No more homeless pets and other exercises in messaging
By Christie Keith
October 22, 2009
I’m off to Best Friends’ “No More Homeless Pets” conference this weekend — tragically being held in Las Vegas. Why are so many animal welfare organizations holding their events in Las Vegas these days? (I actually know the answer — it’s cheap. I was just whining.)
Best Friends is the no-kill group that virtually never utters that phrase. Don’t get me wrong, though, I love “no more homeless pets.” It’s great messaging, and if you’re now thinking I’m a little on the word-obsessed side, well, yes. I am.
That’s why I’m also head over heels in love with the Oregon Humane Society’s campaign to “end petlessness.” (Click to view image in full size.)
I commented on their Facebook page how much I admired them for coming up with that one, and they said it had been developed for them by ad agency Leopold Ketel & Partners. Talk about turning the usual messaging upside down!
I’ll definitely check in from the conference this weekend. I might try liveblogging, if I can hook up to the Interwebz… it’s always iffy. And if you’ll be there, shout out in the comments!
But what’s their attitude towards potential adopters when they come in? Their website has a discouraging amount of information to go through, much of which could be presented more positively and usefully in person than online. They say they have a scaled fee structure, but don’t give any information about where the fees start. They discourage people with children under six from getting pets—my sister was six months when we got our first dog (and I was ten years.) With small children in the house, you need to think about what’s the right pet, for sure—and if you have four under the age of five, you may not have time for a pet quite yet, but OHS just discourages people with kids under six from getting pets at all.
Maybe for the person who comes in the door or calls on the phone, they’re warm, encouraging, and helpful. But if that’s the case, they may want to ask the same ad agency that came up with “End Petlessness” to work over the messaging on their website.
Comment by Lis — October 22, 2009 @ 6:30 am
But if that’s the case, they may want to ask the same ad agency that came up with “End Petlessness” to work over the messaging on their website.
Comment by Lis — October 22, 2009
I would bet they’re aware of this. I can tell you from my “day job” work that getting consistent messaging across all media platforms is a real challenge. Even more so for small non-profits!
Comment by Gina Spadafori — October 22, 2009 @ 6:49 am
Oh, and by the way … you have NO IDEA how much Christie hates Las Vegas. Her hatred of the place even tops her hatred for non-fashionable footwear. (Although, seriously, Christie, if you wore Crocs in Vegas you’d fit in and be more comfortable. Just sayin’ … LOL!)
Comment by Gina Spadafori — October 22, 2009 @ 6:51 am
Gina…Technically, Crocs are fashionable in that they are popular, but that does not make them attractive! :)
Love that “End Petlessness” slogan.
Comment by Katie Bruesewitz — October 22, 2009 @ 10:21 am
I loved their ad campaign ever since I saw one of their commercials on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSo5eApMYZ4
Too cute!
Comment by Pai — October 22, 2009 @ 11:21 am
I agree it’s a great ad. I’m a wee bit far from Oregon to know much about the rest of their operations, so I’ll take your word on that. Pity.
Comment by Susan — October 22, 2009 @ 8:15 pm
Lis, I see your point - I grew up with a dog, too - but I also understand why shelters and rescues today are so much more nervous about adopting to families with small kids. Parents today aren’t like our parents were. If our psychotic fox terrier bit me, my parents asked me what I did to the DOG. (Answer: nothing. He was a biter.) Today, if widdle Johnnie whacks the dog with a 2 x 4 every 15 minutes and eventually the dog loses its patience and snaps or growls, blammo, the dog is back to the shelter with a report of being aggressive, or worse, put down by the owner.
One of the positive things I can say about my dad is that he probably would have re-homed one of us before killing the dog. If nothing else, he taught me to love and respect animals.
Comment by Susan — October 22, 2009 @ 8:33 pm
There’s the unfortunate side to the “ending petlessness” slogan, and that is adopting pets out to families that should not have them. It’s easy for that phrase to sound virtuous until you work for a facility that sees the endless strays and dumped animals from shelter adoptions gone wrong (microchips and tags tell that tale). Not every family should have a dog or a cat and that’s OK.
Comment by B. Badger — November 6, 2009 @ 9:10 pm
B. Bagder, that’s a very different story than I hear from shelter directors all over the country. They still screen, but in a friendly, positive way, designed to make people feel like they’re having a good experience instead of undergoing the Spanish inquisition.
And wonder of wonders, their bounceback rates have either stayed flat or gone up only a tiny fraction of their new, increased adoption rate.
Which saves animal lives, and does not result in animals in bad homes or bouncing back to shelters. What results in high bounce backs and bad placements is BAD ADOPTION POLICIES, not aggressive adoption programs. The fear of seeing “endless strays and dumped animals” is an excuse made by crappy shelters that don’t want to change, or shelters that don’t know how to do effective adoption matchmaking in the first place.
The key to ending pet homelessness is doing a good job at sheltering and rehoming animals. And that means being fast, being high volume, and being good. A challenge for sure, but one shelters all over America, in all kinds of communities, are meeting.
Comment by Christie Keith — November 6, 2009 @ 11:52 pm