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.

I doubt very much you're alone nick. I had heard of them but if I hadn't spent 10 years working in marketing/PR I don't think I'd have any reason to know who they are.

OAA yes v boring industry body

Just in charge of billboards

Do you know that billboards were originally "invented" to screen off bomb sites during the war?

Crazycatlady Thanks for that - I'm going to email Thomas Cook and the NSPCC and tell them that their association with this agency damages their brand in my view. Don't think I was ever likely to consume Jackpot Joy's services tbh.

Lol nor me eightieschick. I posted press office details for the other two organisations earlier up the thread if you don't already have them.

Sorry, they're on the original thread, not this one

Only just seen this - well done Mrs Baldwin*!! Very glad that there are women like you out there.

Totally missed all this. I did see the ad fleetingly and did think WTF? But just assumed (as it was literally a split second glance) that I missed something. I suppose that's half the problem....its that insidious reinforcement of a completely ridiculous idea.

So, well done everyone. Very, very impressive work. Just such a shame it had to be done.

So,, can I just be clear (as I missed the original thread). The billboard was for OAA (who are basically just a governing body for billboard advertising) and the campaign was devised by Beta (who are an ad agency who also work for the NSPCC etc.)?

The campaign was done by (Beta)

don't forget the ()s

Well, their campaign certainly worked, didn't it!

In what way?

"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. "

Now we've heard of the OAA and "Britainthinks.com", their advertising drove people on-line, and encouraged (very heated) debate. Job done.

I certainly don't like the ad. It's controversy for the sake of controversy. But in some parts of the media that's considered a success. Unfortunately.

Well done for getting them to take down the ads.

No, no Weebump, it didn't drive anyone online...not as evidenced by this thread, and the other one, in any case. We were all already here! Only a few of us even saw the ad.

and I doubt very much that many of us went over to BT to contribute to their little debate.

Robert and I would like to apologise to anyone we've offended with one of the posters we created for the OAA.

The reason we've waited until now to apologise is that the strength and nature of the reaction to the poster, specifically on mumsnet, shocked us. At first we were not sure what to do.

It had not been our intention to cause such offence, nor to attract such abuse.

Our intention was to provoke discussion. We believed that both the poster and the content of the Britainthinks website reflected this. We accept we got this wrong.

It has been suggested that we are about to commence legal proceedings against mumsnet. This is categorically not the case.

We have asked that they operate within their own editorial guidelines which they now are doing.

We are profoundly sorry. We hope our apology is accepted.

Garry and Robert.

Not all of the response was abusive though, was it.

Thank you for your apology, (Beta).

Yes (Beta) thank you very much for your apology

Yes, thanks for the apology. But why are you denying the legal bit?

Guys what's with the parentheses please?

Thanks for the apology. I havent posted before but I did complain to the ASA.

I thought the campaign was crass, offensive and a bit of a cheap shot at a group that you thought you could get away with taking a pop at to raise a storm. It certainly did that! I am also a marketing director and I was stunnned that you let anything quite so ill judged out of the door.

I am a also a lone parent who works extremely hard to support my family and do the best job I can at bringing up my kids. My boys know full well mummy works hard but they also know she loves them, looks after them and puts food on the table. I dont think that makes me or millions of other people like me a bad parent. Maybe you should try it sometime, its really not that easy.

In future before you target a group why not try walking a day in their shoes?

Hmm. Elastamum, I think it's called 'market research'. I can't be sure, as I think it might be a bit of a new fangled thing in the 1950s world.

Some more reading - Susie Rushton commenting in today's Independent

Advertising its own failure

How not to start a debate: this week the Outdoor Advertising Association launched a series of bus-side adverts with provocative slogans designed to show off the impact of their most prominent sites. They kicked off this national campaign with a poster that read "Career Women Make Bad Mothers", which was, according to Beta, the agency behind it, intended as "a portal for debate".

Oddly enough, plenty of women didn't find the poster particularly conducive to reasoned discussion, and on Wednesday the OAA found itself the target of a campaign by Mumsnet and was forced to take the 11,500 ads down. What's bemusing is why an advertising body chose such a lame creative idea to promote its own product. We all know the advertising industry is in dire straits. This only advertised their desperation. Why stop at using working mothers as a "hot topic"? Why not promote debate with assertions that "All Northerners are criminals" or "It's time to close our borders"?

Link to Susie Rushton's comment page here:
www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/susie-rushton-enjoy-the-travel-chaos-while-it-lasts-18611 99.html
(Scroll to the bottom to read what I have copied and pasted here)

And as I posted to the other thread thanks for your apology Beta. Looking forward to seeing some more inspiring campaigns from you in the future.

I think Garry and Robert have never had anyone stand up to them before.........they clearly only employ 'yes' men/women and probably rule by intimidation and force, which is why this campaign got out in the first place, and why they "were so shocked at the reaction"

More fun reading - apparently you lot have caused an international feminist blogoverse stir:

www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2010/01/06/oh-you-bad-bad-women/

mumbrella.com.au/the-outdoor-industry-doesnt-need-to-be-offensive-to-prove-its-worth-15086?utm_sourc e=feedburner&utmmedium=feed&utmcampaign=Feed%3A+mumbrella+%28mUmBRELLA%29&utm_content=Google+Reade r

I missed all this kicking off, but am profoundly grateful that you all did kick off.

I am really boggle-eyed that the response to this ad wasn't foreseen. I Showed a picture of the ad on the bus to my 17 year old son and he asked what was it advertising? And when I explained he said: "Crude".