Downloaded 14 times
Uploaded byTanmoy Porel
Ogilvy & Mather Project Presentation
The document discusses scope of social issue campaigns conducted by Indian English newspapers. It aims to assess the impact of such campaigns and identify parameters for effective campaigns. Research was conducted through surveys to analyze factors like social issues addressed, innovation, effectiveness, relevance and impact of past campaigns. Key findings were that successful campaigns strongly addressed social issues relevant to the audience and had significant impact. Attributes like strong implementation, importance of the issue, and marketing were found essential. Recommended future campaigns included issues like child labor, trafficking, water conservation, and smoking cessation. Social marketing models and diffusion of ideas theory were proposed to design and promote new impactful social campaigns.
More Related Content
Similar to Ogilvy & Mather Project Presentation
Ogilvy & Mather Project Presentation
- 1. Scope of socialissue campaigns by Indian english dailies Presented by: Tanmoy Porel, LIBA
- 2.
- 3. Objectives • To assessthe impact and effect of social issue campaigns by Indian english newspapers • To find the parameters or attributes for an effective social campaign • To gauge the scope of a particular campaign in the context of print media
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
- 7. Why? • Television remainsthe most popular source of information* • 22 per cent for news and current affairs • 63 per cent read newspapers to gather news and information on current event • Highest newspaper circulation • Numerous Social Issue Campaigns * WALL STREET JOURNAL http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/11/15/do-young-indians-read-not-as-much-as-they-watch-tv/
- 8.
- 9.
- 10. Gender Ratio* Female Male 45 30% 105 70% * AgeGroup :20-29 Years
- 11.
- 12. Newspaper Habits Regularly (Everyday) 92 61% Sometimes (Once ortwice a week) 49 33% Occasionally (Once or twice a month) 7 5% Rarely (newspapers are less visible to me) 1 1% Seldom 1 1%
- 13. Newspaper Habits I justgo through the headlines 19 13% 5-10 minutes 71 47% About an hour 55 37% 5 3% More
- 14. Medium Print (nothing beatsmorning tea/coffee and newspaper) 48 32% Newspaper websites 51 34% Apps on my smartphone 34 23% Facebook Groups/Pages 11 7% 6 4% Other
- 15. Newspaper Preference Times ofIndia 90 40% Hindustan Times 11 5% The Hindu 91 41% 3 1% 28 13% The Deccan Herald Other
- 16.
- 17. Purpose To be up-to-date 114 34% Totalk sense in my social circle 56 17% Entertainment is all I need 14 4% Authentic and Unbiased news 29 9% To know about happenings in and around the city 101 30% Movie listings and horoscope 15 4% 6 2% Other
- 18.
- 19.
- 20.
- 21. Variable Reliability Test •Variables • • • • • Social Issue Addressed Innovation Effectiveness Relevance Impact • Cronbach’s Alpha (α) = 0.662 (Fair to good) • Unidimensionality of the scale
- 22. Aman Ki Asha •Descriptive Statistics • Close Means • KMO Coefficient • 0.83 • Scree Plot • 59% variance explained by one component • Component Matrix • Relevance of the topic
- 23. Behave Yourself India •Descriptive Statistics • Social Issue Addressed • KMO Coefficient • 0.644 • Scree Plot • 62.7 % variance explained by two components • Component Matrix • Component 1: Social Issue Addressed, Innovation, Relevance • Component2 : Effectiveness, Impact
- 24. It’s My Life •Descriptive Statistics • Close Means • KMO Coefficient • 0.894 • Scree Plot • 73% variance is explained by one component • Component Matrix • All factors are important in the component
- 25. Lead India • DescriptiveStatistics • Close Means • KMO Coefficient • 0.751 • Scree Plot • 55.74% variance explained by one component • Component Matrix • Impact of the campaign
- 26. Mumbai For Women •Descriptive Statistics • Close Means • KMO Coefficient • 0.796 • Scree Plot • 64% variance explained by one component • Component Matrix • Effectiveness
- 27. Teach India • DescriptiveStatistics • Social Issue Addressed • KMO Coefficient • 0.644 • Scree Plot • 62.7% variance explained by two components • Component Matrix • Component 1 : Social Issue Addressed, Innovation, Relevance • Component 2 : Effectiveness, Impact
- 28. Act Against Corruption •Descriptive Statistics • Social Issue Addressed • KMO Coefficient • 0.805 • Scree Plot • 59% variance is explained by one component • Component Matrix • Effectiveness
- 29.
