Advertising Getting Worse?…Why?
To watch some vintage TV ads please click here…
There was a time (not long ago) when the readers/viewers attention was riveted more towards the advertisements than the news/programmes while reading/watching newspapers/magazines and television.
But times are changing. Now as the newspapers and the TV opt more for the dramatic and jazzy approach of the ads, many ad practitioners fear, ironically, that ads are no longer reaching the heights they were once capable of.
So is the industry suffering an ideas crisis? asks Ian Burrell in The Independent. Advertising is an art form Âbut now the consumers’ attention has begun to wander.
“According to independent research by TGI (Target Group Index), the proportion of the audience who think that television ads are as good as the programmes has fallen from 32 per cent in 1991 to 15 per cent in 2006. Advertising is getting worse, and I would give five reasons why…”
Read on…
And then there are ads which, some say, we can do without… Click here…
And here…
2 Responses to “Advertising Getting Worse?…Why?”
Very nice. The old advertisements are downright CUTE. There seems to be no cynicism in them, no sneering or making fun of others. Mind you, I think they’re cute to look at, but I would still skip them if they started showing those sorts of adverts on TV every day. A few interesting notes:
1- The car ad is a really good one, very uplifting and surprisingly…well…politically correct, actually. They say that “men and women working together” make their cars and even show a good looking black worker in with the mix. Oh and the car looks REALLY nice, too.
2- Gillete hasn’t changed their ads during their entire existence, it seems, LOL. The whole thing about the length and angle of the blade and all, it’s the same exact ad, save some changes for technology and the fact the ad is in black and white.
Do Not Mail Opt-Out Law would be fair to everyone.
The proposed recent “Do not mail” is an Opt-Out law. Only those not desiring advertising mail need opt-out. Anyone desiring advertising mail can do nothing – and continue to receive it. Why deny those wishing to avoid advertising mail the power to do so?
I do not consider handling unwanted advertising placed against my will on my personal property to be a civic obligation!
The US Supreme Court said in the Rowan case in 1970, ““In today’s [1970] complex society we are inescapably captive audiences for many purposes, but a sufficient measure of individual autonomy must survive to permit every householder to exercise control over unwanted mail. To make the householder the exclusive and final judge of what will cross his threshold undoubtedly has the effect of impeding the flow of ideas, information, and arguments that, ideally, he should receive and consider. Today’s merchandising methods, the plethora of mass mailings subsidized by low postal rates, and the growth of the sale of large mailing lists as an industry in itself have changed the mailman from a carrier of primarily private communications, as he was in a more leisurely day, and have made him an adjunct of the mass mailer who sends unsolicited and often unwanted mail into every home. It places no strain on the doctrine of judicial notice to observe that whether measured by pieces or pounds, Everyman’s mail today is made up overwhelmingly of material he did not seek from persons he does not know. And all too often it is matter he finds offensive.â€?
Furthermore, the Supreme Court said, “the mailer’s right to communicate is circumscribed only by an affirmative act of the addressee giving notice that he wishes no further mailings from that mailer.
To hold less would tend to license a form of trespass and would make hardly more sense than to say that a radio or television viewer may not twist the dial to cut off an offensive or boring communication and thus bar its entering his home. Nothing in the Constitution compels us to listen to or view any unwanted communication, whatever its merit; we see no basis for according the printed word or pictures a different or more preferred status because they are sent by mail.�
We need a nationwide “Do Not Mail� law to create a one-stop, convenient place for homeowners to give senders the aforementioned affirmative notice that we do not want certain kinds of mail sent to our homes.
http://www.newdream.org/emails/ta19.html
Signed,
Ramsey A Fahel