Earlier today I came across an article on Business Insider showcasing the news that Google had recently won a contest set by USA Today. The contest, announced this past October, asked marketers, advertisers and agencies to submit their most creative print ad to be judged by a panel; with the winner getting the prize of 1 million dollars worth of ad space. Google’s winning ad was for its social media platform, Google+. The ad featured a rather long sentence explaining how the Dalai Lama and Desmond Tutu used Google+’s feature, hangout, to have a meeting online.
I think this was a great idea and concept for a contest. First of all, anything that can be done to encourage good, creative, print advertising is awesome. Unlike most people, I don’t believe print advertising is dead. It might be in the process of dying, but that means that the ads that are surviving are the cream of the crop, the badasses that refuse to go down without a fight. Everyone knows newspapers attract a generally wealthier and more educated demographic, so anything that can sell them is definitely worth advertising (and printing). Feel free to argue with me on this, I like listening to others’ opinions.
My only problem, or moment that made me go “ehh”, was when I read about the runner ups in the contest. One of them was the Ad Council’s Save the Children Campaign. I’m not gonna lie and say I know much about the campaign, I don’t, but I do know the Ad Council only gets behind campaigns that benefit the greater good, and can use all the help we can provide. While Google might’ve been more creative, which was the contest criteria, I can’t help but think the one million dollars might’ve been better spent towards advertising the children’s needs. Maybe I’m just being a sap.
Anyways, here’s a close up of the ad, would you have paid a million dollars for this sentence?