The Pilion Trust ‘F*** the Poor’ Experiment and What It Proved

The Pilion Trust’s Provocative Street Campaign

In April 2014 a small London charity, the Pilion Trust, sent a man onto the city's streets wearing a cardboard sign with a deliberately vile message: "F*** the poor". Hidden cameras recorded how people reacted. Then he turned the sign round so it asked passers-by to help the poor, and the cameras kept rolling. The contrast between the two halves of the film is the whole point, and it worked: the stunt went viral and raised far more money than the charity had asked for. Warning: the video contains strong language.

What happens in the video

In the first half, the man walks through busy London streets with the offensive slogan hanging around his neck. Strangers stop him, argue with him, tell him he should be ashamed and in some cases try to make him take the sign off. People who would normally hurry past a street fundraiser go out of their way to defend the poor.

In the second half he flips the board. The new side carries a kind message asking people to help the poor, and he holds out a collection tin. Almost nobody stops. The same streets that were full of outrage a few minutes earlier now walk straight past him.

The film closes with the charity's line: "We know you care. Please care enough to give." It is a polite way of saying that feeling angry about poverty and doing something about it are two separate things.

Who made it and why

The Pilion Trust is a small UK charity that works with some of the poorest and most vulnerable people in London. According to the trade site Little Black Book, the film went online on YouTube on 7 April 2014 and was later shown in cinemas. It was made for the charity by the advertising agency Publicis London, which worked on it unpaid because the trust had no money for paid media.

The charity's chief executive, Savvas Panas, said at the time that the trust had been hit by a nationwide fall in charitable giving of around 20% and by public funding cuts of about 60%. He added that he found it more offensive that people in Britain were living in deep poverty than any word on a sign. The awards body D&AD later described the immediate goal: a shelter run by the trust for homeless children was facing closure after funding cuts, and it needed £50,000 to stay open.

The result: from £500 to more than £160,000

For a campaign built on a piece of cardboard, the numbers are striking. D&AD's case summary reports that the whole production cost about £500, that more than three million people watched the film within a week of its release, and that donations rose by over 1,600%. The campaign raised £163,734, more than three times its £50,000 target. It also produced copycat versions, international news coverage and a wave of messages of support.

The industry noticed too. The film won Graphite Pencils at the 2015 D&AD Awards in the Direct and Impact categories, and it was entered at the Cannes Lions festival. In other words, the stunt that seemed to prove people do not give ended up persuading a great many people to give.

Is it a real social experiment?

It helps to be clear about what the film is. It is an advertisement made by a professional agency, not a scientific study. We do not know how many hours were filmed, how many people walked past without reacting to the offensive sign, or how the clips were chosen. Like any edited video, it shows the moments that tell the story best.

That does not make the point false. Psychologists have long described a gap between what people say they value and what they do when a small cost is involved, and anyone who has done street fundraising will recognise the scene. Outrage is cheap and immediate; giving money to a stranger with a tin asks for trust and a decision. The film simply makes that gap visible in a way most of us would rather not see in ourselves.

Why shock works for small charities

Large charities can buy television slots and poster campaigns. A small trust cannot, so it has to earn attention instead. A rude slogan is an old trick, but here it is used to flip the viewer's feelings: first you side with the angry passers-by, then you realise you might be one of the people walking past the kinder sign. That moment of recognition is what made people share it, and sharing was the only media budget the charity had.

There is a risk in this approach. Shock can offend the very people a charity wants to reach, and it wears off quickly if every campaign tries it. The Pilion Trust film worked partly because the offensive half was clearly a setup and the message underneath was kind.

What you can take from it

The useful question the film leaves behind is personal rather than statistical: when did you last act on something that made you angry? If a cause matters to you, a small regular donation, an hour of volunteering or a word with someone who is struggling does more than a strong opinion. Local shelters, food banks and outreach services usually say that steady, unglamorous support is what keeps them running.

Sources: Film by The Pilion Trust with Publicis London (first shared here via True Activist); Little Black Book: the Pilion Trust launches its campaign (April 2014); D&AD Awards archive (2015).

Related: