Over the past decades, nuclear power in Germany has been high on the political agenda, with heated discussions about whether or not the technology should be phased out. More and more arguments for a “phase-out of the phase-out” have been put forward (led by Angela Merkel) due to the recent energy disputes with Russia and the increasing prices of fossil fuels…only to clash with very active anti-nuclear activists on the ground, and with Greenpeace first.
Titled “The DeathZone”, the latest commercial campaign by Greenpeace Energy in Germany [Update on Jan. 12, 2010: I have just been contacted by one of the copywriters behind the campaign. The campaign is not actually run by Greenpeace, but was part of a project led by students of the Miami Ad School Europe, in Germany] aims at raising public awareness around the issues of aging nuclear reactors and the real dangers and safety threats associated to it, by referring to the Tchernobyl disaster and the remaining 32km2 exclusion zone (here called DeathZone) around the disaster site.
In addition to the video below, the DeathZone campaign includes a series of billboards, a balloon release event, and a virtual line to be drawn through the city of Hamburg at a radius of 32km2 as a symbolic representation of the DeathZone.
[ Update on Jan. 12, 2010: A more up-to-date and 'official' video is available here, with a clear disclaimer at the end notifying that this film is the work of students of Miami Ad School Europe.]
All in all, a campaign that could very well be a missed opportunity for Greenpeace Energy to further its goals and generate effective engagement around an important and rather urgent issue. I explain:
- The message is flawed. Scare tactics are used. The video and the billboards feed the public with apocalyptic images of nuclear disasters, of doom and despair … similar to any ‘end of the world’ movie you can think about. The title of the campaign says it all: DeathZone.
- What about the future? In the video, it says that “60% of Germans oppose the change in the law (i.e. canceling the “nuclear phase-out option”), but the vast majority still uses nuclear power”. Here is a big challenge…but Greenpeace totally fails to offer any solution or viable alternative. In a pure dramatic style, the campaign maximizes the problem and minimizes the solution (which is actually non-existent).
- Without any positive messages or any forward looking offer, this campaign might very well leave the public helpless/hopeless. And will unlikely generate behavior change or even enhance support for the anti-nuclear cause, whether from citizens/general public … or politicians.
After 16 ads of the day…I (sadly) feel like I am repeating myself, am I ? 
Credits: Advertising Agency: Miami Ad School Europe // Art Director: Zoe Sys Vogelius // Copywriters: Duncan Munge, Amadeus Henhapl
Source: Green Advertising Blog
Please will you change this post. This is NOT a campaign by Greenpeace Germany. Not even by Greenpeace Energy Germany.
This campaign was the idea of a bunch of students from Miami ad school europe! (you did put this at the bottom).
Thanks for your interest in the campaign (and the feedback) but please will you change this.
Hi Duncan,
Thanks for your comment and for spotting that error in the post. I will be happy to make the necessary corrections of course, so that the work and contribution of the Miami Ad School Europe can be fully recognized.
If I understand your point well, this campaign was a student project? Not likely to be commissioned by Greenpeace Germany or Greenpeace Energy?
Please let me know and give some more details, and I will update the post accordingly.
Cheers,
And my apologies for that error.
Perrine