10.02.2008

that DeclareYourself voting vid? think twice.

it seems that the Don't Vote video i discussed here yesterday has caused quite a stir in the advertising and marketing community, from a number of age ranges and locations, like Public School Intelligentsia and Dear Jane Sample, both of whom are devoutly, it seems, against it. in a way, rightfully so. it's unappealing. but...

i think that there has been sight lost on the target group for the video. it's not meant to convince jaded 30-40 somethings to vote through use of the wiles of overpaid celebrity--you and i see through that by now. neither does it appeal to my age group, unless they act younger, because many of us have graduated college, have decided to vote or not vote already, have assessed our politics, and so forth. as such, we likely won't care about the spot.

it is meant to appeal to high schoolers and recent high school grads, whose attentions spans, as i've mentioned and many know, are incredibly difficult to capture. you can't coddle them like mommy and daddy or tell them what they should do. they're teenagers, they're rebellious, and likely, they don't give two shits about you, the government, or Wall Street. but if you get their back up by being condescending, you may just have a shot. MAYBE. though to get them to watch for 4 mins is asking a lot of the ADD generation.

to verify my thought process on this, i tossed my brother, a high school aged kid, the video. told him to watch it and just tell me what he thought. no prepping, no framing. then i asked him a few pointed questions: would it have made you register to vote? what did you think about the use of celebrities? what did you think about the use of sarcasm?

--
the responses were as follows:

on voting:
it would have persuaded me to vote, within reason yes i would try to but it would be put on a list of personal priority meaning i'd get to it asap but i wouldnt go out of my way instantly to do so

on sarcasm:
if i could vote, and wasnt planning to, it sure would've made me feel like crap. their approach was very sarcastic (obviously on purpose). i think the sarcasm was just right, but as i said it would come down to personal priority to whether or not i left that second to register

on celebrity:
sarah silverman(silvermen? sp?) was a little over the top with her...nonsense - it didnt fit well with the seriousness of the video. otherwise they worked well together.

any other thoughts:
ME: if i hadn't told you, specifically, to watch the whole thing, would you have if you stumbled on it?
HE: with a proper description and/or title, yes. i dont just click randomly at yt vids
ME: do you want to add anything else?
HE: the length was abit much, only when they started "waiting" for you to register
--

i don't profess that my brother is the be-all end-all answer; in fact, he's atypical. he's highly aware, interested in politics, and extremely bright. if you were following me on twitter, you noticed that i didn't think he'd like it, since he tends to have views nearly as mature as ours. so if this video works for him, i urge you to think about that, and to ask others in the high school age group what they think. no prepping, no framing. just, does it make you want to vote? food for thought.

6 comments:

David Griner said...

Your comment about attention spans gets at my major beef. The thing is insanely long and repetitive, which I can't imagine appealing to any demographic, much less the young-uns.

Matt Hunsberger said...

This really blows. I got the point and was sick of it after 30 seconds. And there's nothing I hate more than 50 celebrities trying to get me involved in something.

The one thing I do like is the sarcastic tone. I think it would work better if they used a bunch of kids from the target demo. Being criticized by a peer is much more effective than being criticized by a random celebrity.

M.Tartag said...

I have to echo Matt, "Being criticized by a peer is much more effective than being criticized by a random celebrity." This ad isn't abstract, so it doesn't fall into the bin of weird-you-tube-shit that people collect and pass on. This ad isn't so mainstream it is moving, so it loses on that end as well. And you're right the average disinterested viewer is not going to watch it all the way through (3rd count of loss). Points on use of your brother. But you folks are way too smart to use as a subject pool, to begin with. I love your family so much though (off topic).

windo said...

They should've just used the Johah Hill footage. It would've been much more relevant to the HS kids. talking peer to peer and not like gramps telling you what to do.

shaun. said...

if only all highschool students were as on the ball as your brother.

i certainly was not in highschool.

the girl Riot™ said...

@griner -- gets at your major beef? we're agreeing there. i believe we both think it's far too lengthy to hold an ADD attention span, as i said in yesterday's post. i was championing the use of condescension as a tactic to get at those ADD attentions initially.

@matt -- i completely agree. like i said, me personally? i hate the video. it wouldn't work on me. never. but i'm not the target, and i think that's what a lot of analysts of the piece are losing sight of. i do think it would be interesting to use folks from the target demo to tell the same story, though.

@lissa -- yeah, i really thought my bro would hate it as much as i did.

@windo, @shaun -- thanks for your input :) yeah, i would have liked to ask someone who wasn't my brother. i may ask some of his friends, if i cared enough. but, as i don't particularly like the video myself, i'm not sure my level of caring. just wanted to make the point that while most of ad world will hate the vid--because i think it's worthy of hatred--that we're not the folks being spoken to.

xxo all!