A brand has elbowed its way into the conversation about a tragic murder. And nobody seems to mind. What am I missing?

Alternatively they delete and ban anyone who says something that they don’t like?

Fly’s? Dead people? Not Cool.

I’m confused because shouldn’t the fly be dead as a result of the Mortein? How come he’s still alive and pontificating on current events anyway. I know, I just don’t get it!

This could be an excellent case study on how Australian audience perceive and engage with brand on social media. Thanks for the great insights Tim

The fact that the ‘social’ response was overwhelmingly in favour of the post speaks volumes in the way perceptions are changing in the social space. When Paris Hilton’s sex tape emerged aeons ago, it was initially thought that this would put an end to her public aspirations. Instead, this type of video has become a viable option for anyone wishing to fast-track their public profile. Despite the fact that Mortein has just withdrawn the post, it would appear that this decision was made by someone with an ‘old-school’ set of morals within the company responding to Tim’s piece, as opposed to any direct backlash from the twittersphere. This is one of the best pieces to have emerged from mumbrella; a perplexed exasperation but one that acknowledges that ALL who responded positively were complicit. And that maybe any moral outrage does not reflect the prevailing (and changing) norms.

I see stupid people everywhere!

@me – by saying “someone with an ‘old school’ set of morals”, I presume you mean someone who actually has a set of morals.

@Blutack. I was using the phrase semi-facetiously. But consider this; the person who conceived the idea didn’t have a problem with it. The person who rendered the image didn’t have a problem with it. The person invigilating the stream didn’t have a problem with it. Maybe these were mostly the same person. Furthermore the people who responded positively online didn’t have a problem with it.

My key takeout from Tim’s piece is that the moral framework seems to be shifting. It becomes a deeply philosophical discussion, but morals are not a fixed set of parameters or opinions. Do you really think the flesh and blood individuals who were involved positively in this Mortein thread are completely devoid of any moral framework; or that it is so distorted that they cannot function ‘normally’ in any societal capacity.

I’m getting so accustomed to having my assumptions on people’s behavioural ‘norms’ challenged on an anecdotal basis, or coming across repeated ‘old school’ opinions on the absolute corruption of the human race thanks to social media.

This piece is a superb balanced piece of opinion on an infinitely sophisticated and mutli-dimensional aspect of our interactions with others. Please don’t presume I mean someone who does not actually have a set of morals.

So a poison commenting on a murder where the cause of death is not yet known?

Maybe we could get Global knives to sponsor the next beheading video?

We used to laugh when contextual ads got it wrong, now the social media guys do it on purpose.

Agree, Tim. And just because the social media team may understand their audience better than you, it doesn’t mean their judgment is better….or that their audiences’ lack of sensitivity should be the benchmark for behaviours. This “audience” are people who’re following an insecticide on social media, for goodness sake. How sad is that?
Appalling stuff from a company that should know better.

TIm, I shared your reaction to it, as did many of my advertising colleagues on Facebook. I’ve been trying to work out the reason there wasn’t a bigger backlash (the kind you seem to get when Qantas tries anything in social media, for example), and I think the key lies in this observation you make in the piece:

Well at more than half a century old, Louie may be Australia’s oldest brand mascot. Consistent investment in being part of national culture does count for something.

I can’t help feeling that because generations of Australians have grown up with Louie, they feel a certain nostalgic affection for him, and treat him more as a friend than as an animated marketing device. They look past the fact that this is an ad for Mortein, and treat it the way they would a social media post by one of their friends.

Surely there’s a few copyright / trademark issues with some of those posts too? World Cup? Australian cricket jumper? Photo of One Direction? Apple logo?

“The person who rendered the image didn’t have a problem with it. The person invigilating the stream didn’t have a problem with it”

Umm. If that was their job they probably had no choice or say in the matter.

Sadly says a lot about where we’ve got to as a society in 2015. A cartoon fly we kill with the product it promotes essentially using a despicable tragedy for further self promotion – and people are supportive of it. Its a sad state of affairs. Louie is clever and relevant and their other posts are fun but they’ve crossed a big line with this one. Just not cool.

