Summary

-As a group we had chosen to look at Sexual Health in the field of Graphic Communication, from the 1940s to present day, and an assessment of the use of ‘shock value.’ We have subdivided areas between us that we have found of interest, for example, AIDs, sexual health advertising in the 1940s and the increase in shock value, to name but a few.

-We started chronologically, from as early on as the 1940s. From this point, we have looked at advertising and other forms of graphic communication, until the present day.

////

-Research into images and campaigns from the 1940s, resulted in focus on a particular poster, ‘She May Look Clean, But’ . It was discovered that there is a large contrast between the attitudes and mentalities of ‘then’ and ‘now,’ which is to be expected from passing time.  During the war there was a surge in sexually transmitted infections from soldiers and their meetings with ‘good time gals.’ Posters were created to discourage soliders from this kind of behaviour, painting these particular women in an unflinching and shocking light. Men were discouraged from supposedly sweet looking girls, highlighting that such things would catch you unawares, a polite and subtle approach, much like how they suggested these ‘good time girls’ would seduce a soldier. An interesting angle to this is how it aims at men’s pride, in particular how they suggested you would not be able to ‘beat the axis of evil’ with VD.

'Good Time Gals' Did women deserve such negative press?

-With this focus on a male perspective, it seemed that it was not intentionally there to shock, but perhaps, compared with today’s more informative approach, the main aim was perhaps to stamp it out entirely instead of educate people as to why it was unfavourable.

-In contrast, more current advertising campaigns have had quite a different approach. We are in the age of the information, with the internet and more and more new devices being developed to communicate. Sexual health advertising has found itself adapting  to this.

-The ‘Respect’ campaign is largely aimed at teenagers, as it aims itself to be on your side. It depicts a situation of whether someone has or hasn’t used a condom, and fits it into a context wherein a realistic teenage conversation occurs about such a subject. It is quite the opposite to the attempts from the 1940s, as it seeks to inform rather than scare. This and the more recent ‘Condom Essential Wear’ Campaign is aiming to normalise the responsibility of using a condom. As the ‘Essential Wear’ campaign is aimed at an already sexually active auidence, it is aiming to highlight the risks in a resonably helpful way.

-The ‘Respect’ campaign is not only advertised through television advertisements or posters, depicting ‘trendy’ tattoo graphics to appeal to a teenage audience. It advertises everywhere it could interact with its target audience, for example on Facebook and on Spotify, where adverts in general now fit around  the age, gender and playlist to make it relevant to the user.

Trendy tattoo graphic from the 'Respect' campaign

-Another government initiative today to battle against STDs are chlamydia packs, which were distrubuted around university campuses and university halls. Its aim was again a more informative and not a scaremongering approach, with packs which could be done in the privacy of your own home and then sent off, to be notified via text.

-It’s interesting to see how things have changed between the 1940s and now, but it has been a gradual change indeed. Aids was in particular a big talking point in the 1980s and had been advertised accordingly, this being another major moment in time between the transition of the two areas.

-In the 80s people knew about AIDS but it was never as much in conciousness, mainstream tv, the start of the whole AIDS in the conciouss was not  friendly approach. With the use of a mini-horror movie, it was needed, but it seemed it was to scare rather than inform. This is similar to the approach in the 1940s that was based more on scare tactic rather than infomative graphics. The use of the deep, booming voice and the personification of death attracted audience member’s attention.  People behind the campaign have said it was needed to “shake a nation into taking charge of its own sexual health”.

Interesting to consider how this understanding of AIDS has developed into a much more sensitive subject these days <strong>taking an emotive approach.</strong> -For example in the current day in Germany an installation of Hamburg Children- cut outs. Something unique, and new, thought provoking idea that you can engage with. In the main square of hamburg, you won’t know it’s there until it pops up randomly and members of the public could interact.  It forces you to realise the situation but in a less patronising manner than that of the 19080s. <strong>This appraoch was more about  educating the public and understanding the problem.</strong> It is an extremely <strong>emotive approach with the use of Children and their stories of being affected by someone who has aids.</strong> It is subtle and poignant aiming straight for the heart and making the individual think. It could be an emotional shock to suddenley see such a display but in contrast to the works of the 40s when understanding was minimum and the 80s where death was the main concern, it takes a thoughtful look at a major problem and working in a way such as the Respect adverts attempting to find a solution and to work together.

-However, even though it seems that today’s advertising campaigns are more subtle and helpful, some are still causing offence. An example of this is the ‘Levonelle One Step’ morning after pill television advertisements, which, released recently, recieved a number of complaints. The approachable and sweet style of the advertisement, of a woman going to buy the morning after pill, was seem as ‘normalising’ and making light of a potentially serious situation.

Too cutesy for its own good?

-So how far do you have to go to get the message across? And when is too far? In complete contrast to the Levonelle contraversy, Canada has its own branding of morning after pill, the ‘Plan B’ pill, where in the advertisment a couple are having sex and lazily mention at the end that the condom has broke. However, it’s all okay, because Plan B is on standby. The concerns about the Levonelle advert were that it was perhaps encouraging unsafe sex and even using the morning after pill as a form of contraception. However, the Plan B advert seems to take it to another level, making quite a humourous advert out of the situation.

-There is an understanding that there is a need to make such information interesting  and attention-grabbing, to get audiences, but how far can you go in ‘normalising’ something before you make it seem like it’s not really an issue at all?

-Sexual health promoters have been intelligent in understanding their audiences, and they have accordingly adapted their ways. With such a serious subject, it has to be handled in a particular manner, so as not to cause offence but also to raise awareness and inform their target audiences. So are today’s advertisements ticking all the right boxes? Have we learnt from the past what is inneffectual or offensive, to balance out today’s views? Are we perhaps going the other way now and normalising everything, to such an extreme that in the end STDs are nothing to worry about? It’s a tricky balance between the two, but it is impressive to see how far advertisements are willing to go to protect and educate people about a serious issue.

Furthermore; through our research it seems apparent that Britain audiences are quicker to complain about the methods used to advertise to the public about these issues. It is a subject that can easily offend, despite the changes in approach since the 80′s Aids adverts and 40′s STD  posters a public more involved and influencing to current advertising are letting the advertisers know how they feel. This influence the public has will only increase and is likely to shape the form sexual health advertising has in the future.

/////