No offense but I am shocked that anyone-ANYONE-could possibly see these ads as effective. I am not suggesting a return to the days of "Marijuana will make you a murderous sex crazed lunatic" but a dog saying "you disappoint me"?? You know who I can guarantee you loves these ads?: Stoned Teenagers. Every time these ads come on, I can imagine a basement full of stoners giggling and high fiving everytime the dog raises the dog flag (presumably claiming this planet in the name of Dog). There are print versions of these ads that run in comic books which are equally baffling. One depicts a boy saying "I smoke pot to impress the ladies". His friend retorts "Try football". What does that even mean? How about someone (without hysteria) finding a way of stating that if you are still growing and developing, marijuana will disrupt that growth particularly your mental development? In other words, stating the truth and not making weird little cartoons about aliens that, quite frankly, look like they were designed by someone higher than Wavy Gravy at 4:21. I thought that one of the best spots was the one where the speaker states that his friend smokes weed and never got arrested, never this never that (negating all the popular myths about marijuana use) before finally stating that he never actually does anything at all and that he lives in his parents basement well into his twenties. Realistic and terribly frightening to most teens. Then again, disappointing one's dog to the degree that he overthrows the earth..well, I guess that's scary too.....IF YOU"RE HIGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The problem with your solution is the same as telling people not to drink and drive. They know the truth; getting arrested for DUI or worse an accident. Does that stop them? No. Sometimes you have to appeal to peer pressure to overcome the "it won't happen to me" mind set which is much further from "truth" than the ads. Most ads don't lay truth directly on the table. How many beer ads show a 45 year old guy with a beer gut who says, "Wambat beer tastes good, so buy it."? Instead you get a hot chick or guy who in real life never drink beer, showing that drinking beer is the only way to have fun.

The ad with the UFO alien was inspired by the copywriters' "personal experience"? What have THEY been smoking?

Everytime I see this anti pot commercial it makes me want to get high. I can't imagine anything funnier then watching these ads stoned out of my mind. Unfortunately I gave it up and no longer smoke but these ads make me want to change my mind.

i agree. i can't imagine how this ad could be seen as effective. and to call this "the best ad ever?" the best ad ever is one that more effectively sells the product than any pre-existing or competing ads. or when a product isn't for sale, creates or exceeds the intended level of brand/message awareness.

and when it comes to marijuana ads, "best" shouldn't be determined by whether one writer liked its quirky execution, but rather, how likely are teens who saw this ad vs. teens who didn't see this ad vs. teens who saw the previous marijuana ads to smoke marijuana? this ad hasn't even been in circulation long enough to determine how it compared to other ads' effectiveness in reducing teen marijuana smoking. the market ultimately determines the best ad ever. perhaps this is the writer's "favorite" marijuana ad ever, which is how i think the article should have been titled.

but linguistic complaints aside, this quirky, muted little ad looks like something Miranda July would've created and that that type of creation seems likely to be appreciated more by a late 20s early 30s ad writer for Slate than by a 13-18 year old high school kid.

this article would've been better written if it explored the dilemma of sending mixed messages to kids by drastically changing "brand messaging." think about it. one year ago, an anti-marijuana ad tells kids they're going to get high and kill a toddler, and the next year, an ad tells them they'll be uninteresting. if i were a teen and i'd seen both sets of ads, i'd dismiss both, b/c i'd see through the fact that a thinking man on the other end of the ad is trying to tell me why something is bad but can't figure out why exactly it is bad. This is the "fundamental mistake" this writer made in writing this article, dismissing the fact that those old ads do exist, and have impacted teens. Failing to consider that no matter how effective these ads appear, they must be considered as inconsistent in the larger framework of the anti-marijuana ad context.

Brands can reinvent themselves, and do so all the time, (Marlboro and Zima are two notorious examples from two different eras), but always those new ads are pondered in the context of "how will the audience respond to this given the previous ads that promoted this product?"

The best soft-pedal approach could prove entirely meaningless if the residue of the government's previous scare-tactics lingers in teens' bongs...er, brains.

this writer draws broad conclusions about an ad from a sample size of "one," ultimately relying on his own personal experience w/ the drug and his feelings about the drug, rather than asking contemporary american teens, how they responded to the ad. which would definitely help mixing in some real-world credibility when judging these ads in articles that ad agencies are probably using to further their business street cred.

clios aside, ads cannot merely be analyzed like an art, and reading this column makes me feel like i'm trusting the business guidance of an Art History major from Oberlin, not an Econ major from Wharton. so if this writer is going to declare something the "best ad ever" we readers must remember it's just as subjective as a suburban white woman proclaiming that her church is the best one in all of Stamford, Ct.

whether this writer went to Oberlin or Wharton or anywhere in between, this article's credibility would skyrocket if he combined his artistic interpretation with hard data that confirmed or negated what he "declared" to be true. or at least revisited his articles down the road, once that data was available.

