Pub Blitz
In April 2006, we got word that Statistics Canada was planning to spend $13 million on advertising and promotion for that year's census.
Thirteen million dollars. Just to get people to fill out a form.
What The Money Was For
The plan was a full media blitz. TV spots. Radio ads. Billboards. Newspaper inserts. Maybe a website. Maybe a hotline. The whole package.
The goal was to boost response rates. The higher the response rate, the more reliable the data, and the less follow-up work needed later. On paper, the math made sense. Spend a little now to save a lot later.
But $13 million is a lot of "a little."
Why It Bugged People
Here's the thing about the census. It's mandatory. You have to fill it out. So why spend millions of dollars convincing people to do something they're already legally required to do?
You could argue it's about awareness. Some people don't know the census is happening. Some people move around and don't get the form. Some people just forget. Advertising helps with that.
But $13 million worth of advertising? For a survey that people have to answer anyway? That feels like a lot of money to spend on something you could achieve more cheaply with a simple letter and a deadline.
Where The Money Went
We don't know exactly. The contracts were handed out through normal government procurement, which means they went to whoever won the bids. Ad agencies. Media companies. Printers. Maybe some consultants. Maybe some of the same firms that handled the Lockheed Martin contract.
What we do know is that the figure was announced. Then it was spent. Then the 2006 census happened, and it was widely reported to be a mess. Over budget. Behind schedule. Full of internal problems.
So the $13 million didn't exactly fix things.
The Real Issue
It's not that advertising is bad. It's that the census has a trust problem, and you can't advertise your way out of a trust problem.
If people don't want to fill out the form, it's usually not because they haven't seen the ads. It's because they don't trust what happens to their data. They've heard about the breaches. They've heard about Lockheed Martin. They've heard about the CRA link. And they've decided they'd rather not participate.
Throwing $13 million at a public relations campaign doesn't fix that. It just means you spent $13 million on top of the trust problem.
What It Tells You
When an agency is willing to spend that kind of money on advertising instead of fixing the underlying issues, it tells you something about their priorities. They'd rather change how people feel than change what they're doing.
That's not unique to Stats Canada. It's how a lot of large organisations operate. But when the organisation in question is handling your private data, it's worth paying attention to.
What You Can Do
You can't stop Stats Canada from spending money on ads. That's not your call. But you can decide how you respond to them.
An ad telling you the census is important isn't the same thing as an ad telling you the census is safe. Those are two different claims, and only one of them is about your actual interests.
If you see a census ad this year, ask yourself what they're really asking you to do. They're asking you to trust them. And trust isn't something you can buy with a billboard.