How do you go about writing something this bad?
July 22 2013, 8:53 am | | 7 Comments
By Simon Veksner
Head of Ideas.
Naked Communications Australia
I’ve always been perplexed by ads like this new global spot for the Mazda 3.
Clearly it’s an extremely bad ad, in the sense that it will not perform well by any of the common metrics such as recall, persuasion, or effect on brand perception scores.
But what confuses me is that it is not a bad ad in the sense that it was trying to be good, and failed. It isn’t even trying to be good. READ ON…
7 Comments
Did an actual copywriter sit down in front of a computer and type those words for Naked’s new Renault Megane ad?
It shows a lot of car. From a lot of angles. It shows a lot of interior features. It shows cutaways, just like the brochure.
The latter is the key. In the absence of anything to differentiate the product, a clear positioning or an idea, just put the brochure on TV. It gives something to everyone on the approval committee.
To be honest its bad, but its pretty much the same as most of the spots on air ATM.
what makes this was worse than usual is just the sub standard execution. – but the idea is pretty much like every other car ad, features, lame reaction, features, voice over, end.
“Clearly it’s an extremely bad ad, in the sense that it will not perform well by any of the common metrics such as recall, persuasion, or effect on brand perception scores.”
Simon,isn’t the weasel in the line above “common metrics”? Recall – when you own market the way the Mazda 3 does, recall isn’t as difficult because consumers want and expect to hear from you. Persuasion – clearly this market doesn’t need a huge dose of it. Brand Perception – well it does say the brand is keeping up with technology and you couldn’t class it as offensive, so it probably won’t have a negative impact.
The crime of ‘filming the brochure’ was born in an era when the television medium was our communications flagstone, because there was no other choice.
In an age when consumers now drive the media, and with the unusually wide target market enjoyed by the Mazda 3, I think there may be some validity in broad-brushing your case on television and then niching relevant insights through more progressive media avenues. Why bother with television at all then? Well probably because as market leader, you’re expected to be there. The days for that axiom, though, are numbered.
I really don’t think it’s at all polite for the Head of Ideas from the Naked to be casting stones at the work of another agency do you? Smacks of arrogance; a cheap shot and not at all cricket.
Talking of which, how good are England!
Hi Jamie. I agree with you. I don’t think the ad is offensive, and it won’t have a negative impact. It just won’t have much of a positive impact either. So I guess I’m not saying the ad is actively evil, just a missed opportunity.
Of course you are right, Simon – and more of me is playing devil’s advocate than not. To your point – the ad is utterly inoffensive and conceptually an abundance of nothing. In fact it is really not an ad but a slide show, and useful for things like the big screen at the footy, when audio isn’t an option.
With the ad in question now given a role, the test for the marketing team at Mazda will be pushing their agency creative teams to treat the car as three or four different cars (because that is the nature of its sales base) and be very cluster-focused in the media approach.
No doubt the French creatives on the Megane account in Paris grapple with this exact problem. Poor bastards.