Gun Control Advertisement Analysis

A Shocking Scenario: Analyzing a Gun Control Advertisement In the spring of 2013, GREY Advertisement agency released a series of advertisements for the organization “Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.” These public service announcements, placed on billboards around the country, are intended to “reflect the absurdity of our country's current lax laws and weak regulation of guns,” (Huffington Post, 2013). Contrasting a piece of candy to an assault rifle, one image uses emotion and logic to persuade the viewer. By taking a stance in the current gun-control debates, this image rephrases a significant social and political issue still faced in America today. Although this advertisement did not create a controversy at the time of its publication,
Nearly everyone recognized the problem of gun violence, but the proposed solutions were in sharp contrast. The two main opinions presented either supported stricter gun laws, keeping the same gun laws, or loosening restrictions. A 2013 Associated Press Survey revealed that 58% of the population favored stricter gun laws, whereas the remaining 42% favored the same or looser gun laws (Associated Press, 2013). This survey shows the polarity of the country’s opinions at the time of this advertisement’s publication. Since the debate was so close, both sides took action to persuade people. Many advertisements were (and still are) being made on this topic, so “Moms Demand Action” tried to rephrase the problem. Keeping to the conventions of an effective billboard advertisement, they kept their message short, concise, and to the point. These advertisements focused only on child safety, omitting any scenario that would bring up more a complicated debate. Leaving out this information simplifies this organization’s standpoint in the eyes of the viewer, making the advertisement more
As a billboard, it is essentially aimed towards anyone driving or sitting in the passenger seat of a car. This audience is made up of a wide variety of people with varying beliefs, which is why the advertisement must use such powerful and accessible imagery. The unintended audience includes children, who might see the ad and misunderstand the point it is trying to make. Since the audience for this advertisement is so broad, there are multiple ways that it could be interpreted. Most members of its intended audience would understand that the advertisement is against guns, but some might not see that. For example, one might think that the text is arguing that Kinder eggs should be legal in the United States because they are less dangerous than guns. The unintended audience (children) might see a child holding a rifle and understand that guns are dangerous, of they might want to have a gun themselves. These varying interpretations could be just as polarized as the gun debates themselves, and serve to hinder the effectiveness of this