Clever way to draw attention to the climate chance issue or blatant use of scare tactics? According to Treehugger, the Jack and Jill ad is one of four print ads, two billboards, and a television spot in an ad campaign by the U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change.
The televised spot features a father reading a bedtime story to his daughter about the the impact of Climate Change
Britain’s Advertising Standards Association has “rebuked” the ad campaign, stating that it is misleading. Treehugger reports:
It says the ads should have been “phrased more tentatively.” Does it strike anyone else as ridiculous that a media advisory board is determining whether or not scientific findings are accurate or not? Whether or not the ads scare kids is one thing–whether or not they’re factually accurate shouldn’t be determined by a body with no expertise on the subject. Would you trust the MPAA to parse nuclear physics?
Enjoy the video!
Personally, I see nothing wrong with the ad itself, aside from being a bit melodramatic — startling even, but it definitely catches attention and may get people at least talking about Climate Change. Such sorts of apocalyptic messaging likely are not the most useful means to encourage a rational dialogue about climate change, but… since many adults aren’t listening to expert adults’ “rational dialog about Climate Change,” maybe they’ll listen to their children’s concern about the world they inherit. With its doe-eyed blond and drowning animals, is the ad too much?
The TV spot only garnered a “rebuke,” and also was found to be factually accurate. The UK government stands by its campaign.
See the Guardian for more analysis on the debacle.