Question: When designing an advertisement campaign how should one balance dignity and respect for offensiveness?

Nobody remembers the latest ad for McDonald's or Foldger's but I can tell you all about the "[black face Dunkin Donuts](http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/dunkin-donuts-apologizes-blackface-ad-not-everyone-sorry-152172)" ad or the "[Pearl Izumi run until your dog collapses](http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/running-shoes-magazine-ad-dead-dog-just-makes-people-really-sad-152336)" ad.

As a designer, who will undoubtedly take the blame for it - for example [the McDonald's You're Not Alone ad](http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/mcdonalds-apologizes-mental-health-parody-ad-it-says-it-didnt-approve-148498). 

When is it okay? How do future employers view this? On the one hand it is in a sense marketing genius --- no publicity is bad publicity. On the other hand it is often highly offensive or at the very least seen as tasteless. So as a designer when is it okay, what is the calculation? Particularly, if you're the one making the decision *(Answering when the client wants it, is not a complete answer)*.

Answer: 
I second Emilie in saying that everything will offend someone somewhere. Personally, I am pretty sick of people finding offence left right and centre. Some people are *looking for* things that will get their knickers in a twist, and as Alan so elegantly points out: pleasing everyone ends up in the bland, the invisible and - *at best* - mediocre work. And therefore not efficient communication or marketing.

Cultural preferences imposed from other countries and other cultures ideas of PC is incredibly annoying. *That* is offensive. I will not have USA, Italy, Uganda or Fiji telling me how *not* to make ads for Scandinavia.

You could say that this is really about a *communication language,* and do not forget that some level of offence can be very effective marketing. You can annoy some people, stereotype them; and this will strengthen the brand among those who sees themselves the opposite. You can be upset, offended or intrigued by the series of [**United Colors of Benetton,**](http://top10buzz.com/top-ten-controversial-united-colors-of-benetton-ads/) they will rarely leave you indifferent. Funnily enough, regarding United Colors, their clothes are pretty non-descript (though colourful), but the ads often makes people go rabid. I think you can annoy people and still sell them things: if you first annoy them, and then make them think.

I once saw an ad, with four gray, grave, boring, suited, miserable guys with the caption "the most colourful thing (accountants) Johnson, Hansen, Jensen and Nielsen did last year, was to switch to eco-friendly printing paper". I think accountants might find it funny too

Good ads makes you see things a little differently, they surprise you a little: enough to have your attention for a little bit. You cannot do this by pleasing everyone. Sometimes you have to be bold, be brave, and just go for it. Political correctness is too often stupid.
I don't think it is marketing genius as you could get as much visibility with a great ad that is not tasteless. 

As for the calculation, I don't think there is a way to do the calculation by yourself, especially if you're not the target audience. Different target audience have different flexibility for humor, you likely won't have the same tolerance for certain things if you're a geek vs. if you are investing in a diamonds or something. That's where I would push for a focus group. If you're designing for that kind of client, you should have the budget to hold one anyways.

Everyone gets offended by everything these days. If your target audience thinks you ad is good, I would tend to say you're on the right track. 

As for future employers, it depends on the fit. Some look for that kind of "in your face" portfolio and others are more conservative.