OAA Apologise for "Career Women Make Bad Mothers" Campaign

[OAA]

The OAA are running a campaign to demonstrate the power of outdoor advertising to drive people online. This is being done in conjunction with a new website called ?Britainthinks.com? which encourages debate amongst the people of Britain.

We regret any misunderstanding that led to feelings of offence on the part of members of the Mumsnet community.

The intention of the website is to generate debate by posing questions that are deemed to be socially relevant by members of society.

We did not intend to cause any offence and we would stress that the questions posed were not the opinions of the OAA or any of its members.

Three posters were designed to initiate the debate using sport, life and politics and these are supported by dozens of other questions on the website itself.

Regrettably the question relating to ?career women? has caused offence and the OAA unreservedly apologises to anyone who has been offended. This was not our intention and, to ensure that this misunderstanding does not persist, instructions have been given to remove this poster.

Subject to the vagaries of the weather, all copy will be removed as soon as possible. The sites currently carrying this poster will be either blanked-out or carry one of the other designs. The poster will also be removed from the ?Britainthinks.com? website. All Digital posters have already been removed.

Hm, I hardly think working women constitute just a few people....

In marketing terms, the proportion of folk who complain represent a much larger cohort.

It is the same principle as market research.

soryy, more than just a few people

nope, madamedefarge, my impression of the man is formed by his immediate response. in knee-jerk veritas and all that... (plus there's the campaign in the first place and wheeling out top totty sharon johnson to say how silly we are).

we should nominate a charity and have done with it. i'm with swedes, it's cold, the campaign is only running for another fortnight, weather forecast is grim, the ads are mostly in stations where homeless people are constantly getting chucked out of cos they don't look sufficiently thrusting and modern. it feels like the right thing to do. i vote shelter (or another homeless agency).

oh, ignore me, I can't even read my own posts properly...presumably because my head is full of milk

I take your point Aitch, but I also know how unbelievably stupid even very clever people can be when forcibly ejected from their comfort zone, especially when it comes to crisis management.

A womens aid ad in response to a sexist ad is a helluva leap and a bit kneejerk isn't it? I think we need to draw a line under the sexism and we can only do that by wholly handing over to a charity that does't serve to point score for us.

just read the comments section in that Times piece.

it starts with the campaign, madamed. there would be no crisis to manage.

can i just remind you that this is a bloke who talks seriously of 'career women', like that's something that exists since the days of Alexis Colby-Carrington?

So would the general concensus at this point be that donating the advertising space to charity is the way forward, and that the only debate remaining would be which one, and at this point we have three strong contenders, Shelter, Fawcett Society and Women's Aid?

yup. and we've got the Whole Weekend to argue about that!

I agree Aitch. The current weather conditions make Shelter a v obvious choice. If you were homeless tonight I'm not sure you'd care too much about anything else.

I do see your point Aitch, ......for example is a ....

But I also think we have golden opportunity to extract something very positive from this... free advertising for a worthy cause....

i think shelter is a good one because it is hopefully inclusive of men and women

Definitely agree with charity optipn. Definitely.

Don't provide their copy, donate and be done with it.

A small charity even, one that can't afford to buy advertising space.

"...I also know how unbelievably stupid even very clever people can be when forcibly ejected from their comfort zone, especially when it comes to crisis management..." - MadameDeFarge you are soooo right. (and in MrsBaldwin's view this is because they confuse their personal ambition/reputation with the broader issue).

IMO Beta should be doing the legwork if there is any phoning of charities to be done. This is because our job here is almost done.

OAA and Beta have publicly apologised for offence caused.
Ads have been removed
Mumsnet have apologised to Beta for offence caused.

Beta has offered to work with Mumsnet.
Mumsnet is not really sure about this
But Mumsnet thinks it would not like the offer of some free ad space for a good cause to be entirely wasted
So perhaps Beta would like to offer the opportunity to a worthy charity - Mumsnet has suggested a few names.

Whether any worthy charities would like to get into bed with Beta is an entirely different question - and a whole new story next week for Campaign and Brand Republic adland magazines to report on, for the continuing amusement of the rest of the communications and media industry.

are you surprised that no-one from fawcett or object has been in touch, dittany? i am.

Shelter refer to other agencies that do the actual provision, and provide information - most of their money is spent campaigning. Their budget is 45 million a year including vast sums on advertising (including posters).

I'd rather it went to a small charity which doesn't have any resources, or a charity which provides services.

(Personally)

I doubt that anyone from Fawcett etc. is reading the thread aitch

That would be remarkably coincidental frankly!

really? why? it's been a huge story, their clippings service should have brought it up. even a google alert on 'sexism' would have done.

Shelter already spend lots of money in the outdoor industry so (beta) might go to them in order to hope obtaining lots of money from them in future

Whereas a small charity there could be no benefit to anyone but the charity

yes. They are probably knackered from a hard week campaigning for women with a budget of tuppence, and enjoying some nice family time (all those working mums, ya know)

because aitch it's a saturday and it hasn't been that much of a huge story, just covered briefly in two broadsheets. And places like Fawcett won't have anything other than temporary staff - certainly not subscribing to a clippings service

shelter is national, though, as is homelessness.

part-time staff not temporary staff