What do you think of this ad?
 

Hi everyone. I was reading a magazine today and came across this ad:

<img src="http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0PwD9An8SnUdoINMItQDmmFQEpnJLSrUw9B5BVfEwC2eY2DZcftLC4BH5bFy!HBS8EDy3rfNlBl2wWrHm!YTqYrn4tBjBvw3X/mag_ad.jpg?dc=4675485721448227346">

In case you can't read it, the ad says:

<b>95% of people in the world with HIV don't know they have it.

Are you putting us on?
-Kenneth Cole</b>

I looked at the Kenneth Cole website (Kenneth Cole is a fashion designer) and apparently they are big <a href="http://www.kennethcole.com/scripts/aboutus/links.asp">supporters of charities and organizations</a>. All their advertising seems to be centered around shocking quotations and the response 'Are you putting us on?'

<img src="http://www.kennethcole.com/images/pics/kc_08.jpg">

I admit it took me a little while to make the connection. Kenneth Cole supports AIDS charities through money raised by people buying their clothes, hence the response 'Are you putting us on?'.

My question is, do people think this is a clever, ethical form of advertising? No doubt raising money for charities is a good thing, but the ad I saw in that magazine repulses me. Something about the two beautiful people in classic 'distant, uncaring' poses, and the shocking quote about HIV statistics, just throws me right off.

What do people think?

I have long held that people should be charitable for charity's sake, not for the sake of telling everyone, "Hey, look how charitable I am!" It really cheapens the supposedly altruistic gesture of charity.

Regarding these ads, I thought "Are you putting us on?" referred to condoms. How that related to Kenneth Cole, I didn't know. I thought maybe they were marketing some chic new brand of rubber.

Overall, I guess an act of charity is good. And raising awareness is good. So while I don't like the idea of them touting their charitable work, overall it's worth it if it keeps them giving and educating.

ALthough i feel the advert is clever in its approach, i don't feel the fact that they themselves (Kennith Cole) are advertising their clothing at the same time is quite right.

I have to agree with the last two posters. Its great that they are doing this charitable work, but charity so that they can advertise more isnt the greatest thing in the world, nor is shock-value merely for the sake of shock-value or selling things.

I wonder if we would find the ad any better if the photo were HIV-related? At the moment the subject of the photo and the 'meaning' behind the quote have nothing to do with each other.

Was it Benneton, years ago, which used photos of starving children or war crimes to promote their clothing? I see this is a similar thing, but the irrelevence of the photo is still off-putting.

I don't have an issue with the photo of the ad, I have an issue with the company doing a couple things...

Either way, it's good a charity is getting money.. but how much? It all comes down to if the company honestly cares or not. I may be cynical, but I have trouble seeing this as anything more than a marketing ploy (given, I haven't actually investigated the company myself). If they're using this as a marketing ploy, then I think it's shit. The advertising campaign sort of points to this, unfortunately. If this company actually truly cares about the charities, and gives money to them.. you'd think they'd say it differently than their current way. The ads seem like they are giving a minimal amount to charities so they can use the "we give to charities" line to make more money.

I dunno, just doesn't seem kosher to me...

compare the ads to the KnowHIVAIDS.org site.

http://www.knowhivaids.org/learn_ads.html

I'm of the opinion so long as they are getting the mesage out is the most important thing. Whoever does their ad copy (I don't recall at the moment) figured out a clever way to tie it in. To me just more noise...

Woah, I must be wierd.

See, I have a pretty negative stereotype of skinny little models like that... like they're all strung out on drugs and infected with god-knows-what. My first reaction was "of course they has HIV!" I see the point though, and I think's a good idea. Rasing awareness about HIV is pretty importaint these days.

I don't see it as raising money for a charity, which Kenneth Cole is well known for, he also does charity work for breast cancer charities I beleive. I see this is a public service announcement which desperately needs saying.

:jumps up on soapbox:
I remember sitting in a biology lecture hall in Medford Mass in the early 80slearning about a disease with no cure that affects mainly the gay communuty, but it wasn't outside the realm of possibility that if could affect the non gay community.

A year or two later, we got pamphets, with condoms, that basically said the only sure way to protect yourself from AIDS was to wear a condom every single time, because you never know.

