Pablo the drugs mule dog

Christian - 06:29 06 January 2009

To me the comedian takes away the seriousness of the issue. How powerfull will advertising be against your best friends or those around you when they are doing it and egging you on? i my opinion the advert should have focused harder on a key point that they brought up, its not the fact that 30% is coke 70% is who knows what- that is scary rather the fact that everyone reacts differently so even if your friends are ok, you might not be almost like russian roulette. Wouldnt people just search for information online rather than call someone?

Alex J - 18:56 06 January 2009

I can see why the comedic element might cause some people to disregard the more serious message it is trying to get across but nevertheless the creators needed to find some way to engage with a younger audience and appear less authoritative. I think they are trying to move away from the nanny state culture and appear more like an omniscient guardian figure rather than simply saying 'don't do coke coz it's well bad'. As for having a weak impact on those who are being egged on to do it by friends i would disagree. I think the advert is successfully targeted at those who are on the brink of trying coke and the information may well encourage them not to do so; those who are regular users will already be fully aware of the negative points brought up. Fair enough the phone number is pretty obsolete given that most young people are more comfortable finding information out online. Although, the voiceover at the end does mention the website not the phone number.

Richard - 17:45 12 January 2009

I agree with Alex on this one, shock advertising to this target audience doesnt always work as they've smartened up to it and know when to switch off, i think its a brave idea but i think it'll pay off

Joe - 15:54 13 January 2009

I am inclined to agree with Christian here. I'm not entirely sure humor is the best way to deal with the issue of drug use. For example, my flatmate just (completely unprompted) recalled and acknowledged that she 'liked' the ad - however, is fondness a desirable response to an anti-drug advert?

Richard - 20:00 13 January 2009

I think it is. Frank needs people to like and trust them in order to support those they help, otherwise they will just be lecturing them and will be ignored

Christian - 01:35 15 January 2009

A study by Martin Lindstrom on how our minds work against warning ads showed that to an existing user of any substance that triggers the 'reward' system in our brain (i.e. try it and like it) any warning against the use of the product is completely worthless. The advert will actually work against its original purpose. For instance, he provd that the cigarette warnings on the cigarette packs triggers the brain to want to smoke!

Richard - 11:52 15 January 2009

Like with the book you had on product placement not working, i bet i could find studies that show the opposite to this as well....

Christian - 20:53 15 January 2009

So are we implying that science is not acurate? if we can find proof for both sides of the argument then how do we really know if advertising (or product placement) really works? should the comment "dont know which half" be dont know if it works at all? I think advertising only works because we as consumers know that they dont work, if that makes any sense.

Richard - 17:28 18 January 2009

love the way you slipped your a"s in there.... the problem with these studies is that there is always a limit as to how much you can find out with the resources you have and there are always exceptions to what you find

Harriet B - 12:35 18 February 2009

I think this advert effectively targets the audience. It's taking a new approach on giving people a lot of information in one advert without lecturing. The humour does not deter from the serious nature of the topic although I do agree that it should focus more on the other substances that cocaine is cut with.

Sonia A - 10:48 19 February 2009

I think the advert works well at targeting the target audience, although it uses humour, the serious message about drugs is still evident. As most campaigns use shock tactics this is a welcome change, which in my opinion works as it shows the more typical effects rather than just the worst ones. I think it is a good way of informing young people about drugs and attempting to get them to get more information from a reliable source rather than just relying on friends/people who have done it before.

Abbie - 21:19 17 February 2010

Through using a somewhat controversial tone of comedy in relating to such a serious issue, I think this advert is easier to digest and more memorable than other government ad campaigns. On the other hand, using comedy, may be seen as reducing the seriousness of drug-use . Where shock is a technique usually used in public service ads, the problem arises that the subject matter may appear more distant and unrealistic to the audience and hard to relate to. However with this advert, the use of celebirty/comedian David Mitchell, may create a connection with it's young target audience and help draw attention to it's important content.

You must be logged in in order to write a review

Review this ad