A New York Times article that compiled a number of recent advertising stunts also cited one of the most mind-boggling tactical rationales I've ever read.
"The fact that the core idea is quite subtle in nature means the campaign appeals to the target audience in a non-conventional way."
No, I didn't buy it either. But to be sure, I sought the expurgated opinion of a Singapore-based expert Robert Campbell - a man who knows a lot about bad advertising. His response nailed it as usual.
So it appeals because it's not an ad? Genius. When will they learn the youth aren't upset by ads - they're the most ad and communication literate generation in the World - they just hate when they're lied/patronised to.
Advertising/promotion is just one of the Ps and if you can't justify it in terms that you would use to justify any of the other Ps, then it seems to me that you should be rethinking whether it's justifiable at all.
Post a Comment