More than 20 years later, we KNOW how you get AIDS. We also KNOW that you can't always tell who has it and who doesnt. People are having way more sex than they ever did, especially the under 25 set, with more parters, but yet, people still have unprotected sex. Have people gone daft? Or do they just beleive that it can't happen to them?

While I would prefer this ad used non high fashion mode waifs types and rather used more athletic looking people to drive their point home, it's still a valid point. An ad like this should inspire conversation... Which it has, unfortunately, it's inspiring the wrong conversation.

If this ad makes one person choose safer sex -then it's absolutely done it's job.

I wonder if this ad does promote safe sex? I don't think the skinniness of the models (well, the female one) has anything to do with HIV. In my opinion the ad isn't promoting HIV awareness, it's promoting the brand. Instead of thinking 'I'll wear a condom next time', I think 'That's a cheap, unethical way of advertising'.

Other ads which are on the Kenneth Cole site are about encouraging voting (presumably in the American system, since Australia doesn't have voluntary voting), and the models/photo has nothing to do with voting. Again, it's just some waif-like female model and a half-rugged, half-pretty boy male model just... standing.

It seems all of us agree that it's a rather cheap way of promoting a good cause.

It's good to see that the fashion people care about more stuff than cocaine and fuckin' models.

I don't... but at least they do.

You guys/gals seem to see Kenneth Cole exploiting HIV to sell his brand, while I see Kenneth Cole using his brand to bring awareness about HIV and other problems. I see no difference in this ad that I do in the Beer Commercial where the guy slashes his tires so he doesn't drive drunk and they add "please drink responsibly" near the end of the Ad. They don't HAVE to put that, but they do. Sure it's a Beer Ad, but it's also a don't drink and drive ad.

Shameful self-promotion.

How is it self promotion if it raises awareness for a serious issue?

The age group that kenneth Cole targets, is the age group that has the highest percentage of new AIDS cases....

Exactly. It's not advertising, per se. Sure they'll make money from it, but that's not the major point here. It's making you aware of the fact that they support this charity.
Are they going to sell more clothes from this? Yeah.
Did you know they supported AIDS research before that ad came out? No.
It works for everyone? Yeah.

I really don't think that there is anything shameful about it. the more they sell, the more is donated, end of story. I can't think of anything more important than finding a cure for AIDS. to me it's more important than cancer.

I'm missing something in the ad where it's chest thumping and saying that they are supporting AIDS research. Unless you research the company, I'm not seeing in the ad that says they are a supporter of the charity. I see this as nothing more than a PSA for AIDS education, which is sorely needed.

One of their lines is called REACTION -- I'd expect their ads to push the envelope a little and have an campaign that elicits a reaction out of people. I would prefer that the reaction be to get people talking about AIDS, rather than that this is self serving for the company.

I think it would be brilliant if it was an ad campaign for a condom company

A simple, some of Kenneth Cole's profits go to HIV funding and factual information about HIV would be better than trying to shock in advertisements. Don't know about anyone else but it doesn't make me want to buy the product.

I like it, it's making money basically off making money for Charity.

Nothing boosts sales better than making people feel like they're more important than they really are. That's how advertising works.

Maybe I'm immune to it, I had to scroll back up after typing that because I didn't remember what company it was for. I don't even know where I would go to buy Kenneth Cole clothing.

Nothing boosts sales better than making people feel like they're more important than they really are. That's how advertising works.

Maybe I'm immune to it, I had to scroll back up after typing that because I didn't remember what company it was for. I don't even know where I would go to buy Kenneth Cole clothing.

Nothing boosts sales better than making people feel like they're more important than they really are. That's how advertising works.

Maybe I'm immune to it, I had to scroll back up after typing that because I didn't remember what company it was for. I don't even know where I would go to buy Kenneth Cole clothing. If someone wants to jump in and tell me either a: I should know that they have their own stores, or b: they sell stuff through <name of store here,> I think that both prove my point, if I was, in fact, making a point at all. I don't know.

i think its a shame that the woman in the the add doesnt have bigger tits

I have to agree with cookkee. I also think thak society for the most part has become jaded and needs to shocked sometimes to get a reaction.

I want to know how they figure out 95% of a group of people of unknown size.

