have someone (not the client) who isn’t involved with the campaign give it a once over.
why? well aside from adding an extra layer of proofreading, it helps to prevent unintentional – and undesirable – double entendres from making the client look ridiculous. granted, not all double entendres are bad. i’ll even go as far as to say i’m usually quite fond of them. nonetheless, when used improperly, they can ruin a message. i’m no psychologist, but i would venture to say mistakes like this occur when a creative team is so entrenched in a project they forget to take a step back and consider what others might read into their verbiage or imagery. and then of course, the client usually eats, sleeps and breathes their product or service, so they’re not exactly the best candidate for this process.
to illustrate the need for suggestion #427, i wish i had a photo of a billboard i recently passed on hwy 70 heading west from st. louis. it’s advertising for centurytel, a regional cable tv and internet provider, and it reads:
GO FIBER-FAST
sure, it’s harmless (and probably unintentional), but i have to think i’m not the only person to make the connection. and generally speaking, equating loose bowels with a product or service(s) isn’t the best approach. i’ve had issues with this particular ad campaign for awhile, but mostly because it seems to lack originality. and while this particular slogan may be somewhat original, i don’t think this double entendre purposeful.
side note: if the campaign was actually to subliminally suggest stopping at the next convenience station, they just might be onto something.
advertising suggestion #427
August 25, 2008have someone (not the client) who isn’t involved with the campaign give it a once over.
why? well aside from adding an extra layer of proofreading, it helps to prevent unintentional – and undesirable – double entendres from making the client look ridiculous. granted, not all double entendres are bad. i’ll even go as far as to say i’m usually quite fond of them. nonetheless, when used improperly, they can ruin a message. i’m no psychologist, but i would venture to say mistakes like this occur when a creative team is so entrenched in a project they forget to take a step back and consider what others might read into their verbiage or imagery. and then of course, the client usually eats, sleeps and breathes their product or service, so they’re not exactly the best candidate for this process.
to illustrate the need for suggestion #427, i wish i had a photo of a billboard i recently passed on hwy 70 heading west from st. louis. it’s advertising for centurytel, a regional cable tv and internet provider, and it reads:
GO FIBER-FAST
sure, it’s harmless (and probably unintentional), but i have to think i’m not the only person to make the connection. and generally speaking, equating loose bowels with a product or service(s) isn’t the best approach. i’ve had issues with this particular ad campaign for awhile, but mostly because it seems to lack originality. and while this particular slogan may be somewhat original, i don’t think this double entendre purposeful.
side note: if the campaign was actually to subliminally suggest stopping at the next convenience station, they just might be onto something.
Tags:ad campaign, advertising commentary, cable, centurytel, high-speed, internet
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »