Reference:  www.prevent-it.ca

WSIB (Workplace Safety and Insurance Board) followed up their dramatically grotesque “Prevent It” ads from last year with two new ads – one more disturbing and buzz-worthy than ever. 

The “best of the worst” (“worst” referring to how disturbing they are, not in reference to the quality of the ad) showcases a pretty young sous chef who has an “accident” that results in a vat of hot liquid dumping all over her amid terrified screams and shots of her blistering and burning face.   

Honestly, this is one of the most horrifying and graphic ads I have ever watched.  As a marketer,my gut reaction is awe.  I will applaud how WSIB has taken their message and created advertising that is so in-your-face, it’s kind of scary.  From a viewer standpoint, I am horrified and a bit angry that, while expecting something traumatic, the image had to be so shocking.  Too shocking?  That’s what the buzz is about.

From a marketing standpoint, I think WSIB is on the cusp of taking this campaign one step too far.  Don’t get me wrong: I think the ad is effective to a point.  They are making people talk.  But what they were talking about before (realization that workplace safety is important) and what they are talking about now (how offensive/scary/vulgar the spot is) is what’s starting to make this “shock campaign” less effective. 

Consider the message versus the imagery. WSIB wants us to think about how to prevent workplace injury.  The call to action is essentially “Prevent It”.  However, when the imagery is so shocking and so offensive that they the spots can only be played after 8pm on most stations due to graphic content, is the “Prevent It”, or even the drive to the website, being overshadowed by the shock-value?  Has the scare overcome the sense?

Look back to the previous set of ads from last year.  Two that jump to mind are the young retail worker on a ladder, who falls into a display case and gets up, bloody and impaled with glass; then the forklift driver who knocks into stacks of product/materials and is impaled by a big pole.  Is there a difference?

While still graphic, the previous ads in this campaign are more “movie magic” gore and less realistic, which makes the viewer comfortable with what they are seeing.  They know it’s not “real”. I think the message loses impact this year when the ad moves from the slightly unbelievable to an image that is much more realistic and graphic.  I understand the idea behind more graphic equals bigger impact, but in this case, stop while you’re ahead.

It seems the biggest drive for a viewer is to get them on the website to learn more.  Unfortunately, by the time WSIB puts the site on the screen, the viewer is so traumatized by what they’ve just watched that I’m not sure many are jumping up from their chairs to run to their computers. Really, what is more memorable?  The image of this poor girl writhing on the floor with her burned face and screams, or the 3 seconds of the website shown at the end?

It seems like Draft FCB, the agency responsible for creating the ads, saw the success of the previous campaign and felt they had to push the envelope a bit more to make the new series of spots just as effective.  In reality, they’ve lost the best thing they had going for them: a successful, innovative campaign that could be built on to really drive home how workers can avoid injury. 

Sometimes less really is more.

Reference:  www.prevent-it.ca

To coincide with their newest graphic television spots, WSIB also launched a new Prevent It campaign geared toward youth workers.

While youth workers make up the largest percentage of workplace accident victims they are the least likely to file a claim for an unsafe workplace because they just don’t know, or aren’t informed, it’s their basic right to work in a safe environment.  In that sense, it’s not surprising to see an entire campaign dedicated just to them.  Unfortunately, WSIB truly missed the mark and squandered a spectacular opportunity.

In a very Simpsons-esque style, WSIB has launched what I assume they believe to be hip, youthful messages, designed to make youth workers really consider the safety of their workplaces and learn more about their rights. 

Based on their assumptions of what is most important to youth - their tunes and their parties - I can only assume that WSIB and their agency, Draft FCB, are old, white-haired men sitting in a boardroom trying to discern exactly what youth find cool in this century.  Here’s a tip:  they don’t find it all that cool to be talked down to and made to appear that their tunes and parties are more important than their ears and arms.  Yes, you may hear them laughing.  But they’re laughing at you, not with you.

WSIB had a successful, effective ad campaign already in place that would have been well-suited for today’s desensitized teens and chose instead to create a Beavis and Butthead style cartooned campaign that, more or less, mocks workplace accidents. 

Are we seriously trying to educate young workers by bribing them with promises of cool tech toys?  Do we really expect them to find real meaning in a message that is akin to “If you want to party, don’t get hurt at work”?  Have we learned
so little in advertising that we no longer know when to not talk down to our audiences?

Even if a very concerned youth worker takes time to go to the WSIB’s website and clicks on “Scott”, the indifferent looking sap with the amputated hand, they are faced with a website that is more Simpsons and less substance.  I’m sure that kids all over are having a riot watching Scott’s severed hand float through the air only to land in front of him and watch with laughter as a bird comes to roost on the bloody, spurting stump.  What I’m still missing is what exactly that teaches them.