Dominos: Artisan Pizza - Fabio

Seeing as I don't actually own a TV it is rare that I come across an advertisement in its natural habitat.   Tonight as I ate dinner and watched Glee at a friend's house I saw this ad for Dominos' Artisan pizzas. The ad stars Top Chef contestant Fabio and was created by Crispin Porter + Bogusky. So, let's dive right in.

Message: The message conveyed is that Dominos' Artisan pizzas are really good. And that Dominos is so confident in their product that they're going to offer them at a low price. The ad lists the ingredients, the price and the reason behind it. I understood what they were talking about and though it took awhile to get there I thought it was pretty clear.

Execution: The execution of the ad definitely leaves something to be desired. Using Fabio's poor acting ability as a foible to demonstrate that they can't prove through an ad the quality of the pizza isn't effective. If anything it is just kind of annoying. Fabio was a loveable character because he was so casual and homey, I definitely wouldn't call him refined. So, yes he can't convey the artisinal quality of the pizza through an ad, but maybe that's because he isn't artisinal. And if this is what Dominos thinks of as artisinal, I'm not so sure I'm going to trust them on their "Artisan" pizzas. The cut away Brandon Solano is a bit rough and that's because instead of a reprieve from Fabio's poor acting we get Roboto-Chef. His personality comes across like carboard and who is he looking at? At least they realized that he was equally as painful to watch and take the time that he is talking to actually show the pizzas. Also the shot of Fabio at the end is probably unnecessary and not winning you any extra points.

Strategy: To use a discounted price to get people to try the new Dominos Artisan pizza, since that is the best way to prove their quality.

Success: I'm going to give this a fail. And not because the ad was annoying and both Fabio and Brandon were  unpleasant to watch. No, I'm giving this a fail because in using the strategy of a low price Dominos undermines their own claims of quality. It is really hard to argue that something is high quality and simultaneously offer it at a low price. People just won't believe you and why should they? Everything in the history of our lives is telling us that it's not true. So I don't think that this is even a good strategy. But if you are going to go ahead with it, you need to point out the discount. Because right now I just think that Dominos makes a cheap pizza and is calling it artisinal. Simply adding a limited amount of time would make the audience realize that the pizza is high quality and that this is a limited deal to get people to try it. The ad fails to make the connection that the lower price is a sign of Dominos' confidence in their pizza and not just them making a cheap pizza.

Found on TV!

ISPCC - I Can't Wait Until I Grow Up

This ad for the Irish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children by Ogilvy Dublin has been getting a lot of international attention. Particularly after Ireland's Advertising Standard Authority banned it because of the gendered portrayal of abuse.

Message: The ads message in beautiful and clear. The child's speech focuses on the things that abused children lack and dream of, but often don't have the ability to articulate. The ad concludes with a a voice asking people to "join the fight for children's rights" and a plea for donations as well as a number and website that offers more information.

Execution: This ad focuses on a child who is talking about how he will change things when he is older while different scenes of domestic abuse occur. The violence is realistic enough to make the scenes feel very real and the lack of music and the simple filming add to the realism.

Strategy: To get people involved in the cause of stopping child abuse by educating them about the problem.

Success: This ad is incredibly successful in achieving its goals. The realism of the ad successfully galvanizes the public into feeling like they aught to be taking action, while the eloquent speech helps people to understand the way children whom are being abused feel. It manages to create an emotional reaction while educating people. Most importantly it finishes the ad by telling people how they can help. The explicit call to action of joining the cause and donating gives the audience a means in which they can start to make a change. It is interesting in contrast to the Sex Trafficking ad that I last reviewed, since they had similar emotional draws. However, this ad successfully gives people a means to do something.

Found on AdWeek

Sex Trafficking Awareness Ad

This is an ad for Traffick Lights, a student organization from the National University of Singpore, by BBDO Proximity. The organization's goal is to raise community awareness to help prevent sex trafficking.

Message: The copy in the bottom right corner focuses on the rates of sex trafficking in Southeast Asia and asks the audience to join their Facebook group to educate themselves about the problem.

Execution: The images are very graphic with accurate depictions of the conditions that sex workers have to endure. Though there have been a lot of criticisms of how graphic the ads are, I think that they are probably at the intended level. It grabs people's attention and if you're trying to get people to join a cause you first need them to notice your cause. The second effect of the graphic depiction is a lot more subtle. In filling the space with multiple situations depicted in minute detail the audience is forced to spend a lot of time examining each part of the ad, and the longer you look at it the more disgusted you become. It drives the viewer's feelings towards anger, an emotion that is more likely to inspire action. The use of the cartoon style to reinforce that it is children whom are forced into being sex workers is a thoughtful addition.

Strategy: To educate the public about the problem of children sex workers in Southeast Asia and to inspire them towards action.

Success: This ad is not successful in the end. Despite a very thoughtful creative, the lack of any meaningful call  to action leads to a failure. The ad purposely enrages and forces the audience to be disgusted by the images that they view, however the suggested action is widely disproportionate to the solution suggested by the ad. You can't just rile up an audience and then ask them to join a Facebook group, if anything it just leaves people angry. So though the execution was very thoughtful the lack of action makes this work a failure.

Found on Copyranter

Hamblor - Steakhouse Burgers at Carl's Jr.

This is a new ad for Carl's Jr. by ad agency David&Goliath. I thought that it would be a good entry for my second post, since even though this ad is not to my aesthetic I can still appreciate it's success as an ad.

Message: The message is very clear: this is the ultimate burger. So good that it must have been created by a mythical god. The narrative explains the contents of the burger and the price, which is really all I want to know about a potential burger option. It ends with a flash of the Carl's Jr. slogan and logo, which ties the whole thing back to the brand. So far good job.

Execution: The execution is appropriately over the top, with the mood and the creative fitting right in with the mythical theme. I particularly like how each element of the burger was embodied in  a way that stayed true to the creative idea. Were the Xena-esque women necessary? No, probably not. I don't think they're doing anything to convince people to try the burger, or add to the theme.

Strategy: Introduce the Steakhouse burger as a premium burger.

Success: I think this ad is very successful. It persuasively makes the case that the Steakhouse burger is good quality in a very believable way. A fast food restaurant like Carl's Jr. is never going to be able to portray their burgers as high-end and they wouldn't want that expensive association. This ad presents a different idea of "best" by alluding to themes of mythical gods. It achieves its strategic goal in a genuine and brand believable way and communicates the idea of quality.

Found on Work That Matters.

Our first Google Wallet customer

Thought I’d start with an easy one. This is a promotional video from Google about their new product: Google Wallet. It uses a clip for an old Seinfeld episode.

Message: The message focuses on how Google Wallet is better than your real wallet. The copy reads “Goodbye Wallet. The phone will take it from hear.” Direct and to the point, the ad argues that while your wallet is limited in what it can do your phone can do everything it can do and more.

Execution: The execution of this ad is really well done. The Seinfeld music sets the scene before you recognize the iconic character of George Costanza. And even if you don’t get the Seinfeld reference, the situation is relatable and funny. 

Strategy: The primary strategy is to introduce the Google Wallet as superior to traditional wallets.  

Success: Despite a clear message and great execution I wouldn’t call this advertisement a success. Two major problems with this ad: it doesn’t actually introduce Google Wallet and it doesn’t demonstrate why Google Wallet is better than a traditional wallet.

Though the execution and message are good they miss the mark in actually making Google Wallet look good. They just show why phones are better than wallets, and I mean any phone. The flaw that they show is that wallets can’t hold a lot of physical information, their solution is to store that information on your phone. One little thing, ANY PHONE CAN DO THAT. I don’t even mean Smart Phones, almost every cellphone in the world has the ability to make notes. So does Google Wallet uniquely solve the problem that they have shown? Nope.

And if it doesn’t show that Google Wallet is better than a traditional wallet, does it at least do a good job of introducing Google Wallet? Nope. Because at the end of the video I still haven’t been told what it actually does. Near the end they briefly show a phone with a Citi credit card on it, but they do nothing to explain how that is at all related. This tactic would be fine if they had piqued my curiosity enough to go to the website, but so far they haven’t presented anything worth investigating.

The execution and the copy failed to deliver on the strategy and thus leave the audience uneducated and uninterested about the product. 

Found on Ad Week

Introduction

This blog is simple one day = one ad. 

Every day I’m going to pick one ad and try and determine what the intended strategy was.

That’s it, that’s all there is to it.