Tuesday, 22 October 2013

An orgy of advertising shitness



It's bad enough we already tolerate the Coles adverts on television. Now, it's much worse. Now, these awful ads have manifested as expandable banners. Expandable ef-fing banners.

The only reason the Coles ads have appeared to be so effective is not because the ads are any good, but because Coles enjoys tremendous physical availability.

In other words; There's a Coles around every corner. And because you're time-poor, or maybe just lazy, you simply go to your closest supermarket - independent of (bad) advertising.

As for expandable banners, they are the most diabolical form of advertising ever to be thrust in front of your audience's unsuspecting eyeballs.

They are the equivalent of turning billboards into roadblocks. 

Plus, I can find Wally faster than the close button on these things. They treacherously disguise the button to make you dwell on the ad.

It's like forcing you to go to a bad party, locking you in and hiding the keys. 

So, when you combine a bad advertisement with a bad channel you get very unlikeable  and consequently ineffective advertising (See exhibit A above).

It's as though Coles uses an algorithm to create their advertising. Their ads are soullessly textbook. They do everything right, except being human: 

Memorable - tick. Ownable - tick. Likeable - fail.

So it should come as no surprise Coles would elect to use the most annoying medium ever conceived - the expandable banner (Because I'm sure statistically they're great).

This isn't sustainable. Sure, audiences will remember their ads, and sure they'll remember that it's Coles doing the advertising. But when they get fed up with being forced to watch unlikeable content, it will impact their buying decision and eventually they will go to Woolworths.

If an ad is not likeable; you have nothing, so never, never, never use expandable banners.

Rant over.

For the non-Australian readers, here's the said TV adverts:






By Christopher Ott

No comments:

Post a comment