I have to admit that I don't see the appeal of the ads, nor do I understand the approach. But I'm not the target audience, and neither are any of you. My teenager loves the ads, thinks they're effective, and "gets them". And I'm glad about that.

Actually, the ads are so low-key, it just shows how little ammunition there is to work with. I would like to hear from the kids on this one. I'm sorry workingmom, your kids are probably straight, but I certainly discount their assessment of the ad. They were telling you, their mother. If there isn't a "social desirability" effect in that communication, I am an upright Martian with a fetish for Earth girls.

What is with the Doggy Flag anyway? Is that the new symbol of "clean livin'"?

hi. it figures. my 1st ever post, and it's about this. look, this is really simple. i got stoned on a regular basis, when in my late teens, into my 20's, and occasionally my 30's.

then i stopped. hmm, i wonder why.......oh now i remember. see, i out-grew pot. just like the vast majority of pot-smokers do. the fact is, as you age gracefully, life becomes more interesting, you settle on a career/profession that is fairly rewarding, at least, you more likely than not have children born to you, and if you're a decent person at all, and most people are, you care more about them than yourself.

and so, pot loses a lot of its allure. and you awaken one day relize that even though you may still have a couple of buds, and a small pipe, tucked away in a drawer, you haven't thought about it for a year, then 2.

all the preachin' in the world will not accelerate the process. but one thing's for sure: tell kids how boring or, God forbid, how dangerous marijuana is, and they won't buy the spiel, out of hand, because of the source. Ad agencies? Please. Peer pressure is about all kids notice. And the pressure is on to smoke. Because it's fun when you're a kid. You have no job to risk, no kids to care for,
no one to impress except your friends.

I hereby call for legalization of pot, now. Alcohol is legal; no reasonable person would argue kids should drink alcohol; why would any reasonable person argue that someone who smokes pot should be jailed?

someday, we will look back on these troubled times, and realize we have made huge mistakes. Bottom line: if the Responsible Use of Alcoholic beverages by Adults is legal, so should Responsible Use of Marijuana by Adults be legal. The state-by-state system we have now is an abomination.

"How about someone (without hysteria) finding a way of stating that if you are still growing and developing, marijuana will disrupt that growth particularly your mental development?"

How about the fact that this would simply be another in a long series of lies? "Finding a way" to do this would simply be finding another way to misrepresent the truth. Unfortunately, you probably think this is just "common sense" but it is not supported by any credible clinical research. Please provide a reference for your false speculations, not including government funded propoganda campaign type crap. You really should educate yourself on the subject before you start spouting off.

Here's how it typically plays out, the government funds research to prove the harmful effects of pot, the researchers issue a report stating that there are none and the government buries it. Don't believe me? It's true, look it up, it happened during the Nixon administration and it continues to happen. Of couse you can often buy the results you want, but plenty of researchers with integrity have refused to be bought out. The truth is out there if you look for it.

If your false assumption were correct, there would be an awful lot of "disrupted" individuals out there, "particularly" in terms of mental growth, due to the effects of smoking herb as a teenager. You must be one of the select group who never did this, otherwise you'd realize how ridiculous this conclusion sounds to the rest of us. It's kind of sad really, you used to be such a good third baseman.

Big, worldwide cash crop for developing nations and isolated, impoverished tribal regions.

Calming effect on the uptight, violent, racist materialist, glaciermelting world pupulation's current drab consciousness.

Tax revenues for our future Health Care system (as is already evidenced in NL)

Turning many of the current Alkcohol and Chemicaldrug addicts away from the dangerous drugs.

Fresh breeze of imagination and creative good silliness.

Many are the reasons for viewing these ads as avoiding the arguments FOR Cannibis use.

Noone can yet deligitimize 12,000 or more years of human interest in Marijuana so they avoid all the good reasons for legalization and mainstreaming of the use of this ideal product. They would prefer the square, uptight girlfriend to fly off with a UFO alien? Heck Yeah! let her go! I bet she's a soap opera addict- true waste of human potential.

Telling kids something will disrupt their mental development will not deter any of them from trying or using pot.

Kids know very well that smoking cigarettes is addictive and deadly, but they still try it. They know that most alcoholics start young and end up destroying their own lives, yet young kids are still drinking away their Friday nights.

It's been proven time and time again that the health aspect of anti drug/smoking/drinking campaigns is the LEAST effective way to sway teenagers and pre-teens.

Beyond those ads, there are the ones that feature teens and kids promoting an anti-drug message. Instead of these being REAL teens, they are some exec's idea of what teens are. Most teens are insulted by this. The majority of anti drug ads are meant to identify with teens and tweens, yet all they do is pander to the idea of what someone middle aged or older imagines what a teen is.

Kids today typically spend an inordinate amount of time on sites like youtube, myspace, deviantart, and livejournal. Places where they watch videos, read blogs and look at photos and art made by people their age. They dont have to watch TV programs made to falsely identify with their age group. Anymore, the majority of teens and tweens want something that taps into the growing teen culture of things that are DIY, quirky, artsy, home-made.

