back in 2017. Complaints rolled in claiming it was ‘overtly sexual’ and ‘offensive’. which the ASA ruled was unlikely to provoke offence.

The line between provocation and offence is a blurry one. Provocation to fuel debate and brand awareness will lure complaints, regardless of what the campaign is for. Bodyform owner Essity spoke to Prolific North last year about its taboo-busting adverts to open up conversations about periods.

“If we don’t cause a bit of outrage and a bit of offence, we’re not breaking the taboo,” Essity’s communications director Gareth Lucy said at the time.

According to ASA’s guidance, if a campaign covers an emotive issue or controversial topic, marketers should take care over how stories are used and should not spread widespread offence.

“Of course, one of the key levers a brand has in creating communications that stand out and create talkability – is to create surprise and to provoke. But at the same time, in terms of simple ethics and basic decency, it is clear that there is a line that has to be drawn when it is absolutely evident that it is simply taking things too far and – especially using reviled and deeply upsetting individuals to create that impact. It is just wrong, thoughtless and self serving,” said Dawn Paine co-founder and CEO of Aurora Creative Agency.

google.com, pub-7087036224883813, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0