Government defends 'waste of money' mobile campaign

by Daniel Farey-Jones, Brand Republic 01-Jun-09, 11:55

LONDON - A Government-funded mobile video series aimed at cutting teenage pregnancy has come under fire from the Taxpayers' Alliance after the BBC calculated it cost £45 per person who subscribed to watch it.

The taxpayers' group attacked the government for using "gimmicky marketing" but the Department for Children, Schools and Families said the campaign was a pilot and had exceeded its target for subscribers. The agency behind the campaign has also issued a defence, protesting the £45 figure is "inaccurate and unfair".

The controversy centres on a made-for-mobile drama series called 'Thmbnls' produced for £250,000 as part of the government's strategy to reduce teenage pregnancy rates.

It was made by digital agency 20:20 London and launched four months ago.

It is free to download as the government pays the cost, and people could subscribe to receive the 22 weekly one-minute episodes to their mobile through Thmbnls.co.uk.

The BBC discovered using a Freedom of Information request that 5,576 people have subscribed to it. It worked out the cost per subscriber as £45.

However, the DCSF said it was unfair to omit the number of people who visited the website and watched episodes on YouTube.

Figures supplied by the DCSF in relation to a separate FOI request from campaigner David Gunn show 196,438 unique users visited the Thmbnls website as of May 11, accounting for 262,755 visits.

In addition the trailer for the series was watched 82,619 times on YouTube.

Susie Squire from the Taxpayers' Alliance said: "Too often the government engages with gimmicky marketing and gimmicky advertising because they think they are going to reach a new audience.

"I think when it comes to spending taxpayers' money, particularly on healthcare issues, they should be going for the most effective approach."

The DCSF said it will not know whether Thmbnls is "appropriate for continued investment" until it completes a project evaluation which establishes how it has influenced young peoples' behaviour.

But the department argues it was acceptable to use public money to explore using new approaches to get its messages to hard to reach audiences.

A spokeswoman said: "The Government is often criticised for failing to exploit the opportunities presented by new media and technologies in stimulating behaviour change on important social issues, in this case teenage pregnancy and sexual health, so we believe it is a legitimate use of public money to explore this, in the context of a much wider cross-government teenage pregnancy strategy.

The department also claimed using the mobile channel offered "good value for money" compared with established media.

"As a campaign message vehicle the production of the drama represents good value for money when compared to traditional assets like TV, radio or print adverts.

"Unlike these vehicles, the nature and delivery mechanism for thmbnls enables much richer content that also incorporates interaction and personalisation.

"If we were to deliver thmbnls on TV, the production and broadcast cost would be considerably higher and delivery through traditional online media would be at a similar cost to mobile."

20:20 London also defended the campaign, which it said was designed to have a sustained presence in the lives of young people in deprived inner city areas.

Jo Szpunar, account director at the agency, said: "We argue that exposing a target audience to 22 messages over a long and sustained period of time is more effective at changing habits than hitting a large amount of people with a single message."

The agency claimed the amount of personalisation in the series helped engage recipients and make them feel welcome members of the fictional group.

It also pointed out its budget has also covered two on-campus print campaigns with posters and flyers distributed at further education colleges in target areas.

**Read Chris Barraclough's blog on the criticism**