László Bihari, a member of organiKvideo, explores the secrets of successful and effective social campaign videos. organiK is a video agency specializing in social issues, which primarily produces videos for NGOs.
From time to time, an organization approaches us saying that they saw a good foreign campaign video and want one. These videos usually traveled the world because they left a lasting impression on viewers, who then shared them. Something we feel more deeply than words can describe. But the majority of domestic NGO commissions, which lead to video campaigns, usually do not consider this influence mechanism important, only to explain something in the videos. In this post, it will be discussed that a stronger civil sector requires campaigns that count on this lasting effect, because the world is the way it is today because some people grossly abuse this tool.
The nephew of the founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud, had at least as much influence on the world as he did, but fewer people know his name. Edward Bernays is credited with the development of PR, more precisely, the way advertising works today. Before Bernays, they advertised in the same way that many NGO videos try to convince people today: they explained the message. Under the influence of his uncle, Freud, Bernays came to the conclusion that human desires, especially subconscious desires, have a deeper influence on our behavior than rational thinking, and that is why he based the advertisement on this. One of his first assignments was to popularize smoking among women, which in 1929 was more of a male habit. The Torches of freedom campaign suggested that smoking is a symbol of equality for women. The campaign stirred up a lot of dust, linking smoking with the fulfillment of desires that actually have nothing to do with cigarettes. But regardless of this lie, the customer can still feel that his wish has been fulfilled. (The BBC made a documentary about Berneys' life.)
Later, another communication specialist brought this idea into political advertising, only he focused not on desires, but on fear and hatred. Arthur Finkelstein is credited with the spread of negative campaigns. Among other things, he realized that it is more effective than rational argument if the campaign creates fear and then promises protection. Finkelstein taught that if you explain your agenda, no one will vote for you, but if you point out a scapegoat, you will succeed. After his death, one of his former colleagues spoke in the press about the fact that the campaign against György Soros was developed as a product by his company and sold to the Hungarian government. Among other things, this campaign suggested that all NGOs that receive money from the Soros Open Society Foundation are controlled by Soros himself, and that the people working there are "soldiers" paid from abroad.
In a presentation in Prague, Finkelstein explained his own approach by saying that everyone gets information from multiple sources, so there is a lot of uncertainty, and one message is easily canceled out by another. For this reason, civil videos based on purely rational arguments do not work. Will you explain that housing is a human right? How is equal opportunity needed in education? Why shouldn't Fertő lake be concreted? Whatever you say, an argument in the opposite direction will immediately come from somewhere to weaken yours. But when something affects our emotions, it goes much deeper and its effect is more difficult to undo.
This does not mean that we also have to manipulate to achieve a deeper effect. While Bernays misled the target audience for cigarette advertising, for example, environmental protection campaigns can really be based on the desires deep inside all of us, we don't have to be manipulative. And while Finkelstein's campaign turned people against each other, whoever campaigns for a more solidary society does not need to play social groups against each other.
And such campaigns will be greatly needed now. The globalized economy is heading towards collapse, but we don't have to think that the era of Mad Max is definitely coming: the only thing that is certain is that changes are coming, which we are already dealing with - this is what the founder of Extinction Rebellion, Jem Bendell, writes in his new book, In Breaking together.
Whether you believe in this or not, we can probably agree that the campaigns and video content of the civil sector can play a huge role in finding alternatives to our dead-end paradigms, lifestyles, consumption habits, and political culture in all areas of life.
The task is not in itself to offer solutions to problems, but to create experiences in people that inspire them to internal changes. To changes that we have already gone through. When we campaign for climate change to be a central aspect of political decisions, or for gender equality to finally exist, or for urban development not to be decided by investors, and other fundamental topics to be given adequate weight in the public eye, then we also work from what we believe in. These driving forces are unique to all of us, but the more authentically we can portray them, the more deeply other people resonate with them.
What does this mean in practical terms? That we have to give the previous civil videos and campaigns a stronger impact and deeper content in order to achieve changes with greater efficiency.
