CASE 290 / Make Love Not Scars / 2015
Beauty Tips by Reshma
A familiar tutorial format gives a survivor a direct platform for a specific advocacy request.
AI-assisted research and analysis for the SNS Creative Fieldbook; published by SNS Media Tech. No named human reviewer is claimed.
Sources reviewed 2026-11-05
Campaign credits belong to the original creators. They did not write or endorse this analysis.
Credits: Make Love Not Scars worked with Ogilvy & Mather Mumbai. The Logical Indian identifies itself as a launch partner and credits First December for production.
Recognition: The campaign appears in the 2016 Kyoorius Integrated Digital Campaigns archive; no specific trophy is inferred from an unlabeled image.
Launch / edition: 2015. Award years: 2016.
The problem. The idea. The experience.
Make Love Not Scars sought support for enforcement of restrictions on the open sale of acid. The campaign placed an affected person in the speaking role, using a popular online format to connect an ordinary beauty topic with an advocacy demand.
How the idea came to life
Reshma Qureshi, an acid-attack survivor, presented a series of beauty tutorials that concluded with a petition request. The important structural turn was from a familiar instructional opening to a specific civic action. This brief does not reproduce details of the attack or hazardous materials.
How it reached people
The Kyoorius archive dates the series to 31 August 2015 and credits Ogilvy & Mather. The Logical Indian’s 8 September 2015 account confirms the start date, partner relationship and three video titles. All tutorial installments remain one campaign family.
Supporting sources: Primary award archive → Primary distribution-partner account →
Read the data in context.
The numbers below describe different kinds of outcomes. Their date, scope and reporting source are part of the result.
The launch partner reported more than 100,000 petition signatures by 8 September 2015. That is an interested-party participation claim, not independent proof of policy enforcement or a reduction in attacks. No legal or public-health effect is attributed to the campaign here.
The creative mechanism.
A familiar tutorial format gives a survivor a direct platform for a specific advocacy request.
Enter through a format the audience already uses
A tutorial carries an expectation of practical value and a recognizable sequence. A purpose-led message can work within that structure when the connection is honest and the transition is understandable. Do not hide sponsorship or bait people with irrelevant instruction. In a small-team adaptation, choose a genuine skill that the speaker wants to share and explain why the wider issue belongs in that conversation.
Center the contributor’s agency
A person with lived experience should control more than the moment they appear on camera. Agree on the framing, credit, compensation, editing and distribution, and make withdrawal boundaries clear before filming. Avoid treating a survivor as evidence for a message they did not shape. The editorial objective should include a respectful experience for the contributor, not simply a powerful response from the audience.
Make the request specific enough to evaluate
A petition or advocacy ask should identify what change is requested and who can act on it. Explain what signing does and does not accomplish. For contemporary work, verify the current legal situation rather than recycling a historical campaign’s wording. Track the delivery and response to the request separately from signatures, media attention and social engagement so the accountability chain remains visible.
Protect dignity when creating contrast
The contrast between a familiar beauty format and a serious issue can focus attention, but it can also invite intrusive curiosity. Keep the speaker’s own purpose central and avoid graphic imagery or language designed only to shock. Moderate comments and prepare support for harassment before distribution. A safe adaptation can use contrast between two everyday experiences without asking anyone to relive trauma.
The intended behavior loop
- 01Encounter the creative
- 02Understand the specific issue
- 03Explore the supporting explanation
- 04Choose an appropriate voluntary action
Growth job: Awareness → Community participation. This is an interpretation of the mechanism, not an audited attribution model.
A direction to take into the room.
Original editorial interpretation and proposed adaptation. This is a proposed adaptation, not historical campaign execution or a forecast.
The transferable principle
Let a willing expert or contributor use a familiar instructional format to explain one concrete, verifiable public-interest request.
Keep these boundaries
Do not solicit traumatic disclosures, sensationalize injuries, provide hazardous-material instructions or present petition signatures as policy change.
Turn the lesson into a test.
Illustrative adaptation, not a historical campaign fact
A small-team experiment
A consenting adult craft instructor demonstrates a repair technique, then explains one documented barrier to attending local workshops.
Build the test
- Let the instructor choose the skill and approve the advocacy transition; agree on credit, payment and moderation before recording.
- Verify the access barrier with the venue and frame one achievable request, such as publishing a clear step-free route, without promising agreement.
- Publish a captioned tutorial and a factual request page, with no requirement for viewers to reveal disability, finances or personal history.
Measure the right thing
Measure correct understanding of the request and voluntary expressions of support; separately document whether the venue responds or changes the information.
Know when to stop
Stop if the speaker feels instrumentalized, comments become abusive or the proposed request misstates the venue’s responsibilities or current services.
How this reading fits your brief
Start with the useful part.
Best for: Awareness → Community participation
What to adapt: Let a willing expert or contributor use a familiar instructional format to explain one concrete, verifiable public-interest request.
Prerequisites: Original concept and verified factual claims; Informed participant consent, rights and accessibility review; A defined comparison and outcome measure.
Smaller-team route: A consenting adult craft instructor demonstrates a repair technique, then explains one documented barrier to attending local workshops. Constraint: Do not solicit traumatic disclosures, sensationalize injuries, provide hazardous-material instructions or present petition signatures as policy change.
Budget: Not established by the cited sources. No cost-fit claim is made.
Trade-offs and evidence: Read the limits below before choosing a test. There is no guaranteed reach, sales lift or ROAS.
Questions for your next brief
- What does the audience need to understand before the requested action is useful?
- What evidence would separate attention from a meaningful change?
Sources & further reading.
Brand and award-entry results are attributed claims, not independent causal audits. Source links open the original third-party pages.
- Kyoorius: Beauty Tips by Reshma →Primary award archive · Supports: Client/agency, series mechanism and 31 August 2015 start; unsupported prevalence claims excluded.
- The Logical Indian: The world is listening to Reshma →Primary distribution-partner account · Supports: Launch-partner chronology, production credit and attributed early petition count.
Independent educational analysis of external campaigns. These are not SNS client projects, endorsements or claims of involvement. Campaign facts and reported outcomes are attributed to their sources. Explanations, adaptations and test plans are original analysis and hypotheses, not proven causal findings.