Alex Charchar over at Retinart has a fantastic article where he gives his own spin on the design thoughts of Bob Gill, co-founder of Pentagram. One of my favorites is “Interesting words need boring graphics.” Charchar writes:

A stupid designer grows intoxicated on their own greatness and self-worth.

Gill gives an example I could not top so wont try; We cure cancer for free.

There is one design solution for this. White background, big, black, heavy as a whale text, left aligned. Want to go out on a limb? Center it (but dont).

I love this. You could write the best copy in the world but if you bury it in too much razzmatazz, the effect is lost. And modern advertising, Lord help us, thrives on razzmatazz.

The real tragedy is that copy is largely ignored today. As I was taking advertising and marketing classes, professors often talked about how hard it is to get your message through. We’ve heard it a hundred times, “In this media soaked culture, people see thousands of visuals a day! Your visual needs to find a way to stand out.” Or maybe this is a time to differentiate by having the visuals take a backseat. If everyone is focusing on flash, why not focus on words?

A perfect example is the Google Superbowl commercial from last year. When I asked people why they liked it, I got one answer over and over. It was cute. Not because there was a young, attractive couple being lovey-dovey in washed vintage colors. It was because it told a story. The hero was the copy. It told a story. It gave the ad a heart and the clean visuals didn’t get in the way. The whole ad is a perfect example of copy can still make a great impact in our flashy, image driven culture.

Below are bits from Bob Gill’s book about the subject of simple graphics for interesting words.

In the marketing world being “the first” is an incredible thing. Whether it is being the first brand in a niche product category, the first to use a new media strategy or the first to make a creative new ad claim, people take notice. Firsts also provide tremendous competitive advantage. The only thing worse than being second is blatantly copying the brand that did it first. We’re talking to you Dairy Queen!

If you haven’t seen Dairy Queen’s latest campaign – take a look. For me, it’s a little too close to Old Spice’s campaign. We all know how popular and successful Old Spice’s use of the sarcastic new icon was with the over-the-top irony of their spots. They scored a huge “first.” They came up with a creative strategy that really worked to grab (and hold) the attention of their target audience. It was so popular many of the spots went viral, topping the most watched YouTube video charts. So I can certainly understand why someone in a board room at Dairy Queen must’ve thought – let’s do that! And granted, the two brands aren’t even in the same product category, but still – did they really think the copycat campaign wouldn’t be obvious? And the worst part? Others (like Edge Shave Gel) have starting shamelessly jumping on the bandwagon.

Lesson learned: do your own thing. Sure, plenty of people say there are no more new ideas out there; that everything we come up with has probably been used in some way, shape or form at some point over the past 100 years (even if we don’t know it). Maybe that’s true in many cases, but that doesn’t mean we’ve lost our ability to create new and impactful advertising. And I’m not saying we shouldn’t use creative ideas and strategies from great campaigns that are already out there. We should be inspired by the great advertising around us, not take the easy, copycat way out.

Have you ever had an irritating little computer problem that you just couldn’t figure out for the life of you? (If you work on a PC, I’m sure you can identify with this more than most). You try for what seems like ages to fix a formatting issue or convert a file properly, but you just can’t make it work. After exhausting all of your creative options (for me that means closing the program and re-opening the file) you finally cave and ask a co-worker for help. And of course, the moment they look over your shoulder they instantly know the answer.

Good agency relationships provide the same vital external input to marketing departments. Yes, internal marketing teams know the brand inside and out. They’ve spent countless hours pouring over research, reviewing sales data, and executing strategic plans. They have an in depth understanding of their product, the competitive landscape, and the target audience. But living and breathing the brand and being that close to a product can take its toll on a marketer’s ability to take a fresh look at things from an outside perspective. Enter the ad agency.

At the onset of a new client relationship, we as the agency are well aware that we don’t know the ins and outs of the brand the way the client does. But therein lies our strength.  We have the unique privilege of being able to take an objective look at the big picture. Ask some new questions. Research the answers to the same old questions. Take (or at least recommend) some risks. Change up the creative execution. Explore a new strategy.

Now of course it’s not all rainbows and sunshine just because we get the opportunity to take a fresh look at things. We have to work collaboratively to leveraging the history and knowledge of the client’s marketing team with the creative and strategic talents of the agency. We may have different perspectives and roles, but in a great relationship we’re able to combine our efforts for an incredibly powerful end result, that ultimately benefits the brand.

Here in the office, we are always coming across interesting or intriguing pieces of ad work. It often spurs a moment or two of discussion. This one got us talking.

Often times, anti-fur ads are extremely graphic in nature (like this one – but beware, it is intense), alienating both the target audience (people who wear fur) and people with weak stomachs. People are prone to stiff arm the ads that make them feel uncomfortable or that cast them villains in their own lives. The anti-fur ads below are a bit different – they drive home the point without being too graphic. And because of the mannequin nature of the characters in the ads, consumers can become detached in a way that allows us to get the message without being alienated.

What do you think? Are these ads successful, or do the graphic anti-fur ads work better?

Via I Believe in Adv.

Advertising and public relations: sometimes we ask what the difference is. Sometimes it seems more than that; PR vs advertising in a battle of the ages. But we are mistaken to think that the two are so different or work against each other. In fact, the two probably need each other more than you might think.

While many purists remain on both sides, still more have seen the light and realized that, in some cases, it’s extremely important to create advertising and public relations campaigns that go hand in hand strategically.

Don’t believe me?  In 1993, when Jack in the Box restaurants suffered a crippling E. coli outbreak, advertising guru Dick Sittig created a new ad campaign that featured an updated, business attired mascot (the Jack that we all know and love today).  When paired with an industry-leading food safety initiative, the combined powers of advertising and public relations kept the company out of bankruptcy and revived an otherwise struggling brand.

Read the rest of this entry »