|
There is a huge difference between the writing styles of advertising agency copywriters and direct response copywriters.
"Image" agency writers are long on style and attitude. Direct response copywriters rely on benefits, facts and powerful emotions (fear, greed and the like).
To make this distinction clearer, I'm going to contrast the way the two kinds of writers use the word "you" when they address the reader. The different approach to the prospect is really quite revealing.
Let's start with an ad from Citigroup that ran a while ago in Condé Nast Traveler. Here it is in its entirety with the stylish, poetic line-breaks intact. The first line is rendered as a large, bold headline. The rest is tiny body copy:
Be your own status symbol.
There's only one you.
To help keep it that way, we offer free Citi® Identity Theft Solutions just for
being a customer.
Because when it comes to being you, you're the only one that can truly pull it off.
This ad is stylish and quite cool in tone. There's certainly a lot of "you" mentions in the ad, but the writer keeps the reader at a distance. As in many "image" ads, the posture, the pose, the postmodern wink to the reader is everything.
Maybe that's why the ad doesn't include a meaningful way for the reader to find more about Citi Identity Theft Solutions or even how to open an account at the bank!
NOTE: I did go to the citi.com URL that appeard at the bottom of the ad and could not find ANY reference to Citi Identity Theft Solutions. Wouldn't it have made sense for the ad to include a URL that links directly to a special landing page — one that features Citi Identity Theft Solutions and captures information about the visitor? Believe me, this is not the kind of idea that appeals to writers of sophisticated image ads.
This Citigroup ad, of course, is anathema to direct response writers like me. In my view, the Citigroup ad is self-indulgent and a terrible waste of expensive space.
"Image" agency writers are long on style and attitude. Direct response copywriters rely on benefits, facts and powerful emotions (fear, greed and the like).
To make this distinction clearer, I'm going to contrast the way the two kinds of writers use the word "you" when they address the reader. The different approach to the prospect is really quite revealing.
Let's start with an ad from Citigroup that ran a while ago in Condé Nast Traveler. Here it is in its entirety with the stylish, poetic line-breaks intact. The first line is rendered as a large, bold headline. The rest is tiny body copy:
Be your own status symbol.
There's only one you.
To help keep it that way, we offer free Citi® Identity Theft Solutions just for
being a customer.
Because when it comes to being you, you're the only one that can truly pull it off.
This ad is stylish and quite cool in tone. There's certainly a lot of "you" mentions in the ad, but the writer keeps the reader at a distance. As in many "image" ads, the posture, the pose, the postmodern wink to the reader is everything.
Maybe that's why the ad doesn't include a meaningful way for the reader to find more about Citi Identity Theft Solutions or even how to open an account at the bank!
NOTE: I did go to the citi.com URL that appeard at the bottom of the ad and could not find ANY reference to Citi Identity Theft Solutions. Wouldn't it have made sense for the ad to include a URL that links directly to a special landing page — one that features Citi Identity Theft Solutions and captures information about the visitor? Believe me, this is not the kind of idea that appeals to writers of sophisticated image ads.
This Citigroup ad, of course, is anathema to direct response writers like me. In my view, the Citigroup ad is self-indulgent and a terrible waste of expensive space.
|
Secrets of Direct Marketing Testing
PURLs for Profit