- 30.
- 31. Factor Analysis • DescriptiveStatistics • Close Means with Brand Name being the most important • KMO Coefficient • 0.827 • Scree Plot • 65% variance is explained by one component • Component Matrix • Implementation
- 32.
- 33.
- 34.
- 35. Importance of the socialissue Strongly Agree 55 37% Agree 48 32% Neutral 18 12% Disagree 10 7% Strongly Disagree 19 13%
- 36. Results or Effectof the Campaign Strongly Agree 53 35% Agree 39 26% Neutral 27 18% Disagree 20 13% Strongly Disagree 11 7%
- 37. Brand Name associated withthe campaign Strongly Agree 17 11% Agree 42 28% Neutral 42 28% Disagree 33 22% Strongly Disagree 16 11%
- 38.
- 39.
- 40.
- 41. Importance of social mediapresence Strongly Agree 54 36% Agree 77 51% Neutral 12 8% Disagree 6 4% Strongly Disagree 1 1%
- 42.
- 43.
- 44.
- 45. Passive Effect Exactly likeme 7 5% A lot like me 53 35% Somewhat like me 52 35% Not much like me 30 20% 8 5% Just my opposite
- 46. Consciousness Exactly like me 19 13% Alot like me 80 53% Somewhat like me 37 25% Not much like me 14 9% 0 0% Just my opposite
- 47. Respect for newspaper Exactlylike me 20 13% A lot like me 43 29% Somewhat like me 41 27% Not much like me 44 29% 2 1% Just my opposite
- 48. Futility Exactly like me 8 5% Alot like me 15 10% Somewhat like me 43 29% Not much like me 63 42% Just my opposite 21 14%
- 49. Active Effect Exactly likeme 16 11% A lot like me 39 26% Somewhat like me 64 43% Not much like me 29 19% 2 1% Just my opposite
- 50. Influence Exactly like me 7 5% Alot like me 34 23% Somewhat like me 57 38% Not much like me 43 29% 9 6% Just my opposite
- 51. Campaigns considered as Weapons Exactlylike me 23 15% A lot like me 64 43% Somewhat like me 45 30% Not much like me 16 11% 2 1% Just my opposite
- 52. Awareness Exactly like me 32 21% Alot like me 61 41% Somewhat like me 40 27% Not much like me 14 9% 3 2% Just my opposite
- 53. Interest in politics Exactlylike me 29 19% A lot like me 30 20% Somewhat like me 36 24% Not much like me 32 21% Just my opposite 23 15%
- 54.
- 55. Newspaper preference Times ofIndia 96 42% The Hindu 10 8 48% Hindustan Times 15 7% Deccan Herald 2 1% Other 5 2%
- 56. Stray Dogs Adoption 35 4% Welfarefor slum dwellers 40 5% Child Labour 57 7% Trafficking of children 59 7% Primary Education 43 5% Women Empowerment 37 5% Save Water 57 7% Indian Democracy and its problems 38 5% The Rise of Aam Aadmi 23 3% Petrol Adulteration 39 5% Garbage Disposal/Recycling 55 7% Quit Smoking 45 6% Casteism 42 5% Rape Laws 48 6% Gender Equality 30 4% Female Genocide 34 4% Save Petrol 36 4% Save Paper 39 5% Public Conveyance 45 6% Other 12 1% Social Campaigns
- 57. Social Campaigns The most numberof response came for “NO SMOKING” Campaign in „Other‟ category
- 58.
- 59. Findings • Previous campaignssucceeded due to the following factors • Social Issue Addressed • Relevance of the issue • Impact • Attributes essential for a successful campaign • • • • Implementation Importance of the issue addressed Brand Name Marketing
- 60. Findings • Campaigns tobe considered • • • • • Child Labour Trafficking of Children Save Water Garbage Disposal/Recycling No Smoking
- 61.
- 69.
- 70.
- 71.
- 72. “the design, implementation,and control of programs calculated to influence the acceptability of social ideas and involving considerations of product planning, pricing, communication, distribution, and marketing research” Philip Kotler and Gerald Zaltman
- 73. Model* • Selecting Behaviour •Identifying Barriers and Benefits • Developing Strategies • • • • • • • Commitment Social Norms : Community Support Social Diffusion Prompts Communication Incentives Convenience • Piloting • Broad Scale Implementation and Evaluation *Fostering Sustainable Behavior – Doug McKenzie – Mohr, New Society Publishers
- 74.
- 75.