If you live in Ontario you may have received this bit of Bell Canada promotion in the mail. Click on the picture at the right to see the full image.
I generally think of myself as being pretty good at analyzing advertising and figuring out both the intended audience (seldom me) and the success at reaching them.
This one though has me thinking.
At first glance it seems obvious that they are appealing to parents of younger children, offering to filter ‘net access so that the kiddies don’t see dangerous or distasteful content.
You know, porn, bomb-making instructions, gratuitous violence… that sort of thing.
The problem is that the picture doesn’t show any of those things. It shows a grade seven or eight biology textbook. So who would this ad be aimed at?
Our friends do generally try to monitor the media that their kids consume, but they are more concerned with seeing that things are age appropriate. In other words, they would be less concerned with breasts, than the manner in which the breasts were presented.
Even my conservative relatives are bright enough to understand the difference between a biology lesson (at least a heterosexual one) and pornography. If anything they would probably encourage the former.
So is this ad aimed only at the far-right whackos who believe that keeping kids entirely in the dark will save them from ever discovering sex? The small minority of people who really truly do cut out the naughty bits
(and references to evolution) from their children’s schoolbooks?
That seems to be a pretty narrow demographic.
No, I think that this ad had a much different intent. The elimination of the ovary picture (left) might suggest conservative “family values”, but unless I’m mistaken the other major organ that has been cut out is the poor woman’s stomach (right). Unless this is a commentary on the Internet and bulemia I can’t see any reason for that!
My guess is that this advertising insert is a joke. A joke on Bell who obviously didn’t pay attention to what the Agency was giving them. A joke on the fearful parents who think that a major corporation can take over their parenting responsibilities. A joke on the parents who don’t realize that their kids are smart and savvy enough to get around any parental block – Peacefire.org is a good starting point – or who will just go to their friend’s house where the ‘net is unfiltered.
Somewhere in some advertising agency is a designer who understands the absurdity of this whole idea, and who took a chance and demonstrated that a lot of parents, and lot of people at Bell, really have no idea about what the Internet is, or how their kids use it.
Can we protect kids from sex? Coincidentally the San Francisco Chronicle’s Mark Morford discussed just that topic today, and concludes, based on some serious research, that chastity just hasn’t caught on, and what’s more probably never will.
“Did you see this story? It’s the latest finding, the outcome of the most recent and quite thorough nonpartisan study, from Texas A&M no less, surveying teens in 29 Texas schools and all proving once again that these insidious and dangerous programs have absolutely zero effect on curbing teen sexual appetites and activity, and, if anything, actually induce teens to have more sex.”
PS. More great Biblical inspiration at The Brick Testament