Thursday, February 9, 2012

Digitally Amputating Limbs?

What are your thoughts on the ad from New York's health department's attempt to get people to eat less?  In an effort to get people to choose smaller portions, this ad was created. The man's leg was digitally amputated. 



Do you think the ad is impactful?  Will it have the intended effect?  Should the ad agency have found someone who actually suffered from diabetes and who actually had their leg amputated or does it not make a difference?
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

5 comments:

  1. krivFebruary 10, 2012 at 10:09 PM

    I believe the ad is trying to raise awareness about the long term effects of bad eating habits. Ultimately it's a public service type announcement, with the goal of helping people improve their health and quality of life. If it was an add that was trying to sell something I think that the fact that amputation was digitally done would be more offensive to me. It's hard to put my finger on exactly why. It would be like the ads for beauty products that that feature woman who have been digitally touched up and are not actually a reflection of reality.

    ReplyDelete
  2. HSFebruary 13, 2012 at 12:37 PM

    I think that the ad is impactful, but I believe that it would have been more impactful if the amputee were a real individual who had to have their limb removed due to type 2 diabetes. The ad is also a bit too subtle in that the "amputated" limb is de-emphasized by the placement of a color image over the area of interest in the black and white photo.

    As a child of two diabetic parents I have a personal perspective on this ad. After watching both of my parents struggle with this disease for over a decade both seem to have filed the concern of losing a limb under the "it won't happen to me" category. I think more needs to be done in order to bring this real risk to light and that this ad is a step in the right direction

    ReplyDelete
  3. MCFebruary 27, 2012 at 1:08 PM

    The ad catches the audience's eye and without prior knowledge that this individual is just an actor and not a real victim of diabetes, it is impactful. The ad shows the simple fact that the issues concerning our society today and the impacts that may come out of our diets are right there in front of our face. The ad has made its intended effect and now we should promote awareness and make this more of a concern for our people.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousOctober 16, 2012 at 5:08 PM

    I definitely think that this ad is impactful. Upon first seeing it I definitely thought that I need to take action to ensure that this doesn't increase. The only issue is that this is a problem that forms out of long term and those are the hardest habits to change. I do not think it mattered that the person in the ad was not actually affected by diabetes because it was still promoting awareness of the issue.

    ReplyDelete
  5. UnknownDecember 7, 2012 at 11:22 AM

    The link does not appear to work anymore. However, I find it appalling that the government can justify spending tax dollars on ads that place fear in the public. Although they believe that their intentions are good, it's not the governments place to tell you what you should and shouldn't do, let alone force you to buy smaller drinks. Their effors would be much better spent giving tax benefits to companies that try to promote healthy habits. For example, if a company gets rid of soda fountains, perhaps their tax rate will be 1 or 2% less than companies that choose not to. When they choose to spend money on advertisements like this, they are trying to gain power and influence based on fear. Fear-based power is much weaker than power obtained through respect and knowledge. That being said, this ad certainly might affect some people and get them to stop drinking soda. However, an ad that presents unbiased scientific data about how bad soda really is will probably have more of an impact on people.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)