“You can’t tell lies in public.”
The result of the US election has been known by the world for a couple of weeks now. Donald Trump continues to tweet: “I won the Election”. He didn’t. Without getting into his Machiavellian plans, reading that tweet throws out the question about which media channels would allow this claim airtime. Twitter & Facebook did. However, If the Trump campaign asked Tim Bleakley (CEO of Ocean Outdoor) to host this message on Piccadilly Lights, I’m guessing that there would be literally no amount of money that they could offer for this copy to go up.
Social media platforms like Twitter continue to be regulated not as media companies, but as platforms. The argument used by the tech companies essentially goes that Twitter or Facebook is no different than someone standing on a soap box at Speakers Corner; beyond the rudimentary requirements to avoid hate-speech, liberal democracies should respect the sanctity of free speech. Anyone can go to Speakers Corner and make their views to the world.
Why does the platform argument not apply to a billboard then? There aren’t any legal limitations to putting the message on Piccadilly Lights – there is no law being broken as far as I know.
This week we received a “Pastoral Update” from my 11-year-old son’s school. The strength of the pastoral part of the school is what compelled us to send our son there. As the world gets more complex, and as consumption of information has the capacity to augment thinking either to great benefit or great loss, the importance of ‘pastoral compass’ is likely to be even more valuable than ever, in many ways greater than multiple A* at GCSE or A-Levels.
The values that the school has defined are:
1. I will be courageous in doing what is right
2. I will respect myself, others and the environment
3. I will be aware and inclusive of others
4. I will enable others to be who they are
Framing the tech platforms against each of these 4 values gives some fairly definitive answers. Their argument remains that they are not the “I” – their platforms just reflect the reality of individuals who use them in the real world.
Large and small brands access the massive audiences within these platforms, in precision ways, to great short-term return. However, I’d argue that the longer-term brand damage of being associated with this space is becoming more damaging than the short-term sales benefit. Many brands have acted with their feet, and the duty to push for further change sits with them, as effective legal regulation is very challenging (and a ways off) and the will of the companies themselves will not change faster than it needs to.
Tamara Kulish said it better.
“You become what you surround yourself with. Energies are contagious. Choose carefully. Your environment will become you.”
Shakespeare said it best:
“Context is all.”
The note from head of Pastoral Care also noted that there seemed to be a difference in behaviour online versus offline, and he passed the comment:
“If you wouldn’t print something on the front of a white T shirt and walk around school, home or your local town with it on, then don’t post it online either.”
Outdoor media has earned its place as a trusted media, not through regulation or law setting. It’s been earned by good stewardship and an understanding that you would only put on a billboard what you would put on a t-shirt that you would wear everywhere.
As I mentioned in a previous note, we’re big fans of the Brand Gap work done by Justin Gibbons & JCDecaux – an extension of Binet & Field’s work. In his book “Media Planning Post COVID” he comments:
“Public media are perceived as being used by only serious businesses that can afford them”.
He goes further and hits the nail on the head: “You can’t tell lies in public.”
- Aidan Neill (CEO, Bitposter)