{"id":700,"date":"2004-03-16T23:18:55","date_gmt":"2004-03-17T07:18:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.amptoons.com\/blog\/archives\/2004\/03\/16\/apples-ipod-ads\/"},"modified":"2004-03-16T23:18:55","modified_gmt":"2004-03-17T07:18:55","slug":"apples-ipod-ads","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/?p=700","title":{"rendered":"Apple's iPod ads"},"content":{"rendered":"

Seth Stevenson, Slate’s new ad critic, recently wrote a column<\/a> criticizing Apple’s new iPod ads (and the old DeBeers diamond ads) because they seemed to suggest that the product was better than the consumer.<\/p>\n

Mr. Stevenson describes the ads as being:<\/p>\n

Silhouetted shadow-people dance in a strenuous manner. Behind them is a wall of solid color that flashes in neon shades of orange, pink, blue, and green. In each shadow-person’s hand is an Apple iPod.<\/p>\n

[. . .]<\/center><\/p>\n

[T]he songs (from groups like Jet and Black Eyed Peas) are extremely well-chosen. Just indie enough so that not everybody knows them; just mainstream enough so that almost everybody likes them. But as good as the music is, the visual concept is even better. It’s incredibly simple: never more than three distinct colors on the screen at any one time, and black and white are two of them. What makes it so bold are those vast swaths of neon monochrome.<\/p>\n

This simplicity highlights the dance moves, but also – and more importantly – it highlights the iPod. The key to it all is the silhouettes. What a brilliant way to showcase a product. Almost everything that might distract us – not just background scenery, but even the actors’ faces and clothes – has been eliminated. All we’re left to focus on is that iconic gizmo. What’s more, the dark black silhouettes of the dancers perfectly offset the iPod’s gleaming white cord, earbuds, and body.<\/p>\n

[. . .]<\/center><\/p>\n

I realized where I’d seen this trick before. It’s the mid-1990s campaign for DeBeers diamonds – the one where the people are shadows, but the jewelry is real. In them, a shadow-man would slip a diamond ring over a shadow-finger, or clasp a pendant necklace around a ghostly throat. These ads used to be on television all the time. You may recall the stirring string music of their soundtrack, or the still-running tagline: “A Diamond Is Forever.”<\/p><\/div>\n

He then goes on to describe his reaction to the ads:<\/p>\n

[W]hat bothered me about the spots was the underlying message. They seem to say that we are all just transient shadows, not long for this world – it’s our diamonds that are forever. In the end, that necklace is no overpriced bauble. It’s a ticket to immortality!<\/p>\n

My distaste for these ads stems in part from the fact that, with both the iPod and the diamonds, the marketing gives me a sneaking sense that the product thinks it’s better than me. More attractive, far more timeless, and frankly more interesting, too. I feel I’m being told that, without this particular merchandise, I will have no tangible presence in the world. And that hurts.<\/p><\/div>\n

At the risk of criticizing the professional critic, I think he misses part of the brilliance of using silhouettes instead of people and so misses how the ads aren’t insulting at all. To understand what Mr. Stevenson missed, we turn to that great tome of art theory: Scott McCloud’s Understanding Comics<\/i><\/a>.<\/p>\n

In the second chapter, Mr. McCloud discusses the way that humans have a tendency to see themselves and their features in objects that bear no resemblance to humans (cars, light sockets, etc.) and that humans also tend to project themselves onto simplified human forms (in the books case, cartoons). The more realistically a cartoon character is rendered, the harder it is to empathize with that character because as more features are added to that character it automatically has fewer features in common with the reader. A face that is composed of a circle, two dots, and a line for the mouth is more easily identified with than one that has all of those features plus long hair. (I would scan in the pages in question, but am not sure of the legality of such a move. If someone can tell me whether or not that falls under fair use, I’ll gladly post scans of the pages.)<\/p>\n

This is what the silhouette ads play on. By taking the consumer, the wearer of the diamond and the user of the iPod, and rendering that person as a shadow they, the advertisers, are inviting the viewer to project his or her self onto the shadows. When the woman grooving to the iPod, or the man giving a diamond to his love, is featureless it’s easier for a person to picture herself or himself as the one grooving or giving.<\/p>\n

So really, the spots are no more insulting than the usual advertising fare. Imagine yourself with our product; wouldn’t you be happier, then?<\/i><\/p>\n

Update (03\/17):<\/b> Just to be clear on this: I think that only Apple’s ads are entirely without offense in this case. As some others have pointed out in the comments, the DeBeers diamond ads are misogynistic in their view that women’s affection can be earned by buying them expensive baubles.<\/p>\n

I’m sorry if that wasn’t clear..<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Seth Stevenson, Slate’s new ad critic, recently wrote a column criticizing Apple’s new iPod ads (and the old DeBeers diamond ads) because they seemed to suggest that the product was better than the consumer. Mr. Stevenson describes the ads as … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":14,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[62],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-700","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-popular-and-unpopular-culture"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/700","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/14"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=700"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/700\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=700"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=700"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=700"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}