The ends don’t justify the means, but is it possible that the ends justify the exclusion of some means?
In Britain, a website did a man-on-the-street kind of study:
Representatives from price comparison website, www.moneysupermarket.com wandered the streets this morning wearing sandwich boards offering a free £5 note to anyone who asked. Despite encountering over 1800 people, only 28 passers by bothered to take advantage of the offer.
That’s a whole lot of people who wouldn’t ask for the money. If you follow the link to the press release, you’ll find the reasons people gave for not asking for the money (cynicism, unbelief, and embarrasment) and the conclusions drawn about people’s attitudes toward money in Britain. But, I’m more interested in what that says about the effectiveness of the form of communication. How much more would cynicism, unbelief, and embarrasment come into play when the message is religious and/or negative?
I’ll admit (before it comes up in the comments) that sandwich boards aren’t all that popular among street evangelists (as far as I know), but signage seems to be holding strong among protestors and other angry people trying to communicate a point. I just can’t see signs being an effective way of communicating the most important truth ever, especially after reading the story above.
Recent Comments