Marketing copy intended to elicit emotion or make people laugh can sometimes go horribly wrong. Heed these warnings.
Are you rational? Most of us like to think of ourselves as rational beings making logical choices. However, there's a raft of evidence telling us we are far more motivated by emotions. And who knows this better than the advertising community? If emotions rule, does it matter if advertising copy makes little sense? Does it matter if it's original? Does it matter if it confuses us?
There's much talk about delivering ads, but less about writing content. Here are some common mistakes.
Sloppy copy
Occasionally, attention to writing meaningful copy gets ignored -- and this can lead to confusion if not outright hilarity.
This is from a print ad that recently appeared in the Economist: "SDA Bocconi is Italy's number one business school, the sixth in Europe and the twenty-first in the world for the executive education, by the Financial Times."
The ad makes it sound as if the Bocconi School of Management in Milan is located in a building next to the Financial Times. The last time I looked, the Financial Times was in London.
Does it instill confidence? How much would it have cost to rewrite this clearly?
Here is an example from the American Translators' Association (ATA) of how it can all go wrong.
"…Lina's a pricy French sandwich chain, advertised for franchisees abroad…The slogan: 'Tomorrow we will expect on your dynamism.' Response: zero."
Translation matters now that companies are extending their global reach. When this slogan was translated, it became meaningless. So keep in mind that if you're translating from another language into English, the translation should be done by a native English speaker.
Of course we shouldn't laugh at people genuinely trying to communicate in English when it isn't their first language. But you'd think a business would have the budget to get this sort of thing right.
Grand confusion
The rather grand sounding "Oxford Strategic Leadership Programme" from the Saïd Business School claims that, "Leadership cannot be taught, but leaders can be educated."
Why can't you teach a leader anything? Is it a case of you can't teach an old dog new tricks? And, what does education without teaching look like?
Confusion can be intentionally used to influence. When people are perplexed they search for meaning and grab onto anything that they can understand.
I put this question about an education without teaching to a number of people who are smart. Eventually, someone suggested the philosopher Hannah Arendt had written on the subject. This may be true. But will prospective graduates get it -- smart though some of them are?
Seeking to ignite the imagination
Whether advertising sets out to be straightforward, or create a hyperventilated fantasy, it's supposed to create desire and point to a better imagined future. All too often, efforts strain toward the superlative and become farcical or mind-numbingly repetitive.
Here's some frenzied copy from the Infiniti website: "The thrill of effortless exhilaration." It sounds positively orgasmic. Of course sex and cars have always been the stuff of fantasy. Infiniti plays it to the limit. There are lots of references to effortlessness on the luxury car's site (except the effort you need to put in to buy the car), seduction and performance.
"An epic sculpture of sensation, an Infiniti G Sedan reshapes performance beyond the mere thrill of horsepower."
What's wrong with horsepower? Elsewhere the company seems to think horsepower is fine. Look at that word "mere." It has an air of insufferable snootiness about it. You can denigrate anything with mere. How about: beyond a mere sculpture of sensation?