The New Lil-lets Campaign

After encountering some varied opinions from colleagues and completely changing my own tune, I have finally settled on a point of view regarding the new Lil-lets campaign by MC Saatchi & Abel.

Someone argued that the ad doesn’t convey any functional product benefits (e.g. efficacy and quality) and hence, is essentially not doing much for the brand. I tend to disagree.

I admit that the campaign/ad is quite emotional and serious and says nothing of the product, but I think that is precisely what’s working for me. I reckon it is the details of sanitary products that embarrass people i.e. the functional benefits that are given horrible names/references like channels, leaks, leak-protection, WINGS (for crying out loud), barriers, walls, absorbent gel…all of which have quite vivid connotations or that conjure up very specific, unfeminine and often awkward imagery.

I think the category, through its communication and what have since become conventions, has created half the embarrassment that women experience when it comes to talking about/experiencing periods and I really don’t know if many chicks would choose to see all this stuff.

What has changed my mind about the Lil-lets campaign is the very fact that it says nothing about all those exaggerated or weird things: no demos, no flapping wings or contorting pads, no blue liquid, no reminders of all the things I really hate and that I am pretty certain other girls and women dislike too.

Essentially, this ad challenges the category slightly and gives a little more credit to what women know and feel i.e. implying a level of personal discernment when it comes to choosing and using (pretty intimate) products and knowing/feeling what is quality and what works.

This is my experience. NOBODY can help me when I’m on my period besides chocolate, I migraine tablet and isolation (read: a day off so I don’t have to talk to anyone), so a sanitary brand is unlikely to do much for me either. All it offers is a product I HAVE to use. No matter how comfortable you try and convince me your pad or tampon is I’d still prefer not to wear one. Full stop. But because that’s not realistic, all I want is a product that is the “healthiest”/best possible quality, the most efficacious, the least embarrassing…and if it proves not to work, I’ll ask what my friends are using and change very swiftly.

A brand needs to say very little to suggest that it is a quality and hence efficacious product – I will make my decision based on what you look like on that shelf or, depending on my age, I’d rely on my mother or friends for help. At the end of the day, the proof will be in my experience of a sanitary product, especially since I believe that every woman or girl has had an embarrassing moment, moments which are actually often not avoidable or solvable by the best product on the market.

Having said all this, the Lil-lets communication may be category challenging and worthy of praise for sparing us demos and unique descriptions, but executionally, it’s not new. One could change the voiceover of the ad and it could be for life insurance, a car, a bank, an education policy, a beauty product, tracker or the next instalment of the new KFC campaign…

DA Youth Poster

If this was truly an effective piece of communication promoting cultural/racial integration, then I doubt that the DA Youth would need to jump to such a defensive conclusion: ‘…if educated university students see the poster as promoting sex, "then we have no hope".’

I’m not certain that slating an intended target audience is the best means of rallying the same people behind your campaign. And, if the sentiment of students is accurate, surely the DA Youth should first question whether it actually understands the very people it is talking to and the context within which they live, rather than reactively question their interpretative skills.

The fact is that people consider it sexual. I agree that this is frustrating, but for a number of reasons, we do operate in a fairly conservative and touchy society when it comes to nudity or anything sexual. There is no escaping that. One would hope that the DA Youth would be aware of this, and I’m pretty certain they were…

Clearly the intention was for the communication to be provocative without being cheesy or reminiscent of an idealistic portrayal of a Rainbow Nation. This is not an easy balance to strike because how does one show “political togetherness” without people scoffing at it and considering it another piece of colourful, 1994-inspired propaganda?

However, I do have to question how much thought went into this and can’t help but feel that a naked couple was the easiest and most obvious option. I’m all for provoking people to think a little and be forced, even temporarily, to exit their comfort zones, but at least then back your efforts up with a bit of thought, planning and perhaps some basic research. Hit us hard with your message and not with distractions from it.

Personally, there’s something more believable in seeing a group of racially- and culturally-diverse kids playing, for example, than seeing an image of an inter-racial couple, who had to be portrayed naked to ensure that people got the message.  Unfortunately, in this instance and whether the DA Youth like it or not, nudity is driving people’s interpretation.