When Clorox decided to compare toilet water to tap water in a TV spot for its Brita water filter system, it definitely made waves.
The plan was to generate some excitement around Brita through the brand’s first dedicated marketing in Canada. In fact, the campaign did more than raise awareness and sales, it also stirred controversy over the quality of municipal drinking water.
The marketing began in the spring with a TV spot, print ads and a microsite by DDB Canada and Tribal DDB. Clorox was keen to drive development of its Brita Faucet Filtration System since sales considerably lagged those of the U.S. Faced with the challenge of convincing Canadians they needed such a device, DDB built a campaign centred on the insight that tap water is the same water used for toilets and other household tasks. “Once we realized that was the reality, we knew we had a real nugget that we could attach ourselves to,” says Andrew Simon, creative director at DDB in Toronto.
Quantitative and qualitative testing went so well that it was too compelling to resist, says Ken Cross, director of marketing and business teams at Clorox Company of Canada in Brampton, Ont. “We hadn’t planned to go as aggressively as we did, but we thought it made sense. It was really grounded in a truth, so the insights were relevant and really made consumers stop and think.”
But the TV commercial in particular stirred the waters. “Glass” shows a glass of water on a kitchen table that drains at the same time that a toilet is heard flushing in the background. As a woman emerges from the washroom, the glass refills, and she takes a sip while a headline reads “Tap and toilet water come from the same source.” The Brita system is promoted as filtering out lead, chlorine and sediment.
The dramatic visuals worked. Clorox has more than doubled its business, says Cross. “Where we were significantly under-developed versus the U.S., we’ve closed the gap dramatically.” (The ad is also being used to promote Brita’s water pitchers.)
But not everyone was happy. The Canadian Water and Wastewater Association called it “commercial propaganda with a degrading intent toward municipal drinking water supplies,” and filed an official complaint with Advertising Standards Canada while making its concerns known to media, government and industry.
The strong negative reaction was unexpected, says Cross, because the research had shown that consumer concerns were below average and Clorox has been making the same statements about its products for years. “Everything in the advertising was 100% true so we didn’t think they (the association) had grounds to go and complain. The difference was this advertising was much more compelling than we’ve had historically.”
The TV spot was one of several tested by DDB but the others were considered either too “disgusting” in their graphic use of a toilet or too soft, or less intrusive, in their messaging. “The simplicity of the visual was what worked for us,” says Cross. “Consumers got it right away… It didn’t turn them off.”
But keen to “play nice,” Clorox made some changes at the request of the ASC. Two supers were added to the TV spot to clarify that municipally supplied water is treated to make it suitable for drinking. In addition, viewers are now directed to drinkbrita.ca instead of youdeservebetter.ca and are no longer asked, “Don’t you deserve better?”
There was never any contention about the message being truthful, says Simon, there was just a need for clarification. “We knew we had something powerful and we wanted to really bring it to life. The sound mnemonic and visual mnemonic are the heroes of the story.”
SARAH DOBSON is a freelance writer in Toronto.