I understand people's anger at the way the ad was done or why people might be pissed that they're using AIDs as a marketing campaign.

But still, to be fair, I don't care how it's done - people need to be aware of things like this. If their favorite clothing company telling them is the only way they'll find out, so be it. If a chance at profits will make Kenneth Cole donate to AIDs foundations, I'd rather see it as a good thing. I'd rather them use AIDs as a shameless marketing ploy while they donate to helpful causes than for them to not donate at all.

Make the best of it :)

First thought: "Is that two guys?"

Second thought: "95%!?!?!!!!"

hey, anything that puts money into the hands of researchers is ok with me

[QUOTE=Dorito2]Something about the two beautiful people in classic 'distant, uncaring' poses, and the shocking quote about HIV statistics, just throws me right off. QUOTE]

This is why I like it. It's shocking and it makes you go whoa if the rich and famous have AIDS then the guy I'm going home with tonight could have it too. It's easy to think if someone isn't "dirty" then they probably don't have it.

The question of if they should use charity for advertising is a tough one. I think though that getting the message out there is also a form of charity and they have been quite successful with that. If nothing else they got us thinking.

heres my view on charity:
If it makes you happy because youre helping others, its good
If it doesnt make you happy, and you still do it, its good, because youre sacrificing
If it makes you happy because it in some way benefits you or builds your pride...mmm i dont like it too much

now the add: the part that repulses me is that they are almost trying to guilt us into buying their clothes. 'Are you putting us on? because if you aren't, you aren't helping AIDS!!'...Fuck you, I'll buy whatever the hell i want thank you, and THEN donate to whichever charity i see fit.

yea, what the hell!!! if they dont know they have it, howd they get polled?!?

sorry about two back to back posts

Well there are things you could do to figure that out - like perhaps they did an anonymous poll of HIV/AIDs patients asking how often they have unprotected sex. They could then determine a rough estimate of how many people may have gotten HIV/AIds from them and compare that to the number of people actually diagnosed with it each year.

Of course, this is pretty far fetched considering that the epidemic is sweeping the entire world. A poll like this for everyone in the world seems highly unlikely.

Yeah, I agree with you, Dorito. Off the topic a bit, but I've always hated it how magasines advertise about how being healthy is good, but then they have pictures of skinny little models. Or how they say normal sized people are "pluses". Sad. This Kenneth Cole company needs to have a better commercial. If they say something shocking, they need to have a shocking picture with it. Not some floozies dressed up in expensive clothes.

atleast the good looking people will make more ppl read the caption also

Pro: It brings a serious social message to people in a very popular medium.

Con: It kind of tarnishes that message by saying "if you hate HIV, BUY OUR STUFF!!" :D :thumbsup:

It does seem a bit unethical to combine an ad and a kind of public service anouncement, but I think it can be forgiven since they are doing something helpful regardless. Better than the other ridiculous fashion ads for overpriced clothes, it also tells you not to screw around. Thank you, Kenneth Cole.

I think it would be OK if Kenneth Cole were to put a "disclaimer" of sorts at the bottom of the ad stating that they were a supporter of AIDS charities. Maybe there's an ethical problem there I don't see, but the Ad was just confusing to me, as I didn't know they supported said charities.

I think someone needs a sandwich.

You may think that the 95% number is high, but you need to consider only there are 1-2 million people living with aids in north america, compared to 25-30 million people(7.5% of the population) living with aids in Sub-Saharan Africa where this ad will never be seen. We need to keep people informed about aids, tell them what it is, what it will do to you, how you can prevent it and where you can get the supplies to prevent it free and anonymously . In a country like Africa it was already wide spread when discovered and it is going to be a much harder job to stablize the infection rate in those countries because the they just don't have the resources to inform and prevent new infections although they are working VERY hard with some success(I think/hope). I'm not sure the % of people that don't know they are infected in North America, but I'm damn sure it's not a low number.

I going off topic a bit so I'll save the rest for another thread. Again, I see nothing wrong with these ads I could care less if about his brand, but if the ad makes one person say "hmm 95% That's a big number, I think I'll get tested" then the ad was worth it.

Edit: I wanna make clear when I say AIDS I mean both HIV and AIDS.