A Piece of Me

Read the campaign story

KPN’s A Piece of Me brought online shaming into a song and music video created with MEAU. D&AD’s 2024 archive identifies Dentsu Creative Amsterdam, Wefilm and Amp.Amsterdam. The One Club describes consultation with experts and people whose experiences informed the work, followed by a release through music and artist channels and broader supporting communication. The central behaviour was forwarding intimate material without consent, rather than blaming the person whose trust had been violated.

The award accounts describe attention, educational use and wider social effects. Those claims have different evidential demands. A successful song does not demonstrate less abusive behaviour, and a legal change cannot responsibly be attributed to one campaign without a documented causal account. This analysis therefore uses the sources to establish the creative approach and credits while keeping claims about prevention, policy and individual outcomes outside its findings.

Editorial interpretation: music can provide a route into a subject people avoid discussing directly. The audience may choose to listen before encountering the sponsor’s broader message. That route works only if the artist has meaningful creative ownership and the subject is handled with care. A brand cannot simply borrow vulnerability as an attention device. The process of gathering experiences, deciding what becomes public and supporting contributors is part of the campaign’s ethical quality.

Editorial interpretation: the sharper strategic choice is the location of responsibility. General warnings about online danger can leave the affected person feeling that they should have prevented their own mistreatment. A behaviour-specific story can instead make the forwarding decision visible to bystanders and potential perpetrators. The useful next step is not a request for viewers to disclose private experiences publicly, but an accessible explanation of consent, support and how to avoid amplifying harm.

Define the behaviour before the emotional story

Specify the action the audience should reconsider and the misconception that permits it. Work with appropriate safeguarding and subject specialists before commissioning emotionally intense content. A clear behaviour gives the creative work a practical purpose and makes evaluation possible. Without that clarity, viewers may feel sadness while retaining the same harmful assumptions. Avoid generalising from one person’s account to every affected person, even when a single narrative is needed for the film.

Build consent into the production process

Offer contributors private participation routes and meaningful control over identification. Do not ask for explicit material as proof of an experience. Explain distribution, future reuse and the limits of withdrawing material once published. Provide appropriate support resources and specialist review of the finished work. Participation should not depend on willingness to become a public spokesperson. The campaign’s operational conduct must demonstrate the same respect for consent that its message asks of the audience.

Measure safer understanding without invasive tracking

Use fictional scenarios to assess whether audiences recognise non-consensual sharing and know a responsible response. Compare answers before and after exposure, with an appropriate comparison group where feasible. Do not infer reduced abuse from views, streams or comments, and do not track private messages to prove success. Public discussion can be valuable while still falling short of demonstrated behaviour change. Report each level separately and acknowledge what cannot ethically be measured.

A small test for another brief

With a qualified community partner, test a short, non-graphic fictional story about digital consent among consenting adults before considering wider communication.

Assess recognition of consent violations, victim-blaming assumptions and knowledge of support routes. Keep entertainment preference separate from learning.

Stop if the work invites public disclosure, exposes contributors or produces confusion about who is responsible for non-consensual sharing.

• Agree the safeguarding process, support information and contributor permissions first.
• Create two versions that explain the same decision through story and straightforward guidance.
• Collect anonymous scenario-based responses without asking participants to reveal personal incidents.