Got a favourite ad campaign? Or is there one that you think was exceptionally successful? What was it and why does it work so well?
Tamara: I like what McDonald’s is doing now with its “question and answer” ads. The interactivity gives a friendly face to a scary corporate company. Also, the transparency fights their “mystery meat” image.
Scott: A few come to mind:
First, the Energizer Bunny. In the beginning, you never knew what ad would turn out to be a fake that would get interrupted by the Bunny. It had people wondering when the Bunny would next appear.
Next, the Old Spice ads with Isaiah Mustafa. While the ads didn’t boost sales of the advertised product, sales of the other Old Spice products did. People were willing to watch the smooth as silk ads and then buy the product to be like Isaiah.
Going back a bit, the Tasters Choice ads with the Tasters Choice couple. At the time, no one saw ads as more than just selling product. The ad makers for this series of ads added a romance plot, featuring Anthony Stewart Head. Again, people wanted to see the next installment.
I’m sure I’m missing a good number of good campaigns, but those stand out for me.
Steve: The infamous Old Spice Guy. Because it WORKED, even if it petered off. It was highly effective, involved an iconic character, and created a memorable experience.
Serdar: The Mac “1984″ ads were iconic as all get-out. They were also, if memory serves, the first time a tech company used modern ad techniques (e.g., where the product itself was never shown, but the company as a brand was invoked strongly with a certain state of mind).
Bonnie: A favorite of mine is the ads, both print and TV, for Cure auto insurance. It’s simplicity itself – just the company’s dot-with-a-face logo delivering sharp lines and snappy jabs at their competition, at one point, even going as far as to say “*Bleep* them” -
Also, the iconic iPod ads featuring dancing silhouettes. Simplicity itself – not a word is spoken about the device and what it does, all you know is it makes you want one. Style over substance, to be sure – but in this case, the style BECOMES the substance.