Ok, about two semesters ago I stopped hanging new posters, and let what was already up play out their lifespan to see which posters had the most "staying power."
Most people who "get the joke" favor this flyer (http://www.scribd.com/doc/21764986/Don-t-be-Afraid), and my personal favorite is this flyer (http://www.scribd.com/doc/22170321/Doing-the-Right-Thing).
However, it turns out that this flyer (http://www.scribd.com/doc/22773930/Swine-Flu-Brought-to-You-by) outlived every other poster I hung. In fact, not only did it outlast the others as far as actual "hang-time," the student health dept. took the small stack I left on the table and unknowingly started ripping copies and replenishing the pile themselves.
When I saw them doing my dirty work for me, and noticed that this particular poster stays up without question, I began to wonder what it was about this particular poster that gave it the extra oomph that other flyers lacked. I noticed two things that this flyer had that others didn't. For one, it deals with a public health crisis. Although, I think the thing that made all the difference was the inclusion of a recognizable corporate logo. Interesting. It seems nobody questions advertising...
Thoughts on this?
Purell conceivably would sponsor a public awareness campaign like this.
The problem is that when you have that much copy most people will not read the entire ad.
Statistically speaking, people will see "Purell" and "Swine Flu", think it's an ad and act accordingly.
Very few will make it to the end.
I don't think this a particularly good example of PosterGASM for a number of reasons, mainly because you're primarily doing free advertising for Purell, missing your target demographic, and the joke is pretty lukewarm IMO.
Yeah, I don't think it's a particularly good poster myself, I was just curious about it's longevity.
TBH, the idea that I was inadvertantly advertising for purell never even crossed my mind, but now that you mention it, that certainly could be the case. If it is, what do you think the best way to subvert an ad logo, without just providing free advertising, is?
Regardless of whether it's good or not, I feel there's something to learn from this.
That the student health department doesn't read the things it posts?
I think ads are viewed as more "legitimate" than posters created by a peer. Maybe ads are an accepted annoyance that we've learned not to deal with? The acceptable strategies for dealing with advertising are to either challenge it internally ("Is this claim true, or an exaggeration? What aren't they telling me about the product?") or just to ignore it. Actually removing the ad is a lot more effective - but since most ads (billboard, television, radio, etc) are beyond our power to affect, we don't realize that we have that option when dealing with physical spam on bulletin boards?
I know that there are ads for Kaplan, etc. put up in our classrooms that have been there for years without anyone doing anything about it (despite them being un-stamped and it being expressly against policy to put up posters anywhere except for approved bulletin boards.)