Historically, piecemeal public-service ads have trod cautiously so as not to alienate a core constituency—gun owners themselves, some 30 percent of Americans. They’ve employed inconsistent strategies, sometimes urging gun owners to “lock it up,” other times decrying feeble government regulation. Mixed messages threaten to undercut the impact of these PSAs, and soft targets can make for mealymouthed calls to action. Thoughtful, measured arguments aren’t always the right fit for this medium, which usually requires a villain, like a Big Tobacco. “For us, that starts and stops with the NRA,” Sam Shepherd, the global executive creative director of Leo Burnett, told me.
Mac Schwerin
November 11, 2022
The Ad Industry’s Plan to Fix America’s Gun Crisis
[Interesting stuff in this article. It’s a look into the smartest minds of the enemy.
This at least partially explains the long time blame on the gun manufactures who “care more about profits than children’s lives.” The slogan writers know they need a villain and they have been trying out the NRA and the manufactures.
For some reason criminals as villains are not acceptable. Is it because criminal are their natural ally in the fight against private gun ownership? If the criminals did not exist there would not be a publicly defendable need to restrict gun ownership.—Joe]
If the criminals did not exist there would not be a publicly defendable need to restrict gun ownership.
Not sure if that’s the strong argument you’re hoping for, Joe. That’s on par with “Assume a spherical horse of uniform density” or “I’m only overweight because of all the gosh-darned gravity”.
Actually, I think it’s the other way around. The existence of criminals, in and out of government, is a major reason why gun ownership (also known as “the right to self defense using effective tools”) is necessary.
There is of course also the right to self-defense against non-human hazards, which also requires the right to possess and bear effective tools.
I think we need to cancel out the triple negatives:
If the criminals DO exist there IS a publicly defendable need to restrict gun ownership.
Or…
If the criminals did not exist there IS a publicly defendable need to ENCOURAGE gun ownership.
I don’t think either of those are what Joe was intending to convey. We need either one more negative or one less.
I’m sure the most galling thing for these clowns is that the two most effective real gun safety programs are Project Child Safe and Eddie Eagle which were created by the NSSF and NRA. Heck, the NSSF training material is so good Moms Demand Action got caught using their slide deck.
“Criminals” is a pretty faceless enemy, unless you’ve personally been victimized and saw the criminal who did it. It’s much easier to identify with a specific enemy: “Orange Man Bad”, “NRA”, “Big Pharma”.
Didn’t we just have a post on how 38% of Americans aren’t believing media anymore? With 4% yearly growth rate?
Is this just Madison avenue trying to get some more Bloomberg money?
The real problem is getting the dopamine hit the way you want the public attitude to move. How you going to get that against something when everyone else in your industry (Hollywood), is using them as a tool of good?
Hollywood has been trying this for years by never having the hero pick up the gun of the dead bad guy he just killed. Even though he’s out of bullets and down to just his toe-nail clippers.
Everyone just thinks it’s stupid hollywood. Suspends believe for a moment. And gets on with their reason for watching it in the first place. (Nothing better to do.)
Anyone with half a brain knows gun control can’t be done. Anyone paying them to try is a marked sucker.
Rigged courts seem to be their best play these days. But even those are evaporating.
“The real problem is getting the dopamine hit the way you want the public attitude to move…Hollywood has been trying this for years by never having the hero pick up the gun of the dead bad guy he just killed. Even though he’s out of bullets and down to just his toe-nail clippers.”
Doesn’t seem to be working:
https://abc13.com/deadly-home-invasion-break-in-katy-windmoor-drive-police-activity-suspect-shoots-his-accomplice/12441832/
Home invasion suspect shot accomplice before he was killed by homeowner’s son
KATY, Texas (KTRK) — A home invasion suspect was shot and killed inside a Katy home overnight, and deputies believe he accidently shot his own accomplice before his death…
There were three people inside the home at the time — a mother and her two adult sons.
Sheriff Ed Gonzalez said two men dressed in body armor kicked the front door down. The victims told investigators that the suspects were pounding on the door, identifying themselves as Houston police officers.
That’s when the sons got up to see what was happening.
Gonzalez said for unknown reasons, when the suspects got inside, they began shooting immediately.
When the adult sons confronted them, one of the suspects began firing toward them. That’s when Gonzalez said the suspect may have inadvertently shot his own accomplice. The wounded man dropped his pistol as he tried to flee, Gonzalez said.
One of the sons said he grabbed the pistol off the floor and started firing, fatally shooting the suspect that initially began shooting at them.
Welcome to Texas, where the “felony murder law” means that if you’re a party to a felony, and someone dies in the course of that crime, all the accomplices get charged with murder.
So, first a thug gets shot by his co-thug. Then he and the getaway driver are going to get charged with the murder of the ventilated co-thug.
Well, thug 1, who shot thug 2, isn’t going to be charged with anything since he got a free trip to the morgue, courtesy of one of the home owner’s kids.
Now thug 2 and the getaway driver – thug 3 – surely can be up for felony, but so far, no one’s seen hide nor hair of them.
Funny! Good on them kids!
To bad they weren’t able to John Wick the whole crew!
This is not really new either. Big Media promoted people like John Dillinger and Bonnie & Clyde. Gallons of ink were poured out over their exploits. Fortunes were made reporting their deeds.