Greenpeace has released a 90-second commercial that takes dead aim at SUV drivers.
While I appreciate the cheekiness of this ad, I ‘m not sure this is the correct approach. Shame is a powerful motivator, but I think this type of moralizing only emboldens SUV drivers (labeling them all as pricks may not win people over to your side of the debate). I recognize that global warming and sustainability are the most pressing issues of the 21st century, but I think the economic argument is a much more effective way to push the ordinary citizen into action.
I’m interested to hear what Spacing Wire readers have to say about this commercial.
19 comments
Kind of a low-blow. I’m not happy with people who choose SUVs either, but that doesn’t give me the right to abuse them. Honestly through the entire ad I felt everyone BUT the man in question were pricks. Spitting into someone’s coffee? That’s disgusting.
I was expecting worse moralizing (like a PETA ad) — but it’s pretty tame, and funny. The key thing is it’s British, and their sense of humour is different than North American sensibilities. I think it’ll be well received, and not galvanize anybody anymore than they already are.
I know that I don’t know what’s right and what’s wrong. If ever I seem for a cause, in the back of my mind I’m full of doubt.
I think this commercial might reach people at the far end of the totally ignorant spectrum.
My mom drives an SUV and she’s a wonderful lady.
Ok, to the above commenter, of course the actions of the co-workers were exaggerated, it is a commercial and a metaphor to boot.
And while the commercial itself may not work to actually change specific SUV drivers over to buying hybrids, I think it makes real steps to de-glamorize them. Car manufactures sell cars based on emotion, especially SUVs which are never taken off of city streets. They are sold with appeals to masculinity and luxury. It is time that they are sold in the opposite light.
It works the same with smoking, which had to be placed in an exaggerated negative light. Sure, not all smokers or SUV driver’s are assholes, but they are not all suave, sexy, virile and rich either.
Here’s a press release form Greenpeace:
Wednesday July 19th 2006
NEW GREENPEACE AD SLAMS GAS GUZZLERS
Film subverts TV tactics – BAFTA actress gives support
As the Motor Show opens and Britain bakes in soaring temperatures that the Met Office say might be linked to climate change, Greenpeace has launched a new film targeting gas guzzling 4x4s. Using the language, style and production values of traditional car adverts, the film challenges the image portrayed by the advertising industry of 4×4 drivers escaping their urban environment for the freedom of the open road. Greenpeace took advice from advertising industry insiders before producing the film.
The advert satirises the aspirational images and glossy marketing used by motor manufacturers to encourage car drivers to purchase an urban 4×4. In the film a city employee encounters distain from his fellow employees, but only at the end of the film does the viewer learn why – he owns a city gas guzzler. The ad ends with the line, ‘What does your car say about you?’
The film urges car buyers to think about the consequences of their choices and not be suckered by car industry advertising. In 2004 alone Ford spent over £18 million in the UK marketing Land Rovers as glamorous products for town and country. The company spent £3.2 million on marketing the vehicles to Londoners. Publicity material for the new Range Rover Sport boasts, ‘On-road it is astounding. There has never been a Land Rover so focused on awesome tarmac performance.’ This year’s motor show will see the launch of the first right-hand drive Hummer. Based on a war-fighting assault vehicle, the Hummer’s size and fuel consumption will make it a deadly addition to the fleet of Sports Utility Vehicles (SUVs) on the roads of our cities.
Last year Greenpeace occupied the Range Rover assembly line in Solihull, shutting it down for a day. For several months, Greenpeace volunteers have been clamping 4x4s with cardboard clamps, putting leaflets under windscreen wipers and fixing fake tax discs to windscreens that call for extra road tax for gas guzzling vehicles. One of the targeted cars belonged to Thandie Newton. Now BAFTA-winning Thandie has sold her BMW 4×4 and replaced it with a hybrid car. The star of ‘Crash’ has also written to dozens of other celebrities suggesting they think about doing the same.
Thandie Newton said: ‘As you know, extreme weather events are on the increase. Climate change, which is largely brought on by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, seriously threatens generations to come. That’s why I swapped my SUV for a fuel efficient Toyota Prius. I hope this film from Greenpeace will persuade others to do the same.’
John Sauven, Greenpeace communications director, said: ‘Confronting the car advertising industry has never been more important. As climate change threatens our existence on this planet we cannot let the advertisers off the hook. Showing images of urban 4x4s driving across an arctic wilderness is insane given that the polar ice caps are melting due to the inefficient use of fossil fuels. We need to challenge head on the language and images that make 4x4s attractive, exposing the reality when you get behind the wheel. That’s what this film is about.’
I like it, it makes a good point without being too offencive.
