Some communication campaigns sell a product. Others try to change behavior. And there are campaigns that aim to change the way we see reality.

The video released by the Ministry of Health under the message “I want an abortion” belongs, in my opinion, to this latter category.

And that is precisely why it deserves to be analyzed from the perspective of values-based marketing .

I’m not going to make a partisan assessment here. Nor do I believe that the rejection of abortion is exclusive to Catholics. There are atheists, agnostics, and people of diverse philosophical convictions who believe that human life deserves protection from its earliest stages. The debate on abortion is, therefore, much broader than a confrontation between believers and non-believers.

The question that interests me is another one:

What happens when a public administration uses the best communication techniques to present a particular view of abortion as if it were an indisputable moral and social reality?

A well-made video can convey much more than information if it is built with the usual tools of a good communication campaign: simple language, recognizable situations, emotional identification, closeness and an easy-to-remember narrative.

From a technical standpoint, it can be an effective campaign. And that’s precisely the problem I want to raise.

Effective marketing does not guarantee the quality of the message.

A message can be magnificently crafted and yet lead to a particular interpretation of reality without presenting the essential issues that would allow citizens to form their own judgment. This is especially important when we talk about a topic like abortion.

To inform or to persuade?

The State has an obligation to inform citizens about healthcare services and their rights recognized by law. But informing is not exactly the same as persuading.

Organic Law 2/2010, subsequently amended by Organic Law 1/2023, regulates the voluntary termination of pregnancy and establishes that it can be performed at the woman’s request within the first fourteen weeks of gestation, in addition to addressing certain subsequent circumstances. Therefore, it would be incorrect to state that abortion in Spain lacks legal regulation.

But it would also be simplistic to say that there is a supposed and unlimited “right to abortion” detached from any other legal right. The Constitutional Court itself has established that the voluntary termination of pregnancy falls within the constitutionally protected sphere of women’s rights, but at the same time recognizes prenatal life as a constitutionally protected right .

This tension is fundamental. And that is precisely why it is worrying that an institutional campaign can present abortion from only one of the perspectives involved.

What marketing can achieve

One of the greatest strengths of contemporary marketing is turning a complex decision into a simple one .

“I want an abortion.” The phrase seems to simply express an individual’s will. But behind that decision lie much deeper questions:

What is the human being that is developing in the mother’s womb?

Does that life have moral value?

When does our responsibility towards her begin?

How should women’s rights and freedoms be reconciled with the protection of prenatal life?

What alternatives does a woman have when facing an unexpected pregnancy?

What support does she receive if she decides to continue with her pregnancy?

These questions are not the property of any one religion. They are anthropological, ethical, legal, and social questions.

And an institutional campaign that aims to inform about such a crucial issue should foster a citizenry capable of thinking, not simply facilitate a particular decision.

The power of normalization

Marketing doesn’t need to explicitly state that something is good. Sometimes it’s enough to present it as normal, simple, everyday, and unquestionable . That’s one of the most powerful mechanisms of contemporary communication.

When a complex reality is presented surrounded by positive images, friendly language, and everyday situations, the perception that we are dealing with a morally problematic issue gradually disappears. Communication doesn’t need to argue. Communication creates a mental framework.

And whoever controls that framework has an enormous capacity to influence the perception of reality. This takes on extraordinary importance when the communicator is not a private company, but the State itself.

Values-based marketing: effectiveness cannot be the only criterion

Herein lies one of the fundamental ideas of Values-Based Marketing .

For too long we’ve equated good marketing with effective marketing. If it gets attention, it works. If it changes behavior, it works. If it gets people to buy, it works. But there’s a prior question:

What do we use that capacity for influence for?

Marketing also needs an ethical dimension.

Values ​​shouldn’t just be a tool to make a campaign more appealing. They should become a criterion for deciding what we communicate, how we communicate it, and what consequences our communication may have on individuals and society .

From this perspective, an institutional campaign on abortion should be especially careful. It is not enough to ask whether it is well done. We must ask:

Is it comprehensive enough?

Does it respect the complexity of the problem?

Does it present all the human assets that are at stake?

Does it help a woman in a difficult situation to make a truly free decision?

Freedom also means being able to know all the options

There is a paradox that deserves to be addressed. If we truly want to defend a woman’s freedom, we must ensure that she can make decisions with as much information as possible and without pressure. That means knowing not only how to have an abortion.

It also means knowing the existing support to continue the pregnancy, the alternatives, the social, family and economic support and, above all, being able to understand that in the decision there is another human life whose value should not disappear from the story .

Freedom needs information. But it also needs truth . And information that deliberately selects what favors a particular decision can end up becoming a form of persuasion.

It is not exclusively a religious issue.

This point seems especially important to me. Rejecting abortion does not necessarily require belief in God. There are philosophical, scientific, anthropological, and ethical arguments that defend the dignity and protection of prenatal human life.

Similarly, those who defend the legalization of abortion use arguments related to women’s autonomy, dignity, freedom, and life plans. Precisely because there are profound arguments on both sides, the State should be especially careful when using its power of communication .

We’re not talking about announcing a vaccination campaign or explaining how to apply for an administrative benefit. We’re talking about an issue that affects our very conception of what it means to be human.

Death marketing?

The title may seem provocative. But it’s meant to provoke reflection, not insult.

If we call “marketing of life ” those strategies that use communication to protect, promote and care for human life, we must ask ourselves what happens when the same persuasive tools are used to present the termination of a human life as a simple, positive and practically conflict-free decision.

We could call it death marketing . Although perhaps the deeper issue is something else entirely:

Can a society become accustomed to considering normal what it previously considered morally wrong simply because we have learned to communicate it better?

That is the true power of marketing. And also its enormous responsibility.

Values-based marketing means something more

For me, values-based marketing isn’t about putting words like freedom, equality, dignity, or solidarity into a campaign to make it more appealing. It’s about asking ourselves if those words are truly guiding our decisions.

Values ​​shouldn’t be a communication tool. They should be a criterion for decision-making. This applies to institutional marketing as well as public health.

And especially when we’re talking about human life. Because if marketing has the power to change behavior, it also has the power to change our understanding of right and wrong.

And that’s why we can’t just ask if a campaign is well done. We have to dare to ask:

Is what that campaign is doing to our way of looking at human beings okay?