The DASO and advertising

The controversial DASO poster. Source: 10and5.com

click to enlarge

Firstly, let us look at Brand DA. The DA has gone to great lengths to sell itself as an all-inclusive, equal brand that avoids controversy, ignores racial lines and targets supporters of all creed and colour. It's very much evident in its most recent election campaign slogan, "Service Delivery for ALL." The focus being on ALL.

This viewpoint is constantly reinforced by Helen Zille, arguably the party's most vocal mouthpiece. To avoid drawing negative attention to the party, Zille, and by extension, the DA, has been reluctant to get involved in petty racial debates for the sake of debating.

Hope and optimism

Furthermore, the DA, as analysed by local strategic design agency Coley Porter Bell in its "Visuals Futures" project from 2009, has been using the international design trends of hope and optimism to spur their extended stance of equality and inclusivity.

With this in mind, let's look at the piece of communication that was produced:

The poster features a semi-naked inter-racial couple in a suggestive embrace with the tagline, "In OUR future, you wouldn't look twice".

Obviously, a piece of communication that was distinctly made with the mission to shock. Or to "get young people talking", as the DASO admits.

Intention to shock

This intention to shock implies that the DASO believes that the majority of viewers are not comfortable with the inter-racial image and de facto implying that we are all mostly racists (and it is not), thus proving its point of a split and racist nation and hence why the DA is required - in my view a self-fulfilling prophecy, as well as one about 15 years too late.

So why is this wrong in an advertising context, and why is it wrong in a Brand DA context?

Media and advertising agencies have unprecedented power over the masses, and their ability to influence both our values and our viewpoints is an extremely potent and profitable one. Their main product to their clients is to influence the public to make certain choices and have certain opinions, and they get paid to do this every day. As one of the top creative directors I have worked with in my career said, "It's our job to inspire the world through creativity to get people to consider our clients' products."

This advert does not inspire. In fact, it does the opposite - it further polarises. You just have a look at the close-to-a-thousand comments on the image, defeating the purpose of good advertising.

Reeks of ANCYL tactics

This advert has belied the crux of the brand that the DA has been building for years. Pushing a campaign that is sensationalist and attention-seeking in its thinking and in its execution reeks of ANCYL tactics. We are a country with problems - we all know that - but instead of focusing on the problems (AIDS, crime, etc), how about we focus on the good and extend that to give a message of hope - one that Brand DA has been pushing all along?

A simple way to have avoided all the minefields would have been to show an interracial couple holding hands, or an interracial group of friends drinking beers together, with a tagline reading, "A nation working together is better for ALL." Still not a great ad, but at least not shaking the tree to see what falls.

When attempting to affect change, it's easier shock than to inspire, but where would we be if everyone took the easy road?

Be better.

Note: This was initially supposed to be an editorial for 10and5.com. But after a discussion between Uno de Waal (@unodewaal), the other co-founder, and I, we decided that 10and5 does not do commentary - we just showcase. I decided to post this as an opinion piece in my personal capacity as someone who's worked at showcasing and curating South African creativity for over four years and who's been working in advertising agencies for about six.

For more:

• 10and5.com: Controversial new campaign for the DA Student Organisation
  
• Daily Maverick: The DA youth poster that caused the storm