This is an interesting subject because I have never seen anyone advertise itself as undesirable. It seems to me that Europe is trying to stop illegal immigration instead of encouraging legal immigration. The commercial is not looking into the dangers of just coming into Europe but actually living in it as well. However, I think that most Africans would already be well aware of the dangers of illegal immigration. I think they should of at least encouraged legal immigration at the end of the ad.
I have heard awful stories of illegal immigration where people are basically put into slavery by companies promising jobs and a new life in a foreign country. I can understand why Switzerland is trying to warn possible immigrants of the dangers of illegal immigration attempting to save lifes and stop human trafficking, but I can also see why people see this as racist and an attempt to stop diversification of Europe. As much as I want to believe that they are doing this for the right reasons, it is very hard for me to believe that there isn’t an alternative motive. I wonder what would happen if the U.S. Government started to run ads in Mexico about the dangers of crossing the borders into America. I do not think we would get nearly as much backlash from the media or the public for doing it.
I agree with Andrew about the US not receiving as much backlash from the media if they ran ad compaigns in Mexico of the dangers of crossing the borders into America. I am currently taking a Sociology of Mexican Migration course right now and we discuss the dangers of crossing the border. Although it is dangerous and the US is trying to stop the continuation of migration to the US, they have yet to run campaigns in Mexico to urge migrants to stop coming. This may be a good idea rather than pumping money into border patrol which in turn creates a more dangerous migration process. I personally think that ad campaigns in other countries are not a horrible idea, they are a better idea than creating more violence along borders and in turn causing more deaths of migrants. Creating public awareness through campaigns in foreign countries is a more creative approach to helping to control migration and would allow migrants to know the truth about a destination country before they make the treacherous journey. The only issue would be to find out whether these campaigns are truthful or if they are discriminating against Africans or other types of people.
Wow. This ad was controversial and probably quite effective. However, it does not seem ethically responsible because it is dramatizing really important issues. It is interesting that this involves Switzerland because they are traditionally a refuge for all different nationalities during times of need. While it is important to bring reality to the myth of the dream of an immediately better life through immigration, it does not seem dramatic advertising is the best way to accomplish this. These type of issues should be dealt with through more formal eduction and community outreach, not advertisements on television where people do not have reliable third parties to discuss these issues with.
This is a very controversial advertisement. I took a class last term that touched on immigration and there can be very harmful consequences. This makes the advertisement very reasonable in the sense that they are warning immigrants about the dangers of illegal immigration. However, I am not convinced that this advertisement will be successful. I think this is a creative way to make more public awareness about the issues of illegal immigration. This advertisement shows what people would believe to be the truth about immigration, or it shows discrimination against those who are immigrating. Depending on the audience I think the advertisement can be viewed either way.
I understand the International Organization for Migration’s reasoning for the ads they’ve run: They want to encourage people in Africa to immigrate to Europe legally; irregular immigration is not a good idea because poverty, crime and death are all possibilities. And Europe has a very long and complicated history (re: colonialism) with Africa (and other parts of the world). At the same time though, the radio guy, Bob Garfield, makes a point that the ads can be viewed as racist — which other people have voiced concerns over (which is also why the issue is being raised on the show). You can tell that Garfield wants Jean-Philippe Chauzy to comment on the political nature of the ads and the controversy. He mentions it at least three times, and he finally gets a rise out of Chauzy (by using the semi-inflammatory language of keeping Europe “lily-white”): Chauzy says the comment is “superficial” and “hurting.” But he side-steps the issue, just talking about the IOM’s goal. Well, IOM’s goal is all well and good, but they have to face the fact that people are responding to the ads in a negative way because they think the ads are racist — especially because they were paid for by a right-leaning government that was elected basically on immigration issues. Even if thinking the ads are racist is “superficial” compared to the goal of saving lives, there’s obviously a disconnect and problem between the goal and the single important thought in the ads. IOM is trying here to seem like they’re addressing the issue when really they’re not; they’re just reiterating talking points.
Comments are closed.
Depicts 320,000 light bulbs, equal to the number of kilowatt hours of electricity wasted in the United States every minute from inefficient residential electricity usage (inefficient wiring, computers in sleep mode, etc.).