Possibly there’s very little reaction because we people that Like a FLY SPRAY on Facebook are a bit simple?

I’m unsure if I’m more staggered by the notion of cartoon emotions being judged credible; a brand presuming that empathy with a murdered woman is a valid strategy, the association of a fly spray with dead people or the facile nature of social media.
What a mudslide of vulgarity.

@David. If the person invigilating the stream had a problem with it, why was it up? Was this flagged as a possible problem before posting? Isn’t the point of this type of role to provide guidance and action on whether a posting – internally generated or otherwise – is appropriate for the brand?

You’re right calling me out on the illustrator; I’m assuming they were freelance and would have had the choice whether to do it or not. And even if they were freelance, declining the job would most probably affect their relationship with the agency.

If someone along this chain of conception and creation did actually think there was an issue here, we’ll probably never know. But until Tim wrote about, it was an okay piece of content.

Soooo… here’s something. Anyone notice there’s been a few less social media shitstorms in recent years? Feels like in 2009, every second week a major brand was getting their arse handed to them.

Partly, thats due to savvier marketers. Mostly, I suspect, its because of Facebook’s little feature “Hide” – which means that negative commenters’ posts are now only seen by their own “friends and family”.

So perhaps there were more dissenting voices, Tim. My guess is, that the “Hide” functionality is one of the main reasons that tsunamis of rage fail to gain momentum.

Most people the Riverina just feel sick revolted and sad at such a vicious and callous crime. To trivialize the murder by using it for advertising reflects really badly on the morons in the advertising industry who used it, and on the unthinking simpletons who liked it.

Great piece Tim. I too thought this would quickly go from ‘best intentions’ to ‘social media disaster’; and have been somewhat surprised that the image relating to Stephanie Scott was met, predominantly, with support from the audience.
I agree with DK; I think Australians have a somewhat nostalgic connection with Louie the Fly and as such, didn’t see this as an insensitive marketing ploy.

*Ahem* Is the fact that Louie has survived 50 years the ultimate in a reverse product demonstration????

And the fact that people are following a fly on Facebook (and actually thanking him in some of their posts!) is truly tragic.

I know @ grim this comment already made, but my first reaction was a nasty mental image of a charred body dumped in bushland undiscovered for several days. I must be in the ” too old” and “don’t get it camp” cause I would not want to deliberately link this image with my “product” – – flies and fly spray.
Gross.
I can’t imagine the anguish at the family of this murdered woman, and I can’t see why a company would risk intruding into that grief. The media is bad enough – even a local journo has been sickened at how his non-local peers have descended like ghouls on this tragedy.

@Bleeding Obvious – little different to people worshiping “comic book heroes” online and discussing their “personalities”. I know of grown men quite heated (on line) over whether Batman could beat Superman in open battle.

Now THAT’S tragic

I saw that too and was absolutely horrified by it. I didn’t want to write, post or tweet about it, because I didn’t want to give them more exposure – and like you, I was shocked that the reactions seemed to be positive. I didn’t get it. I guess, that all could have been managed too, because the company has pulled the post. Perhaps it does need to be circulated, because perhaps many of the target market actually missed this ghoulish attempt to cash in on a senseless tragedy. Or maybe I have it wrong.

On all levels, this is so wrong. What were they thinking? Who was in charge? Can we name names for who was responsible?

I feel like I’m reading a darkly comedic novel; imagining a satirical future where brands have become so blurred and all-encompassing within society that they feel they have the right to weigh into a story about a murdered woman….in order to position themselves as “caring, Aussie brands.” Then a brainwashed population subsequently clicks and ‘likes it.’ No amount of justification or brand history can excuse it.
A sad day for our industry. An even sadder day for the family of Stephanie Scott.

Honestly I don’t have an issue with it. it’s not as if there is a big fat Call-to-Action to buy Mortein slapped on the ad.

