Shock Tactics in Charity and Non-Profit PR

A second potential topic I am considering for my dissertation would focus on the charity and non-profit sector of public relations.

This is the sector I am most passionate about, and the one that I would eventually like to work in. I would love to be able to put the skills I have learnt on my postgraduate degree to good use by communicating the messages of causes that I really believe in. Researching this area of PR could also enable me to create industry contacts which may be useful when looking to establish my career.

A disturbing image taken from 'Silver Spoon'

The reason behind suggesting this as a dissertation topic stems not only from a strong personal interest, but also from issues covered in lectures that I feel could lead to insightful discussions.

In ‘PR The Developing Discipline,’ I have found concepts and theories of persuasion and influence very thought provoking. The lecture also touched briefly on ideas of manipulation and coercion and the techniques that are used in order to influence audience behaviour and opinion to an organisation’s favour. One topic of discussion that particularly interested me was that of fear and guilt appeals.

Charity organisations typically depend on donations for survival and so shock tactics are often practised. We are all familiar with images of ill and starving third-world children on our television screens that seek to create a sense of guilt, and, in theory, donations from audiences. However, as images such as these are used so frequently, could it be that audiences have become somewhat immune to such ‘distressing’ content and so the impact has lessened? 

With this in mind, a study of the effect of fear and guilt appeals could be used to determine their effectiveness and relevance in today’s society. If audiences are considered ‘immune’ then where does this leave the future of PR for charity and non-profit organisations? Are they going to have to change their techniques and become even more shocking in order to generate guilt, fear and awareness or take a more positive approach (as suggested in this Guardian article) to motivate audiences instead? Consider, for example, the Kony 2012 video, which successfully connected to audiences worldwide by showing the positive effect of generosity and action. 

Another image taken from 'Silver Spoon'

The use of shock tactics and the consequences of using images that are considered to be too shocking could also be explored, determining if audiences are likely to be put off donating if they are offended, upset or made to feel uncomfortable by content. This could lead to a study of the controversial nature of certain campaigns, questioning if some organisations take it too far when aiming to raise awareness of particular issues. 

The Barnardo's ‘Silver Spoon’ campaign is an excellent example of a project that many people feel went overboard when it came to generating fear and guilt, and shocking audiences. The images used were deemed highly offensive and were eventually banned which, could further be argued, was a strategic plan of the organisation to attract more media attention and awareness.  
                                                    

As not to limit research, looking at the use of shock tactics in NGOs and Social Marketing campaigns could also be relevant in providing debate. Consider the haunting nature of the Department of Transport's 'Kill Your Speed'  campaign and the graphic images used  in 'Hooked' by the NHS in a bid to shock people into quitting smoking. It would not be hard to understand how these campaigns could be viewed as upsetting or offensive, and in turn, cause audiences to turn their heads in the opposite direction and ignore the messages being communicated.

An image taken from the 'Hooked' campaign

With these examples in mind, are such tactics forms of bullying and manipulation, or are they in fact clever strategies to make the messages stick in audiences’ minds and ‘wise up’ to the issues happening around them?

Should shock tactics be toned down or are the hard-hitting, emotive nature of many campaigns  crucial  to create the awareness and impact that is needed today?