I'm 19 with friends ranging from 17-21. I'm one of the "kids" you're talking about, and I honestly think this is a good ad. It doesn't underestimate our intelligence by showing a "cool" guy talking about drugs. It doesn't pressure us by saying "nobody will love you!". And it doesn't tell us the one thing we're tired of hearing "You aren't invincible, every choice you make concerning drugs will KILL YOU!!!". We're young, of course we think we're invincible, we won't believe those ads until we see that happen. Three people in my high school died in separate accidents caused by drunk driving. And you know what? All the kids there STILL drink, and a lot of them still drive while intoxicated.

These ads picks at the two things that teens actually worry about when it comes to drug use, acceptance by our peers, and the worry of chemical dependency. Trust me, I know, I'm one of those teens. The biggest drama I've seen come out of people my age smoking pot isn't that they went on to jail, led a life of crime, accidentally killed someone, or ended up with a low sperm count. The biggest problems for these people was that their sober friends could not STAND their substance use. They lost friends, acceptance and respect. You tell me ONE thing that is more important to a kid in high school than those three.

This ad has made a perfect example of these issues.

Dear Teenager,

Well, It looks as though the famous prohibition is working just fine with you.

The thing is that all the times I was high and sitting around doing nothing except watching TV, just as one of the popular commercials points out that's all stoners do, the only commercial that ever got my attention was this badly drawn cartoon one. The truth commercials and the commercials trying to SCARE you into not smoking frankly don't work.... they make you think "wow that sucks" but never once did it ever make me second thought what I was about to put into my body or what the consequences might be. The truth is that kids that sit around high all the time really do just that. They sit around and watch tv and munch on anything there is to munch on and DO nothing. I remember the day my friends and I saw the commercial about how smoking will get you no where in life... that all it will do is cause you to sit on the couch and accomplish nothing.... and THAT was the commercial we all laughed and high-fived about. You have to realize that a basement full of stoned teenagers is going to change the channel before watching a commercial about a kid that is trying to seriously tell you the affects of marijuana.

Mike Schmidt:

I felt the ad was very effective. It reminded me of myself when I smoked and my dogs wanted to play or go outside and enjoy the day and I would just want to 'get just a little bit higher' before I did anything with them, thinking I would have more fun that way. Ultimately, my guys would just give up and slink away to a nap as the sun went down and another weekend was wasted.

I don't do that anymore (got married and moved out my dead-end town, started college, etc - still have the dogs!), and I always feel a mix of relief and regret whenver I see that commercial.

Do I think I would have put down the pipe if I'd seen that commercial a few years ago? Not right away- but I would have had one more nagging doubt in the back of my mind about the 'fun' I was supposedly having. Definitely I would have factored that in while I wasn't high when deciding whether to do it or not.

I think it is pretty effective to use pets to touch the American public. So many people in this country have and cherish their dog or cat. I never had kids, and like a lot of people in their twenties, my pets were my roommates, my family, my friends. Look at the commercials for prescription drugs- they show how a woman's depression is affecting the dog, they'll show how a person's joint pain limits the activites they can share with their dog- if it wasn't effective, then you wouldn't see it in expensive commercials.

The ad appealed to me. Not all pot smokers are stoners who sit in the basement watching tv all day- that's a gross stereotype and it's the same kind of stereotyping that has spectacularly failed the anti-drug campaigns of the last fifteen years.

I can honestly say that as the "target audience" (I do smoke a lot of pot) that I am definitely one of those giggling stoners everytime I see either of these commercials, which obviously makes it ineffective. Personally, I think all government anti-pot ads are ineffective, especially to people like me. If the government wants to take an effective stand against drugs, do a better job of it in school...I was in 5th grade when I went through the D.A.R.E. program, and that didn't work aparently. I don't know at what grade level other schools implement the DARE program, but I think that teaching 10-year-olds about crack, pot, acid, etc. is just too early for it to really be effective. I think the government should hire drug addicts to help them with their anti-drug programs...to let the drug addicts give their insider info on what would have made us not be drug addicts. I don't find these stick-people cartoons to be effective AT ALL. I am not at all an unpopular, boring, lethargic person, and to give all potheads that stereotype is wrong. Honestly, I think the government needs to be attacking the really bad drugs that are actually addictive and ruin people's lives (such as Meth or Heroin). I know that a lot of "sensible" people will strongly disagree with me when I say that I think marijuana should be decriminalized in the US., because really, what's wrong with being a little lazy, giggly, and hungry sometimes?? I've found that I'm a much easier person to be around because I'm a pothead. I was a high-strung, hyper, annoying teenager before I became a pothead, and people didn't like me for that. Now I'm calm and cool. What's wrong with that?? Pot's not going away, and people aren't going to quit using it, and does it really turn good people bad? I don't think so.