Textual Analysis Paper: Three Ads for Threatened Species

Ælfhild Wiklund

All over the world species are dying. Many people are working to prevent these extinctions and one of the things they do is publish advertisements to raise awareness and money. In my search for a worthy cause to study, I came across three ads; it was their differences as much as their similarities that drew me in, and I chose to share them with you. First the ad of the panda mask, which evokes guilt and pity for its cause. Second the ad of the selfies three, which addresses a modern crowd. Third, but not least, is the whale of words: who stands a grim silent echo of what could be. To compare and contrast is my goal, and the time and place is now. I have gathered a trio of ads, for assorted threatened species, that use multiple methods to reach a varied audience to raise awareness of their woes and to convince people to help their cause.

This ad from the World Wildlife Federation (WWF) seeks support for bluefin tuna. It is aimed at people who eat tuna and people who love animals, especially pandas. Ideally it would reach people who belong to both groups. This audience is indicated by the text "Would you care more if I was a panda?" and the panda mask on the tuna. The implication of the ad is that the tuna deserve help as much as the pandas. Pandas are typically seen as peaceful cuddly bears which rouses peoples sympathies concerning their plight; this ad attempts to extend this to tuna. The purpose of this ad is to raise awareness of the danger to tuna, which, according to the site I found this ad on, is extinction due to over-fishing. The site says that WWF is using this campaign in an attempt to restrict the tuna catch in the East Atlantic and Mediterranean to less than 6,000 tonnes per year. To achieve their purpose they appeal to the viewers emotions through the comparison to pandas and to a lesser extent the aesthetics of the scene with the sun shining down through the school turning the sea to a lovely progression of blue shades emphasized by the darkening of the lower corners. They also use the “Would you care more if I was a panda?” plea to entwine this cause with your emotions and appeal to the sense of fairness in our ethical sides. Because, really, are tuna less deserving of our help because they aren't cute and cuddly? I certainly don't think so, especially when considering the long term effects, which could very well include the absence of tuna from the menu, forever. Such a possibility is not something that those of us who enjoy eating tuna are likely to condone, if we think that far. Also, simply by putting forth tuna as in need of our aid, they address the common value that we are responsible for our world and our peoples actions. In general this ad uses the stance of how things are today, and attempts to play off our sympathy for pandas and sense of fairness, to sway people to their side.

This ad was also put forth into the realm of internet by the World Wildlife Federation. This case is to raise awareness of multiple species on the brink of extinction. This ad is intended for modern Americans, particularly animal lovers, especially the modern generations who are obsessed with selfies. I concluded that based on the fact that the images are, by all appearances, selfies and the text "Don't let this be my #LastSelfie". While it is qualitative rather than quantitative I consider the pitiful pleading "puppy-eyes" expression all the animals wear further evidence from the ad; in this case proving that it is intended for animal lovers even those who don't see themselves that way as it appeals to our emotions. The purpose of this ad is to raise awareness of endangered species and to reach an audience that might otherwise ignore the plight. I say this of the modern generation because many Americans today are so steeped in the virtual realms online that they don't always understand the full significance of things in the real world. This ad puts things into perspective for those people as the idea that this is the animal's last selfie is tantamount to the animal's death, in this case that of the entire species. This ad shows the issue from a perspective rarely considered and persuades people in the new crowd to see the deadly truth many species today face.

It was the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) that published this elegant ad. It is my personal opinion that it would appeal to people who appreciate art, especially art found in nature; I believe this to be the case because of the artistic qualities of the ad: the water droplets of the splash spotlighted by sunbeams; the word “whale” shaped to represent a pose often taken by the creature it defines in art. Of course animal lovers are once again members of the intended audience, particularly those of an oceanic bent. The text, “Will only words remain?” gives a clear cut and depressing significance to the picture. The question combined with “Time is running out!” gives the viewers an impression of urgency and draws in animal activists and lovers. I believe the presence of the text “Visit IFAW.org” immediately after the main text is an intentional choice that is meant to, and probably does, draw more people to the site as the main text has lit the fire for action in their blood and lo an action is available. The purpose is in all likelyhood to raise awareness of the danger to whales and spread knowledge of IFAW, so that more people will support their cause, likely by giving them money. They work towards that purpose by presenting a pretty picture, with an eloquent message. The picture and query speak to our emotions. The words including IFAW appeal to our rational and ethical natures. It also addresses the belief that we are responsible for preserving the world. It appeals to the value that we must not let such a symbolic creature become nothing more than a historical symbol. This ad uses an approach that addresses what could be and addresses what some might consider a more refined audience than the selfie ad does. Again, however, it reaches out for help for the sake of species in dire need of our consideration.

All three ads promote the same worthy cause: to support animals in need of our constructive interference. But each goes about it in a different way. Where the tuna and whale ads use appealing aesthetics to address the normal audiences for their cause, the other ad uses a different approach seeking out allies among the modern technology worshiping crowd by speaking their language, remember “#LastSelfie.” Unlike the first two ads the whale ad replaces the animal in its image with text; this is precisely the opposite of the tuna ad which adds the panda mask and the selfie ad which superimposes text across the animals' faces. Of them all the tuna ad is the least urgent, relying instead on a softer emotional appeal. While the selfie ad drives home the point to its particular crowd the whale ad really sinks in the potential consequences for the rest of us, admittedly in a more sophisticated way. The ads overall address the danger of extinction to animals in a manner that appeals to a variety of audiences, though all address animal lovers and conservation activists. As you should now see there are many ways to achieve the same result and many audiences that can be reached if you show things from different perspectives. Long live the threatened heterotrophs!