Where Are New York's Missing Mice?

Where Are New York's Missing Mice?


If you've noticed a few tiny, tiny posters in your neighbourhood, D-Con knows why they're there.

If you happen to be in New York right about now you might have noticed a tiny poster or two, each with a heartfelt plea: where's this missing mouse? Pest control company D-Con knows. It's all part of a chuckle-worthy ad campaign, complete with a series of short YouTube videos. It's all about as tame as it could possibly be, so fear not if you're at work.

"Typically pest control advertising is seasonal," says a spokesman for Havas Worldwide, the ad company behind the campaign, "But as the No. 1 selling mouse killer, we wanted to be top of mind before the problem starts."

Indeed. There might be one or two rodents left in New York by the time the campaign's run its course, but there's something charming - in the Charles Addams sense - about D-Con's latest.

Source: Gizmodo

Permalink

Oh, that's a shame. I'm quite fond of mice. Rats, not so much, but mice? I usually manage to reach an understanding with them. All they want is some nice cozy lodgings and a little ball of rice every now and then.

Okay, I know mice are pests and carry disease, so it's necessary to control their population in urban centers. But could we maybe be less giddy about wiping out "lesser" species. Not a very enlightened attitude.

The mice? They moved to New Jersey with all of the homeless population after it became illegal to give them food.

Anyone else find it a bit weird that pest control companies keep using personification of the pests to sell their product to kill them?

Well, I hope I never have a mouse problem, because now I'll never be able to get rid of them.

Lightknight:
Anyone else find it a bit weird that pest control companies keep using personification of the pests to sell their product to kill them?

Now that you mention it...that's more than a little creepy. I think they've also underestimated the internet's fondness for the little creatures. If they were replaced by stray cats in the advertisements...oh, boy.

Barbas:

Lightknight:
Anyone else find it a bit weird that pest control companies keep using personification of the pests to sell their product to kill them?

Now that you mention it...that's more than a little creepy. I think they've also underestimated the internet's fondness for the little creatures. If they were replaced by stray cats in the advertisements...oh, boy.

Yeah, the ads have the wife of a mouse calling 911 because her husband just died. It's... creepy.

After watching all the shorts, they are...dark. Surprisingly dark to be honest, you don't humanize creatures you make your living killing. It just makes us empathize with the wee little creatures. Anyway, I don't like killing them if I can help it at all.

Yeah, that's messed up. It's funny in a very dark way, but... you're basically telling us you're #1 at murdering sentient, sapient, human-like beings. These ads would make more sense if PeTA were releasing them to make us empathize with the little critters.

Does this really belong in the Escapist? I mean really? an ad about pest control.

Lightknight:
Anyone else find it a bit weird that pest control companies keep using personification of the pests to sell their product to kill them?

Weird? not at all really, since people have a tendency to find most other species "cute" rather than their own, the reaction to a human baby is "that's a cute baby", but if you show a puppy, it'll most likely be "THAT'S ADORABLE".

Personification is a common thing when you want people to feel less "bad" about something, like killing rodents for example.

Grabehn:

Lightknight:
Anyone else find it a bit weird that pest control companies keep using personification of the pests to sell their product to kill them?

Weird? not at all really, since people have a tendency to find most other species "cute" rather than their own, the reaction to a human baby is "that's a cute baby", but if you show a puppy, it'll most likely be "THAT'S ADORABLE".

Personification is a common thing when you want people to feel less "bad" about something, like killing rodents for example.

I think the number of people who would react stronger to the death of a puppy than the death of a baby are in a minority.

Nomad:
I think the number of people who would react stronger to the death of a puppy than the death of a baby are in a minority.

Isn't it nice when people overextend a comment beyond the point where they still make any sense?

That was an example of why Personification is used to remove most of the feels someone might get from saying "here, we kill mice", not a direct comparison saying "people care more when you kill a puppy than when you kill a baby".

The Daves are trying to change our computerized way of life!

Wait... Oh, vermin-type mice. Right... My bad!

So... its not a viral campaign for Mouse Guard? Shame.

Grabehn:

Nomad:
I think the number of people who would react stronger to the death of a puppy than the death of a baby are in a minority.

Isn't it nice when people overextend a comment beyond the point where they still make any sense?

That was an example of why Personification is used to remove most of the feels someone might get from saying "here, we kill mice", not a direct comparison saying "people care more when you kill a puppy than when you kill a baby".

Let's review what was said:

  • LightKnight implies (by way of questioning) it is weird that pest control companies humanize pests in order to make people more inclined to kill them. (Meaning that the companies believe people have less of a problem killing "people" than pests).
  • You then say this is not weird at all, because people react more positively to puppies than human babies, with regards to cuteness. You then state that people will feel less bad about killing something if it is humanized, because of this. You explicitly say that framing rodents as persons will make people feel better about killing them than framing rodents as pests.
  • I then point out that with regards to death, few people will react stronger to a puppy dying than a human baby dying. This statement can be held to say one of two things, either of which I would stand behind: either it means that people do not, in fact, react more positively to puppies than to babies. Or it means that regarding death specifically, they care more about babies than puppies. As "death" is more relevant to the subject at hand than "cuteness", both points would make the whole campaign seem weird.
  • You again reiterate that personifying mice (turning them into persons) removes most of people's feelings about killing them: again stating that people do not particularly care about the death of persons.

If anyone overxtended a comment, it wasn't me: I never claimed, as you imply, that you held the position that people care more about puppies dying than babies dying. What I did claim was that your example, as you put it, does not hold water. It is thoroughly strange that the ad company would think humanizing pests will make us more inclined to kill them.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here