Actually, the ad ran last week. But, to quote Stuart Elliott, advertising columnist at The New York Times, “It would have appealed more to viewers during the Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan or Clinton administrations.”
OK, Stuart was referring to his opinion of most of last Sunday’s Super Bowl commercials. But he could just as easily have been referring to the ad above.
The headline is a strong contender for silliest of the year award. As is the thought that the reader actually believes the premise, and has thanked Gillette for this important benefit. Which is the only reason for the “Thank you” in the headline. And leave us not even try to figure out the ancient decade in which the photograph might have caught someone’s attention.
Now, there is an idea hidden in the lower left corner; the thought of less irritation, even on sensitive skin, might be the basis of an ad. But no one involved with the creation of this advertisement seemed to want to actually convince anyone of anything.
Got the idea?
Comments