I recently designed an ad for The Imaging Center of Oradell advertising the a mammography service for the month of October (2010). The premiss of the ad was to motivate women, particularly younger mothers, to have their breasts examined for possible signs of cancer. The ad was turned down by my managers, including my boss (the president of the company). Not because the add was bad or offensive, but because it was too shocking- as the ad concept got a lot of uneasy/troubled emotions about it. It was presented to as many as twenty people within the company and each individual had found it rather bothersome, yet it was memorable and liked by almost everyone except my higher-ups. The ad did not run and a different ad was released. After a few months, I finished my portfolio site and decided to upload the ad that did not get approved. Here is the link to the ad that was not approved:
Here is a link to the ad that was approved:
The question is here… is the non-approved ad better? And as it is published on my site, does it qualify as a playground ad?
Here is a bit I saw on the Adland blog about Scam ads and the Playground, and what Mr. Paul Lavoie had to say on this subject- as it is an interesting and bold choice that designers are taking to express their creative ideas over what the brand-voice aught to be. In a customer driven business designers and agencies are often forced to design what the client wants, and only what the client wants. Without a hit of personal flair or creativity added to the mix. How does this stand in the design business industry? And can this be compared to a modern Avant Garde, harking on the similar ideals of the Futurist movement?
I feel like there is something unique, exciting and fresh about the Playground ad environment- something revolutionary and profound, with a touch of mischievous, as it is miss representing the intended brand voice.
Interview with Paul Lavoie, on Scam ads and Playground ads.
