• PAGE ONE
• INDEX
• HOME

Advertising the safety of airlines

Jaiboy Joseph

WHEN air accidents happen, the carriers involved keep a low advertising profile. At least for a while, razzmatazz is undesirable.

Looking back, airline ads with focus on safety have enjoyed a high rating through storm and calm. However, not many airlines have adopted the approach except for brief periods. Which brings us to the question, should airlines with aging aircraft advertis e safety or mainly confine themselves to matters touching cuisine and inflight glitz?

Here it must be remembered it is a presumption that old planes are prone to developing endless troubles after a limit is crossed. The fact is there are planes as old as the hills still flying and there is a glut of such serviceable aircraft in the market selling at less than one-third the price of a new acquisition.

In the history of aviation publicity, memorable are the safety ads Lufthansa related some years back. It needs the courage of conviction for a airline to attempt such advertising, and Lufthansa was not apparently lacking in this attribute.

Letting others do the talking reinforces the credibility of an ad, hence in their campaign there was the deft use of a quote from Wirtschaftswoche (Dusselford) stating that ``because of Lufthansa's high maintenance standards, their used planes are much s ought-after items''.

The Lufthansa ad emphasised standards of maintenance and paid a tribute to its staff and, in the bargain, indirectly assured prospective travellers that their planes are second to none in terms of safety.

Indian Airlines and its allied concern have reasons to believe that as their planes are getting too old harping on safety may not be the best recourse especially in the light of Jet Airways stealing a march buying the advanced 737-400 to strengthen their fleet.

When new planes are added, there is much fanfare that warms the hearts of frequent travellers specially. The euphoria and the resultant hype are understandable. Remember the early '80s, when Indian Airlines in its ad copy contended that with every new ai rcraft IA buys, ``there begins an exciting chain reaction that makes flying better for you''.

It has been the experience that when an accident occurs, the pilots and engineering staff blame each other. But the most vociferous in denying guilt are generally the manufacturers who have an eye on future sales. In the report of the court of inquiry, i nvestigating the accident of the Indian Airlines Boeing 737 at Hyderabad on December 17, 1978, the judge was severely critical of the efforts of the engineering staff to prove the pilot was prone to certain weaknesses in flying. On the occasion, the manu facturer was also seen straining every nerve to protect his own interests.

Passengers who are often gripped by the fear of flying are impressed by safety more than any other aspect played up in ads. Thus with the stress on `serious mechanics', an airline ad proclaimed in its copy reading like a manifesto: ``Any airline can spec ialise in smiling hostesses ... sometimes a sincere frown is more beautiful than a superficial smile''.

In what other way can the safety message be promoted? Air India had the answer when it began its first trans-Atlantic jet operations. Apart from the boast of Rolls Royce engines specially fitted on its new Boeings, the airline projected its ``multi-milli on mile pilots'' as a guarantee of safety.

The sight of airhostesses is doubtless refreshing. But in the subconscious mind, it is the image of the seasoned commander, the strong, silent person in the cockpit, that inspires confidence in passengers.

Prudence, of course, demands that advertising strikes a cautious note in matters concerning safety, lest in the event of a disaster, the airline gets sued for a misleading claim. This probability is not very remote in the context of the growing inroads m ade by the process of litigation into areas hitherto undreamt.