One of the most important things to think about is: do you really believe that the goal for which you are launching the video campaign is achievable? A social campaign in the best sense of the word is not misleading, but on the contrary, works like an audio amplifier. It amplifies something barely audible, barely visible. What you believe in. And also if you don't believe in your own success.
Today, a lot of civilian videos are made, which at the time of production, no one thinks that what the project is supposed to aim for will actually happen. And the viewer feels this too. If you publicly demand something that you know won't happen, it will resonate positively only within your own bubble, but you will give others the impression that you stand for illusions, so you don't understand how the world works. This image has a much stronger effect on those outside the bubble than what you want to convey in the video.
It is possible and important to stand up for a value, but this can only become an effective tool if we understand and accept that the majority do not yet consider this value as important as we do, and therefore do not want to join us for the time being. Therefore, we should not stand up for the value as if everyone agrees with us and we should just call them to act, but as when we want to give something to people that they do not yet have.
For example, many people agree that housing should be available to everyone, but for that reason, many fewer people would go out on the streets. But the realization of any such universal value is a great experience, and it is this experience that we must first inspire before people will stand by us. I have something to do with your housing, in fact, we all have something to do with ensuring that no one gets cold, and experiencing this is a huge experience for those who are involved in housing activism. Because getting to know the bridges that connect us involves a lifelong inner transformation. This experience needs to be passed on to a lot of people before we can call on the government to change something. The order is important. Video has a role to play here as well, together with many other tools, it can inspire a personality-shaping experience, if you're lucky.
A strong campaign has two legs: you, whose organization, cause, and faith are the foundation, and the creative team, who magnify this and make it experienceable for the world. Both are equally important. In order for the world to understand and experience what the employees of an NGO often spend decades on, it requires hard and persistent joint work between the organization's employees and communication specialists. It is time to recognize that both have serious resource requirements.
Until now, the belief that civility in itself is so attractive that successful campaigns can be run with minimal mental effort has been strongly held in the Hungarian civil sector, that is, the methods of campaigns are secondary issues. Many people think that when producing a campaign video, it is enough to do something very simple:
to show in itself the enthusiasm or indignation that flows from those who join a civil initiative - and that will be transferred to the viewers of the video, and then the masses will gather in support of the cause.
a problem needs to be explained, and then everyone who agrees is on our side.
However, this only works well within each organization's own bubble, which is why you see a lot of civil communication efforts that have little or no effect on those outside the bubble. And this is only partly because there are no large advertising expenditures in civic campaigns. It often seems that the videos themselves cannot be very attractive to those who are not close to an organization, that is, they use a different language, cultural codes, and live in a different environment than the actors and inventors of the video.
Minimal effort videos work well when there is something extra to carry the show. For example, if something special happens, a live telecast can also bring fabulous views. If someone had been at Verecke's with a phone at the time of the Hungarian occupation and logged in from Árpád's side, that video would have caused reactions for centuries. Or if we have an actor who perfectly feels the public and the video genre frameworks, then miracles can be done with him as well. Many influencers essentially make a living from this. In these cases, even an uncut material recorded with a phone can work well. In other cases, however, it doesn't hurt to figure out more thoroughly what will make our video interesting.
No matter how great a team your organization is and no matter how brilliant professionals work on your campaign videos, if the prerequisites for a campaign are not met, the result will be ineffective. Try to decide together with creative video professionals and people dealing with communication about what and when you can produce strong campaign videos. Preferably with those with whom you will then work on the campaign. And if possible, start talking when there is no decision yet. Because only together can you assess whether the conditions are really there for a good campaign video to be born. You don't see yourself from the outside, and they can't see into the world, current events, and possibilities of your organization without you. And all of these influence when something can be successful. For example, you have an important message for nothing if you don't have the right character, story or resources to make the message effective in a video. Therefore, the first question should always be: are the conditions for a good campaign video all together?