Thursday, October 8, 2015

Public Shaming or Health Warning?


Last week, a billboard linking online dating and hook-up apps, namely Grindr and Tinder, to STDs such as chlamydia and gonorrhea appeared on West Hollywood. The campaign, pictured below, is the courtesy of the Aids Healthcare Foundation (AHF) and aims at encouraging users of such apps to get tested for sexually transmitted diseases. This well meant initiative has however led to backlash from the two companies.




Tinder, on one hand, has sent a letter to the foundation, demanding the removal of the billboards and accusing the foundation of "unprovoked and wholly unsubstantiated accusations" made to irreparably damage Tinder’s reputation in an attempt to encourage others to take their HIV test. They further argued that "while Tinder strongly supports such testing, the Billboard’s statements are not founded upon any scientific evidence, and are incapable of withstanding critical analysis.”

Grindr, on a more subtle note, responded with an email statement saying how they have always been actively concerned with keeping users informed about health issues. In addition, they proceeded to removing the foundation’s paid advertising for it’s free STD testing services from their app. “We were surprised at the approach the AHF took, and paused the campaign in order to speak with them and assess our relationship.”, Grindr’s spokesperson commented, adding, “In the end, we’re all on the same page regarding this issue, as health and wellness concerns us all.”

Michael Weinstein, president of the AHF, in an interview with the Guardian called both organizations “tone deaf” and justified his stance by stating that there are consequences to hooking up and minimizing that fact is important. He also criticized their defensive responses, suggesting it would have been wiser if they had supported and joined the initiative instead of overreacting.

The foundation further denied the removal of the billboards and responded to Tinder’s request letter by citing the recent Vanity Fair article entitled Tinder and the Dawn of the “Dating Apocalypse", that attributed a boom in casual hookups to the emergence of dating apps like Tinder and a report released by the the Rhode Island Department of Health in May that credited the rise in syphilis, gonorrhea, and HIV between 2013 and 2014 to high-risk behaviors like “using social media to arrange casual and often anonymous sexual encounters”. In addition, Whitney Eregan Cordova, the foundation’s public health division director, stated that “In many ways, location-based mobile dating apps are becoming a digital bathhouse for millennials wherein the next sexual encounter can literally just be a few feet away—as well as the next STD”.

It is a common case for healthcare campaigns to attempt to shock people in hopes of being effective. In terms of semantic associations, the message is pretty clear in this one. However, do you think that AHF should have (ab)used the logos of the apps in such a way? Could it be an attempt to raise attention to the campaign by inviting them to a public feud? In my opinion, it was an offensive move, especially in regards to Grindr, who was already associated with foundation and promoted their message. On another note, what do you think of the ways Tinder and Grindr reacted? If you were working as a PR professional in one of the two organizations, what would your advice be to them?

-Papadogkona Ifigeneia


1 comment:

  1. It's an interesting case because all relevant actors seem to have a point. Like you said, the AHF might try to shock people a bit to get them to think about it. Also, in line with the article in Vanity Fair, they may be right to emphasize the risk of online dating apps. However, it is also understandable that Tinder and Grindr react negatively because it hurts their reputation.

    If the point was to raise awareness by starting a public feud, the AHF succeeded in that. However, this is at the cost of their relationship with Tinder and Grindr. I think, even though the billboard may help in reaching awareness, it may have been better for the AHF to invest in a good relationship with both Tinder and Grindr. In the long run, it could be more fruitful when these three organizations combine their resources in addressing these issues. Therefore, it may be useful for the AHF to try and reach out to these organizations. In return, Tinder and Grindr could perhaps tone down in their responses, and emphasize their common goal.

    ReplyDelete