Boo! Does shock advertising actually work?

Sookio Bootcamp 2021 alumna Julia Cieslak delves into shockvertising, to establish how effective it really is - and explore the alternatives.

What is shockvertising?

Shock advertising - shockvertising for short - is a type of advertising that sets out to deliberately startle its audience by violating social norms or personal ideals.

It is often used by non-profit organisations and in public health campaigns to attract attention to taboo subjects and societal issues that are typically ignored.

Given their often controversial and sometimes disturbing nature, shock adverts can be incredibly successful or cause a backlash, sometimes with a thin line between the two.

Two recent examples you may have seen are from Channel 4 ahead of their coverage of the Paralympic Games, and their series Naked Attraction. The bus ad was pulled after multiple complaints.

Is shockvertising effective?

According to The Journal of Advertising Research, shocking content in adverts significantly increases the viewer’s attention. Moreover, it can make the advert more memorable and effective at achieving the desired response.

Shock adverts can be appropriate for some organisations and charitable causes more than others. For example, charities that advocate for important, real-life issues can find shock adverts to be an effective way in bringing their issue to the forefront of a person’s mind.

Since charity budgets are often limited, shock adverts can have a higher impact with a smaller spend than standard adverts.

However, choosing to go down the shock advert route should not be taken lightly as the potential reputational repercussions of an offensive advert can be significant.

Moreover, some argue that the third sector is saturated with similar types of ‘shocking’ and emotionally manipulative ads, resulting in shock fatigue.

As a result, the ads become background noise, without significant impact on the audience – which misses its original purpose.

WWF is a great example of an organisation with effective shock adverts. Their advertising is often based on visual content with very little writing - the image itself is enough to send a clear and thought-provoking message.

Their anti-pollution campaign shown above is an example of shockvertising done right; it contains an image which is clearly not real and therefore more striking among other advertising.

The message is very clear – WWF is trying to raise awareness of the waste material that ends up in rivers and pollutes the waters. In the corner of the image, there is a quote with simple statistics: “A single tin of paint can pollute millions of litres of water”, which reinforces the message.

Most instances where shock adverts have failed involved content that is too distressing or offensive. An example of a health-related advert which can be potentially offensive and upsetting is Pancreatic Cancer Action.

The intentions were good, trying to show that the odds of survival with pancreatic cancer are much lower than with other common cancers.

However, it boiled down to a somewhat insensitive approach towards a very sensitive subject. The advert can be understandably upsetting to sufferers of other common cancers, suggesting that their illness is of lesser importance or brings less hardship.

It’s worth noting that the effectiveness of shock adverts isn’t always clear.

In healthcare sector in particular, the content may be highly offensive or graphic, but it does ultimately cause people to take the desired action.

For example, NHS “Get Unhooked” anti-smoking campaign depicts smokers being pierced through the mouth with a fish hook.

It was criticised by the Advertising Standards Agency as likely to “frighten and distress children”. Yet, interestingly, The Department of Health said an anti-smoking helpline and website were contacted more than 820,000 times while the campaign ran.

Therefore, whilst the campaign content was condemned, it did achieve the intended outcome.

What could have been done to lessen the negative publicity around it? Could better ad placement have made it less controversial? For example, it could have been shown on late-night TV to minimise the likelihood of children viewing the distressing content.

How to do shockvertising the right way

• If the content is too shocking and distressing, people might look away or change the TV channel, leading to lower engagement. In addition, if you show an extreme case, your content may be less relatable, encouraging people to think “I’m not that bad, it’s not that serious”.

• Shockvertising should not be used on a regular basis. If the audience is repeatedly exposed to the same shocking content, it will gradually become easier to ignore. Whilst shock adverts are good at sparking initial thoughts, as an issue matures, organisations should start providing messages that show the audience how they can take action. Otherwise the shock element wears off.

• Shocking content should not be used without a strong reason – otherwise it’s more likely to become too controversial and ineffective. Shocking adverts should reflect serious real-life issues.

• All possible interpretations of the content should be considered. It’s better to have one short message rather than to have to justify your bold statement, like in the pancreatic cancer advert.

What if shockvertising isn’t right for your brand?

If you decide that shockvertising is not suitable for your organisation, there are alternatives which should still help you stand out.

One way to gain attention is to unite the audience in a positive manner around your cause.

Breast Cancer Now and their “Wear It Pink” campaign is a great example of that. The aim is to get as many people as possible to wear pink (the colour associated with breast cancer) for a day to raise awareness of the illness and to raise money for the charity. This visual, recognisable touch makes the supporters feel united around the cause and rallies people up to take positive action.

Other charities, also focusing on breast cancer, have opted to use humour.

Whilst you have to be careful with the messaging, a lighter approach to a serious issue can be refreshing for the audience, and make the organisation or cause seem more approachable.

A great example of this is the Know Your Lemons Foundation, which uses lemons to raise awareness of the different signs of breast cancer. The organisation doesn’t show you real photos of what breast cancer may physically look like, as that could scare the audience away and discourage from regularly checking their breasts.

Instead, they demonstrate the same ideas through the use of lemons, which is less scary - but still memorable because of the humorous and light depiction of breasts.

Shock advertising gets you remembered. But its effectiveness depends on how well an organisation understands its target audience and what advertising will resonate with them. Ultimately, the decision to use shock advertising should not be made lightly – and there are plenty of other options if you choose to be cautious.

This piece was written by one of the students on our second Sookio Bootcamp, a week of remote work experience for 20 young marketers. Read the other blog posts about BBC Tokyo Olympics and Dove Reverse Selfie campaigns.