Is it just me or are the ads on telly getting more and more visually complex and obscure in their role as communication - and is this a result of an indulgence that has gone unchecked for far too long? Have we reached the equivalent of Planning and Advertising Prog Rock I ask myself?
I know that there are some brand films that are crystal clear in what they are trying to achieve but I do find myself wondering whether there is an idea at the heart of it or merely just an exercise in executional technique. I fancy those making them are more interested in the ‘look’ of the piece than whether it actually sells anything.
Which makes me think of this:
Ogilvy’s view:
Now I am not saying that this is correct but I do like David Ogilvy where he points out that ‘the purpose of a commercial is not to entertain the viewer, but to sell him.’ Hmmm perhaps but he has a point.
Which leads me to ask this:
Does it make you want to buy the product or service?
We would do well as an industry to remember that we are in the business of selling products - not making ads in the first instance. So does it? DiG apparently doesn't. No-one is really sure if Cogs did or didn't. How many other examples are there where it just didn’t work. Loads I bet you. But we never talk about it. Why would we?
Scary Thought for creatives?
I wonder what would happen if the creative department remuneration was allied to sales. Would this create a behaviour change? You bet. But really - how many times do we ask what the advertising is doing to ensure that someone does something as a result of having been exposed to it. Ask a creative that question. Seriously ask them - see what they say. If they can't tell you why it works or how - and they are making the thing - why would you buy it? Would you trust a doctor who didn’t know how your body worked? Hmmm thought not.
Do we have the right Creative Brief and do we really need one?
Now this is something I have been banging on about for a few years but I have always maintained that there are 4 things that need time and consideration before beginning any communications related exercise:
1) What is the Business Objective?
2) What is the Brand Objective?
3) What is the Marketing Objective?
4) What is the Role of Communications? (what behaviour do you wish to change)
And I think that an ongoing conversational exchange with the creatives about these things before and after the brief is written would go a long way to getting better and more effective work for our clients.
Get rid of the brief AND the proposition?
Maybe we don’t even need a creative brief to work from if we do that bit right – except to get a client to see that we are aligned to the objective. What is the point of a proposition if you collectively know what you are trying to achieve strategically and creatively? Radical thinking? Perhaps – but I wouldn’t be surprised if the whole way we work changes in the next 24 months and those finely honed propositions become less important than ’ideas based thinking’ at the start of the process – if one can still call it that.
So, what can we learn from other disciplines?
I have been looking at a lot of old American ads and posters from the 40s, 50s and 60s recently and noticed that there was a trend towards fairly laboured and clunky illustration and text, and often inappropriately used typography that was employed to ‘sex up’ the content of the message – and I thought – this is exactly what is happening with today’s overly-complex visual treatments (think most car ads).
Modernism and simplicity:
If we look back to the Modernists, they believed that 'form' is determined by function, structure, and materials. The packaging and advertising for a product, for example, should communicate that product's essence to the consumer - not become merely interesting for its own sake – vaguely Ogilvy-esque in that sense. Many European modernists arrived in America during the 50’s and 60s and set about changing the way we perceive the world through advertising and art and design. In essence - they made things simpler.
If you look at the work of people like A.M. Cassandre (absolute genius IMHO) he used simplified geometric forms that gave birth to a whole new visual vocabulary: contrast, tension, balance, and space. And it is 'space' that intrigues me the most.
Contrasts of scale and value can lead to really dynamic compositions when used with care. Krone and Grace were told by Bernbach for example to make the cars in the VW ads either very big or very small. And boy that changed the game forever and I think we need to do something similar or we will have just lost any credibility as ‘creative business partners’ in the way that the heroes of the past did.
Have we reached ‘Advertising Prog Rock’?
We have the advertising equivalent of prog rock going on in my opinion – all fancy and over-elaborate, self-indulgent and inward facing, experimenting with visual forms for the sake of it with no ‘behavioural change’ at its heart. After all these years we still have no real way of measuring advertising effects and how people really consume media and an unequivocal link to sales.
There is a dearth of real insights and floppy thinking about the role of communications at every turn in most agencies. Surely most of this can be sorted by planning – but where’s the rule book for that currently? Perhaps we are just bored. Mark Earls reckons this is due to the mechanisation of creativity within agencies – a topic I shall cover later this month – he has a good point I think.
Solution: Advertising Punk Rock?
And I think we need to get radical on ourselves and create the equivalent of another Modernist or Punk movement in advertising and planning. Let's get simpler again - strip out the 'noise' created by too much executional treatment. Let’s re-establish the client’s objectives and get down to some great ideas based thinking – without the excessive and mostly useless deterministic detail getting in the way. I see a revolution in planning/creative along the lines of the move Bernbach made by combining his writers and illustrators. We need to rethink the whole thing and quickly.
Final thought: Negative space = cut through
My favourite use of dynamic composition is the use of negative space - the 'air' around something, the bit that invites you in. The cognitive processing that occurs is about the product - not about the treatment. These days many ads are so complex that you can't process them properly - its too much fizz and pop - like action films - the bangs and whizzes are more important than the storyline.
A quick example from the man himself - George Lois for Wolfschmidt vodka - perfect in every way I think - lots of space inviting you in - tells you everything that you need to know about how you should/could drink the vodka with panache and style and the language is that of the ‘insider’ – you get it straightaway. Great stuff without the frills. More please.
Wolfschmidt Vodka ad by George Lois - great use of negative space
|
