Actor Geoffrey Holder, quoted in an ad that ran in Rolling Stone in 1985: “If I had hair, I’d use Vidal Sassoon for men.” I think this ad is brilliant. Let’s evaluate how it prompts the viewer to think, feel, and act, then look at the visual design. I’m trying this four-pronged rubric as a way to examine ads and understand what they do right.
THINK: As soon as you read the caption, the contradiction is obvious. An ad for a hair product, promoted by a bald guy? That’s silly! You also process that Vidal Sassoon has to do with hair. Even if you’ve never heard of the brand before, you can easily tell what their business is.
FEEL: There’s something inherently funny about a bald guy shilling shampoo and pomade. You are amused. Geoffrey Holder’s smile is friendly, welcoming. He connotes vitality and artistic panache — Holder was a Trinidadian-American performer in New York. If you watched TV in the 1980s, you might remember him from 7 Up commercials:
In 1985, when Rolling Stone carried this Vidal Sassoon ad, Geoffrey Holder would have been familiar to most readers. The work he did for 7 Up boosted his work for Vidal Sassoon, giving the second company more bang for their buck.
ACT: The caption emphasizes Vidal Sassoon’s brand name without being clumsy or pushy. Next time you browse the shampoo aisle, positive associations will be swirling around in your brain, probably under the threshold of consciousness but powerful nonetheless.
DESIGN: The photograph and caption are simple, easy to read/understand, and pleasant.
That’s it! What do you think? Is this a good way to evaluate advertisements? Do you agree with my interpretation?