The battle over Manchester's congestion charge has become quite farcical really. I personally am undecided, but leaning towards yes; but were it based on the advertising and campaigning, the vote should be non-existent.The no campaign has all the subtlety and balance of Jeremy Clarkson's Big Book of Speed Cameras. A jagged C logo, VOTE NO! NO MORE CHARGES! JUST DRIVING YOUR CAR! Jeez fucking get a grip. It feels like the sort of campaign put together by UKIP to save the pound, a reactionary agressive campaign which is based on opinion not fact; run by the sort of people who would vote to nuke Iran if it meant their car tax came down a few quid.
That said, the Yes campaign isn't much better. Clearly ripping off an NHS ad style, with mug shots of people with blatantly contrived "Quotes". It just looks embarassing. "80 more trams, then the charge comes in? Sound fair to me." Except it doesn't. Because there is no way on earth that these people have said these phrases, it is ad speak of the worst kind; attempting to sound like someone but failing miserably and ending up sounding like a council trying to sway people with fake opinion.
In fact the only people who have come up with anything reasonable are First, the local bus company. Their on-bus posters and booklets at least explain the benefits in a rational way, and are the only persuasive thing I have read in the 'battle' period.
Vote Yes? Vote No? Vote for better advertising!
3 comments:
How can you convince people to vote for something when you use 'comments' that are so obviously not said by real people.
When they lose - as they probably will - it's not the opposition who won it, it's them who lost it.
A lot of brands fall into that trap as well - thinking people choose them because they are loved when really it's because their competition are so bad.
Ego. The evil of business.
i agree with rob :)
thanks for sharing this wonderful post
Post a Comment