Backwards Thinking
October 15th, 2006
There are a couple of advertisements playing on Australian television which are played in reverse. As visually appealing as they look they are poorly conceived and can do more harm than good.
Example I:
The insurance company AAMI has a house fire played in reverse with the couple escaped at end and as the advert goes on you can see the fire spread, then at the beginning you see the how the fire starts. The voiceover claims that AAMI will pay out regardless of the situation. That all sounds fine but halfway through the ad the main man, throws a scotch over the fire to put it out which causes the fire to spread. This indicates to me that it is OK to throw an accelerant over a fire and AAMI will pay out. Is that right AAMI? Can I throw alcohol on a fire and it is all OK?
Example II:
Zyrtec, the antihistimine that helps you with common allergies starts with the lady at the end looking puffy and allergic and as the ad plays backwards she goes through a host of situations that can cause allergies, she takes a Zyrtec and then at the end of the advert, she looks fine. So, what the ad is saying that if you are fine then take a Zyrtec you will be allergic if exposed to an allergen. Not a very good testimonial for medicine. I’d rather have a Claratyne.
October 19th, 2006 at 8:27 am
[…] After commenting on AAMI and Zyrtec on their mixed messages, one of the top Australian banks, the ANZ Bank have out-clevered everyone, even themselves, to deliver the worst message to their customers - the result can be viewed here. […]