People love a good story, and nothing is truer than in advertising.

Or is it? The story of how delicious a McDonalds’ burger looks and influences us in an advert is far more powerful than the truth – the tiny burger that you get in a store, stuffed into a tight, snapping white box, and dumped into a brown paper bag. The two don’t match, but that’s okay since the story is what consumers buy into. Should it be?

Compare Maccas to Save The Children, a charitable organisation that, (well, how else can I say it?) want to save children from hunger, sickness, disease, and many other issues. What Save The Children want from people is a small, monthly contribution of $20. Unlike Maccas, their advertising and website tell the truth – images of children and babies suffering through terrible conditions are the majority of what you see and read about. It’s heart-breaking. Is it possible they can tell a story that is more powerful and motivational than the truth? After all, what’s the story you tell yourself about $20 per month?

Two Save The Children ambassadors knocked on my door a few weeks ago. The truth is I said no, I wouldn’t help. Maybe it was the inconvenience of filling out forms and giving bank details to strangers, or perhaps I’m just a shitbag? But it is what it is, and the truth hurts me.

In the world of advertising, the story and the truth should always be the same, but they’re often not – that’s the truth. What right does any business have to lie to consumers and why is the vast majority so willing to absolutely accept the story?

As an advertiser, where does the line stop between telling a manipulative story versus going out there and spreading the power of the truth?