From Petrified Wood to Pints Social Proof Gone Wrong

Behavioural science meets marketing mishaps back in episode 46 with Phill Agnew. As a specialist in testing what really works in ads, Phill exposes how well intentioned campaigns often push audiences in exactly the wrong direction. He unpacks the idea of negative social proof, where highlighting how many people binge drink, steal from parks or ignore donation prompts can actually signal that this behaviour is normal and acceptable. Phill shares stories from university alcohol campaigns, an American park full of disappearing petrified wood and even the familiar fundraising banner on Wikipedia to show how this plays out in the real world. He then explains how a small shift in wording, audience framing and local proof can dramatically change response rates. For marketers who love data but still rely on gut feel when choosing headlines, this conversation offers a smarter way to use social proof without accidentally encouraging the behaviour you are trying to reduce. Here's the link to the full episode 46.Send us Fan MailStruggling to prove marketing's worth to your board? Grab our free one-page Board-Proof Scorecard: 👉 Download the scorecard 👈Got a marketing problem you would rather not admit to? Reply to this and we will answer it anonymously on the show.Subscribe to our newsletter The mistakes we see marketers make, every fortnight. 👉 [Subscribe here] 👈Follow Chris:X, TikTok, LinkedInFollow Will:LinkedInFollow The Show:TikTok, YouTube