Bounce or Hit? Copywriter's Missing 'Colloquial Markers' = Ambiguous Ad

A message popped up on  Twitter yesterday, “Anyone watching the tennis? #bestgameofwomenstennisforyearsand thatsafact.” Sadly, I wasn’t. But it reminded me of this ad that appeared during the 2011 Australian Open, which I considered a fairly big copywriting error at the time:

[poll id=”2″]
I’m just saying.

  • G’day Alysha, this was part of ANZ bank’s “One Day” campaign. I guess the expectation is that other print or TV advertising was to support the idea.
    Maybe it could have stood alone if the second line read something like: “Start planning your one day today” ???

    • Hi Brett,
      Thanks for your comment. Yes, it might not have been so clunky if they phrased it as you’ve written. But it also would have been less effective, as in, that’s “old advertising command-speak”. Instead, they’re trying to use Stosur’s preparation as an endorsement, which is more “soft-sell” than it is old-style hard-sell.
      I would have preferred to see “Sam’s ready for her ‘one day’.” But perhaps the ambiguity is what they were going for? I still think the majority of the public prefer to have something they can read and understand, but maybe the ad company was hedging on the fact that it would be seen quickly and not really read accept ‘glancingly’ anyway.
      How do they track these things? Did it work to raise public confidence in the consumers’ eyes?

Comments are closed.