Spring 2011 has Sprung Out

During this semester in the Ethics, Law and Diversity in Strategic Communications journalism course I learned a few things. In class we focused on ethical theories, different codes of ethics, legal issues dealing with ethics and several case studies. 

One of the most interesting things that I discovered was how a variety of people view the same situation completely different from one another. During class we would split up in to several small groups to discuss a handful of different cases and found that not everyone viewed ethical issues the same. Some saw certain circumstances as being ethically correct while others saw it as being morally wrong. The way people view things seems to come from their background, beliefs and experiences in life.

Another interesting point that was discussed during class was about honesty versus truth, which later brought up Stephen Colbert’s Word of the Day, “Truthiness.” We found that people use the words truth and honesty interchangeably, but that does not exactly mean that the truth is honest or that it is the honest truth. We defined the fundamental value of truth as what each person believes is correct. Basically meaning that my truth could possibly be different from yours depending on what our morals and beliefs are and on our different perspectives of the situation. “Truthiness” came into the discussion, which means “what I say is right, and nothing anyone else says could possibly be true,” because people desire what they want to be true. I found this lecture to be intriguing since I had never thought about the words truth and honesty meaning two different things.

Overall, I enjoyed this class and learning about different ethical dilemmas that professionals and companies have had to face in both the past and present. It was interesting to study how these professionals reacted to these different ethical situations from when it began through their crisis communications until it ended. 

When Funny Goes Too Far

Super Bowl ads are known to be funny and the best of the best commercials that air on television. People who aren’t even avid football fans will sit down for hours during the big game to watch the commercials. The issue is that sometimes advertisers go a little too far to come across as “funny” to viewers, which ends up ruining the company’s image to consumers. The most controversial commercial from the 2011 Super Bowl was Groupon’s “Save the Money” Tibet ad.

The commercial starts off with sad instrumental music playing in the background while showing videos of Tibetan mountains, architecture and children. While the sad music is still playing, award-winning actor Timothy Hutton states that “the people of Tibet are in trouble and their very culture is in jeopardy.” The beginning buildup of the ad causes viewers to believe that this is a heartwarming commercial that is meant to aid the people of Tibet who are “in trouble.” Then, a Tibetan man walks toward the camera, and the viewers see Hutton sitting at a restaurant table while the Tibetan man serves him curry. Hutton proceeds by saying, “but they still whip up an amazing fish curry,” and he goes on to talk about Groupon’s deal where guests can save a whopping 30 bucks at a Chicago restaurant serving Tibetan cuisine.

This commercial caused viewers to be outraged, because it was seen as being done in poor taste since it inappropriately joked about the suffering of Tibetans. Groupon’s CEO, Andrew Mason, responded immediately to all of the negative feedback by blogging on the Groupon website. He stated that the ad campaign’s main purpose was to “bring more funding and support” to social activism for organizations that the company donates to, which includes The Tibet Fund (along with a few others). Dozens of consumers commented on the blog entry saying that the commercial did not come across as an effective way to spread awareness for these social causes, but instead offended them since it seemed as if Groupon took other people’s misfortunes lightly. The audience was confused by the commercial since it didn’t make the organizations that Groupon was donating to apparent enough. Others commented that a company should not have to explain an ad, since the audience should automatically understand it and if they don’t then the ad campaign failed. There were a few positive comments saying that the ads were good because it told the truth about the apathy of Americans, which is what the commercial was supposed to be poking fun at (apparently). The problem with this is not every viewer knew about Groupon’s mission to help nonprofit organizations before the ad aired.

Mason initially defended the commercials for the “Save the Money” ad campaign, but after receiving more negative comments from the media and consumers he changed sides. He decided to blame Crispin Porter & Bogusky (CP&B) for creating the ad and also himself for trusting CP&B as Groupon’s ad partner.

The whole ad campaign was obviously an awful idea. CP&B is known for its edginess with poking fun at companies including Dominos. Dominos ran an ad campaign that poked fun at the fact that people thought their pizza was awful, but it also explained they revamped their recipe which consumers now love. This campaign was funny but also effective. CP&B tried using this same tactic with Groupon, but instead of poking fun at Groupon, it seemed they joked about people suffering. It’s like they say common sense is unfortunately the least common of all the senses; if Mason had more of this sense this ad campaign probably would have never launched.