My partner and I have often thought, as have friends, that the more things went on, the more the ads became boring, insipid and dull. Basically, we feel like we've gone back to the days of the really corny ads of the past, mixed in, as you'd expect, with politically correct thinking in line with the prevailing mood, sprinkled with green, organic, fair trade and sustainable. It's boring as hell! And it's everywhere.
Better before?
And we oldies remember the crazy, Hollywood-style, humorous, tongue-in-cheek commercials that we loved so much in the 80s and 90s, to the point that an entire program, Culture Pub, was devoted to them. Of course, when we look back, we realize that our memories have fantasized and embellished them, and that some are highly questionable. But all in all, there were a lot of gems that made us smile, that were quite clever or that “blown our minds” with their use of cutting-edge production techniques. In short, we liked it and it helped us to better tolerate the then recent intrusion of commercial breaks on TV, during films or programs. It made the pill go down easier. And that may well be the problem, but let's move on...
This one mainly for the Oranchina, Petit Técollier, Yaupe and Gidupaaaaan ads
Nowadays, programs merely consist of interludes between commercials, each more boring than the last:
— Car Glassssss “and make sure you type FR” eh, you idiots, for fuck's sake!
— “Selyokar.FR” (at least 5 times in 20 seconds in case you didn't get it right)
— Mutchuel Credit “A bank that belongs to its customers” (oh, really?)
— So-and-so “has decided to be a flexitarian” (why not “polytarian” while we're inventing stupid words).
The award goes to Mona Lisa, the bank for which “people come before money”. You bet! And the groundhog? It puts the chocolate bars in the aluminum foil? (inside french joke)
Quite logically, when you see all this “adsulent” rubbish literally spewing out of all kinds of media today, your first instinct is to pull out the “CT Mieux Avant!” (It was Better Before!) joker and convince yourself that advertising was definitely better before.
Better now?
Except that you should always bear in mind that the purpose of advertising is not to inform you (even if it does sometimes), nor to educate you (even if it does...), nor to make you laugh (even if it...), nor to finance your media (even if...). Its purpose, like that of its sponsors, is to get as many people as possible to buy a particular product or service. Nothing else!
To achieve this, it needs to be effective, at least with its target audience. This has almost always led it to adopt the fashions, language and mindset of the era in which it evolved. Straddling the 80s and 90s, society loved impertinence, causticity, frivolity and glamour. At least, that's what it conveyed.
Today we no longer like impertinence; we are “offended”. We no longer understand, or rather we no longer want to understand, the second degree, the detachment, the black, scathing humor. We are, depending on the case, disgusted, outraged, offended, hurt in our values, in our identity, in our very person. We don't like frivolity, this boomer thing, and vulgarity has become the new glamour.
Carrouf 2024, or how to peddle your generic products by treating people like donkeys. They don't even hide it! They say it outright at the end!!!
Let's see...
But advertising doesn't invent anything, doesn't create anything, it merely reflects, acts as a mirror of its era, a mirror of society. So today we comment on the old-fashioned side in the late 20th century, we point out the sexist, racist, patriarchal clichés of dad's ads. But hey, society today, have you taken a good look at yourself? You're dreary, vulgar, conformist without any restraint, self-centered, constantly fearful, “no room for controversy” at all. But what a dull face you have! And your advertising as well ! But all in all, that's a good thing...
Since the eighties, advertising has shed its mask: its intellectual pretensions, its fun-loving side, its glitter, its superficial intelligence, to reveal itself naked to the bone, in all its boredom, all its nuisance, all its shamelessness. And I say: Great, really... Fine! When you think about it, despite the initial impulse to reject this bombardment of garbage, I actually prefer an ad dripping with overplayed false sentiment, stinking attention to the consumer, shameless greenwashing. Not to mention the intrusion into everyone's private sphere in the name of “values” supposedly shared by the brands, emptied of all substance, plus invasion of both public and private space.
2023 - Dumber would be difficult... Not the first time with them, though...
At least we're warned, we know what to expect, we're less fooled... Well, I hope so...
So yes, in that sense, advertising is better now!
Wesh Bro !
PS: I deliberately transvestite the brand names. So that they won't fuck with me.
Bonus – He'll have the wife...
Here is an ad that sparked controversy when it came out and still generates a lot of blog posts from idiots, often communication students or women's rights activists, woke etc. It was quickly withdrawn, and it is undoubtedly one of the biggest misunderstandings in the history of advertising. People stopped at the first sentence: “He's got the money, he's got the power, he's got an Audi, he'll get the woman...” and started to rail against the uninhibited patriarchy, female objectification, in short, horrible and outdated machismo. Even today, if you google “he will get the woman” you will come across a whole load of analyses, all of which are very literal, unambiguous and completely wrong.
Remember that at the time, Audi and the VW group were constantly playing with incongruity in their commercials. Well, there too, even if it's a little more awkward than in some of their other ads, and even if apparently 95% of the population didn't understand the message at all.
The first sentence expresses what many men still think today: “If you've got money, power and a bit of luxury, all the girls are going to fall for you, it's bound to happen!” What comes next? We see the woman's face and we think it's a long shot because she looks modern, probably has good taste, is independent and free to make her own choices. Not the type to fall for your spoiler or the number of your cylinders. Then we get back in the car and suddenly a ball bounces off the windscreen.
What would the average macho man do? He would swear and give the girls a middle finger. Or he would rush out to inspect his car, muttering to himself at the very least. What does our guy do? He brakes, gets out of his car, picks up the ball and gives it back to the girls. The narration resumes, but this time it is a woman speaking: “Men believe that a beautiful car is a way of showing how deep their pockets are, but it is also a way of showing the beauty of their soul.” The wording is debatable, but the message is clear.
Especially since the male narrator repeats the opening line, “He's got the money, he's got the power, he's got an Audi...” and adds “...he's got a soul”. Note that it is then the female character who says “...he'll get the woman...” This clearly shows that she is the one who chooses to step into the car and not just for the ride. Why does she do it? For the money, the power, the Audi? No, just because he behaved well with the little girls, because he has “a soul”.
Of course, one can question the choice of the word 'soul' (no doubt chosen for the rhyme with 'woman' in french), but it seems obvious to me that the message is not to support the big dumb macho guys who confuse their car with their dick, but rather to make fun of this cliché, to laugh at it, to see it from the opposite angle. Those who don't understand this are completely missing the point and only hear what they choose to hear. This was already the case in '93, and it's even worse now because it has become more radical and widespread.
