More and more advertising agencies find their way to the blogospere. Weekly I find new campaigns in my mailbox. It’s a good promotion for the agency and free publicity for their customer.
In this case I got, and many other adbloggers also, got these images from a guerilla campaign for the Instituto Nacional del Tórax, a medical institute from Chile. It’s about therapy for smokers with a high degree of addiction.
This kind of smokers will gather the ‘cigarette’ from the street, in this case it’s a ad for the Tórax institute.
Well nice idea and nicely done. But I got some minor problems with it. I’m not convinced heavy addictable smokers would go in therapy a reading the ad. But who knows, maybe I’m wrong.
My other point: Perfil BTL Santiago, the advertising agency who made this campaign, also work for Lucky Strike. You know what they make.
My question is: Do advertising agencies had to make choices for whom they will work for?
Sum1 wrote about a similar case about a campaign for Landmine.de (German organisation against landmines) which was made by the same agency who worked for DaimlerChrysler (DaimlerChrysler also produce landmines).
Read about it on sum1 (in german)
Or read the comments sum1 gave here at Houtlust (in english).