We go on about how now more than ever brands have the ability to interact and engage with their audiences and how that’s such a great thing but then accuse brand of hijacking social issues for their own objectives.

If it’s a brand taking a stance on some social issue or paying respects to a tragedy or celebrating some momentous occasion, I think that it’s fine as long as they are not trying to solicit some commercial benefit. To me it’s just joining-in in the collective experience and I think that’s how their consumers see it.

As an example – I’ve seen companies do very tasteless 9/11 memorials but I don’t think that brands paying respects to the lives lost on that is off limits. Brands are made up of people after-all.

Only thing I would change on this would be the cigarette.

Interesting points Dan. Mortein actually handled this fairly delicately – that was my first reaction. It is no more or less of a tribute than the Richie Benaud post, which didn’t get receive any backlash as far as I’m aware. If a topic is treated tactfully, with genuine respect, I believe there can be a place for it. Even Anzac Day. VB managed it with their ‘Raise a glass’ campaign, which actually has a distinct call to action.

” Possibly there’s very little reaction because we people that Like a FLY SPRAY on Facebook are a bit simple? ”

The above says it all doesn’t it. Unfortunately the vast majority of humans are simple who utilise a brand on FaceBook.

Its NEVER NEVER ok to trivialise violenceby brand associatioins in social media/ – period !

I can see both sides. I don’t believe Mortein to be disrespectful. And to be honest, there’s really nothing for them to gain. Louie comments on just about every event, act or tragedy.
I would more suspicious of the wedding dress company getting involved. Does this mean that no business should get behind such tragic events even as a sign of respect?

It’s a bit high and mighty to suggest everyone who likes a brand page is an idiot. And to crucify the Mortein social team.

Sure, perhaps they shouldn’t have done this. But there’s no way they sat around and said ‘hey, there’s a hashtag going off for that chick that died. We can use that to get some engagement.’ They would have been touched by it, as many were, and said ‘let’s do a tribute of our own’. I can see that in the language. It’s genuine.

I think that’s why the fans of the page weren’t offended. They could also see that, despite their alleged moronity.

lolz… Dan’s comment people, that is where we are in society now.

Brands – Have opinions, Interact, engage…

No, no they dont.

Brands are tools used to sell more product, they have as much relevance to discussing a murder as does a tree.

People should be offended that PEOPLE running brand marketing dont see any problem in trying to sell more products by exploiting a murdered young woman.

Shit.. i shouldve read on more…

from Jason “Louie comments on just about every event, act or tragedy”

No, Jason, Morteins marketing team comment on everything, with the express intention of selling more mortein… do you think they would be posting for Louie if they werent getting paid?

and
HMMM said…. “Sure, perhaps they shouldn’t have done this. But there’s no way they sat around and said ‘hey, there’s a hashtag going off for that chick that died.”

Thats almost exactly what they wouldve said… this hashtag is going to get more exposure for our client.

What they didnt do was consider whether using a murder to sell product was a good thing to do.

And in case you are a marketer thinking about it.. no, it isnt.

Publishers used to dish out the sentimental articles, with adverts nestled alongside and didn’t companies have to pay for that space! Nowadays, who needs the publisher? Times are changing and the way it is going, with the policies being presented, our grandchildren will be soaking up corporate news for breakfast, lunch and dinner… Programmed more than at any time before. (Perhaps?)

Yeah look..It’s just facebook. Let’s face it.. facebook is for MORONS. Narcissistic attention seeking morons. They write crap comments coz they think others care and they just love to get attention (i.e likes). Mortein is in the end a violent chemical. I don’t like it. I don’t like the “enjoy time with your family.. it’s precious” either. I think that is sickeningly cynical given part of their underlying promotion suggestion is “if you don’t kill all bugs with chemicals then you’re a bad mother”.
Also people are so used to advertising, i guess they have finally accepted it as reality. So Louie the Fly is a real person. “Thanks Louie, that’s sweet of you”. God.. Kill me now. Please.. Don;t make me live among mankind anymore that has so much potential.. and yet…