Some people have a genuine use for an SUV. (Like my uncle who lives in a rural area, and my pro-hockey cousin who lugs around a ton of hockey equipment.)
Most people don’t.
I like the commercial. (Except for the spitting bit, which makes me queasy.)
reminds me of a clip produced by an american group out of detroit (unfortunately, the name of the organization escapes me).
it’s a neat idea, i guess, but i didn’t really find it that funny. it was even bordering on lame, IMO.
m.
Battling issues with extremities will not work. I think it’s an ad that continues to cause me to see Greenpeace in a light of douchebaggery.
I’m fairly sure most products are sold on the premise that they themselves improve the buyer somehow, even however ridiculous this claim is. So selling a car on the idea that they glamourize the owner is little different from selling jeans on the idea they make the wearer look like a svelte model.
I whole-heartedly agree that ads portraying SUVs in natural environments are ridiculous considering most of them are for urban consumption, but this ad never addresses that. It more or less ignores the car altogether and focuses on personally attacking the driver.
Perhaps if the driver were doing all kinds of other wasteful things, I’d understand the point — that the ownership of a SUV may reflect other bad habits — but he’s merely going about his daily life like a normal person. So what? It’s perfectly OK to ostracize an otherwise ordinary, possibly nice and humane person for their *car*?
I know maybe I’m sounding a little excited over one ad, but I’m just afraid it might reflect an entire culture that thinks it’s ok to act without civility, for evils that are much less than others.
I’m not digging it. I spent most of the ad feeling sorry for the poor guy, and the punchline seemed pretty lame.
I think this ad might be doing more harm than good – it’s reinforcing the idea that people should buy a car based on its image. Buying a hybrid because it’s hip/trendy/whatever is just as bad as buying an SUV to look macho. As soon as it’s no longer trendy to drive a hybrid, the driver will trade it in for a sports car and we’re back to square one.
The fact is that most people who drive SUVs (most people who I know, at least) are very nice people. As Jacob says, some drivers actually need – or think they need – an SUV. Showing nice people getting abused by their peers because of the car they drive isn’t going to win these people over. What will win them over is showing them why they don’t actually need an SUV, and why owning one is a bad idea.
Who knows, though; maybe this will actually convince the masses to switch to less wasteful vehicles, and then they’ll be so impressed by the great fuel efficiency and ease of parking and warm fuzzies that they’ll renounce SUVs and everyone will live happily ever after.
My 2 cents are not one more cent should be spent on airing this commercial. I do think shame and guilt can work but this ad is not good at all. It is rather boring and I doubt it would inspire SUV drivers to change. That woman spitting in the guy’s coffee is just too much. I’m not sure you can successfully shame someone by doing something shameful yourself.
Given the state of climate change, global warming and their forthcoming impacts…i think it’s a great commercial to de-glamorize gas guzzling vehicles….we need more commercials like this to make people stop and think. good job greenpeace!!
I find it amusing, but it’s simple and fairly thoughtless and I don’t think it’s going to accomplish anything.
I always find it interesting as well that besides the very large SUV’s like Escalades, Land Rovers and Navigators the rest are not that much different then a mid-size car. The emphasis should be on doing away with autos as much as possible, not calling someone a “prick” for driving one.
I agree that this is a good commercial to deglamourize gas guzzlers, and may make a few people who are considering buying an SUV think twice. More importantly, if you agree with the sentiment, make yourself heard to your friends and family who drive these behemoths.
I was talking with someone recently who is planning to buy an SUV for mainly city driving, and when I asked why (with a somewhat horror-stricken look on my face), they replied that since there were so many other SUVs on the road, you had to have one to be able to see properly in traffic. I don’t really buy that argument — the next bigger thing will just come along, and soon we’ll all be driving monster trucks to keep up in some weird “mutually-assured destruction” type of size one-upmanship.
The same point — wankers drive SUVs — could be made with so much more levity and humour. You just feel sorry for this poor bastard, not scornful of his automotive choice.
That said, though it’s the wrong execution, it’s the right message: SUVs are marketed on neither sport nor utility but rather psychological needs. Attack the messages underlying the psychological sell, and you take the teeth out of SUV marketing.
When I make bad choices, I don’t excuse them by saying that I’m a “nice” person.
I liked the commercial. Drags a bit, but it’s fine.
It’s a cute and funny bit, but not sure if it is powerful enough to change the minds they are seeking to change. Right now, it’s more preaching to the choir. Still, I agree with blamb in that when we make bad choices, we don’t excuse them by saying that they are a “nice” person. That’s just lame. A bad choice is a bad choice. Nice or not.
Greenpeace are NOT using the word “prick”. Only “guzzler”. Just read…
And above all, that’s the truth.