Disclaimer fail: Pride Month bus ad misses the mark
What to do when the fine print isn't fine at all?
Late last week, Vancouver-based human rights advocate Morgane Oger both praised and admonished a Unifor Local 111 ad that was spotted on the back of a Vancouver area transit bus. And the tweet was spot on.
Loving this @UniforTheUnion Local 111 Pride Month ad on Vancouver busses today. That disclaimer though. So prominent. So…awful, @TransLink
I don’t know Morgane but their feelings must have been conflicted, to say the least. This otherwise inclusive and powerful message contained a disclaimer that reminds me of what my mother used to say - there are rules and there are rules. This disclaimer, unfortunately, undermined the heart, substance and tone of what was supposed to be said. And, it’s likely nobody’s fault. Just a lack of thinking or proofing or talking or questioning before taking action.
It seems as if someone applied the letter of the law, so to speak, before thinking it through. The end result - it seems this ad was deemed to need this disclaimer:
The opinions expressed in this advertisement, or by the sponsor of this advertisement, do not in any way represent the opinions of and are not endorsed by TransLink or its subsidiaries.
Really? I understand both boilerplate messages and the history of controversial bus signs. Still, I have questions:
Who signs off on the final signs before they’re placed on a bus? The client? The ad agency? The operator of the buses? TransLink?
Was there any discussion about the disclaimer?
If there was a discussion and the feeling was it was unfortunate but ‘rules are rules,’ could someone have suggested an alternative ad buy - radio? Perhaps an ad buy with a disclaimer that’s not so easily shared on social media?
Are we happy with this ad?
Kudos to TransLink for responding to the tweet. Also, full praise to Morgane for being charitable in the response.
It’s an explanation. It’s honest. It contains the right words. It also fails to address what was noticed in the first place. The ‘fine print’ toys with the ad in a most unfortunate way. The responses to the tweet certainly reflect that.
Morgane, you’re right. There are some learning opportunities here and I would argue they’re not confined to those involved in this campaign. Going forward, I would hope product<>audience supersedes procedures for anyone caught in such a position. I’d also hope people are comfortable with thinking and questioning directives.
The unfortunate part of this - I am sure everyone involved had the best of intentions.