For me, the difference of good ad and bad ad is the message contained in that ad. A clear ad conveys its message elegantly with a good flow of information. On the other hand, bad ad confuses you with garbage and illogical information. I may be harsh towards this particular print ad, but please, please, please, please, if somebody can explain to me what the meaning of this print ad then by all means, tell me, and I will change my negative tone towards this ad.
Loosely translated, the headline says “Experience richer internet browsing with Nokia N71″
- Revolutionary web browsing experience on 3G network
- Hear music on the go with Nokia XpressMusic
- 2 Megapixel camera with 20x digital zoom and flash
- Print and share every photo detail
- Clear and magnificient 2.4″ screen
What’s 2 Megapixel camera, hearing music, printing photos, and the girl picture on the left got to do with richer internet browsing??!!! This ad is just wrong, the messages are convulated and the visual/copy integration is waaaaaaaaayyyy off. Unless, the girl is actually the internet itself, you know, like Matrix. Or probably, her name is Internet. It is quite strange because other Nokia print ad on my local newspaper is quite good except this one.
I don’t like spewing bull crap out of my mouth these days… So instead just criticizing an ad from my experience, I too will criticize ad with a theory back crap.For this entry I will base my comments on just one book, “the bible” of advertising theory, Advertising: Principles and Practice, written by William Wells, John Burnett, and Sandra Moriarty which is published by Prentice Hall.
It is written on page 408 that a good visual in essence are to capture the attention the intended reader AND to illustrate the benefit of the product or service. So the Nokia ad definitely caught my attention outright the first time I opened the newspaper, and that means it’s a good print ad, technically. But visually, does it convey or illustrate the benefit of the product? Or even in broader scale, the brand? Definitely not. What benefit does the girl head illustrate? Pretty? Umm… Ummm… Ummm… No comment about that.
Related posts:
I'm just your average fan and in no way affiliated with Honda. I work for an IT company and my favorite past time is looking at my daughter's face while she's sleeping, then tickle her feet and runaway when she cried... Although most of the time the missus will scold me for it. 
(yes spambots... It's a non clickable graphics)
I think it’s like that Matrix thing you mentioned. If you look at her face and the background it seems to convey the message that she’s damn awed by the information superhighway. Or it could be the fact that she’s awed by Nokia’s products (if you notice in the right-hand side behind her) that it can do stuff like that. Plus, sex appeal. It’s always about sex appeal.
Or… She can be the “icon”, the product/brand ambassador of Nokia… I think she’s famous… Couldn’t get my finger on it, but I think she’s some actress or something… Well, I only watched CNN, BBC, Discovery Channel, or NGC, so if somebody is not internationally recognized, I won’t recognized them either.
Looks like Nadya Hutagalung, sorta.
Err… Who is that? That MTV VJ? She looks like that “namaku strawberry” girl…
Lifestyle. Nice visual??
I don’t get it. The blue line in the bottom right makes it shitty, thats it.
Well, that’s just it, nobody gets it… The small pictures are just a jumble of unrelated pictures about richer internet browsing experience. On the small pictures is a girl wearing headset, seems to be hearing music of some sort… From the internet? Could be, but that’s the perception from me the reader not a real representation of the message. Could be hearing her boy/girlfriend singing, could be anything actually.