Creative Process Verizon\'s More Fun

¶ … Creative Process

Verizon's "More Fun than a Miniature Horse Campaign"

Is the creative approach consistent with the brand's marketing and advertising objectives?

One of the more bizarre recent advertising campaigns by Verizon Wireless is the campaign that asserts that Verizon Wireless phones are more "fun" than miniature horses. The non-sequitur is presumably supposed to be 'edgy' and attract some of Verizon's core consumers, that of young people, specifically young women, seeking some sort of novelty in their phone's appearance and service.

Is the creative approach consistent with the creative strategy and objectives? Does it communicate what it is supposed to communicate?

Verizon has been seeking to promote its new music-playing Chocolate and new Venus phones as the 'next new things.' However, the extent to which this relates to making fun of small horses seems questionable. The advertisement is visually consistent in terms of the people in the advertisement with other Verizon ads -- they are young, well-dressed, good-looking women who look hip and urban (but not 'fashion model' types). The Verizon music is also played at the end of the advertisement, and like many other Verizon ads, the ad transpires in silence, in a kind of deadpan irony.

Is the creative approach appropriate for the target audience?

No. At best, the strangeness of the advertisement will catch a hip, young urbanite's eye for a moment, but it does not distinguish why Verizon is better than its many competitors. Also, many young women and young people in general love animals, or are at least concerned about preserving animal rights. Making fun of miniature horses as creatures that bite their owners and showing a small horse eating a dog-house size stable seems like a strange for a female-targeted ad. Also, unlike a dog, most of the target audience is unlikely to have had contact with miniature horses, so there is not even a resonance of commonality between their experience and the experience portrayed in the advertisement. Finally because the young women in the advertisement seems more interested and affectionate towards their phones than the horse, the unintentional message is that the women are cruel and shallow, and care more for material possessions than living beings.

Does the creative approach communicate a clear and convincing message to the customer?

Other than getting people's attention, the advertisement seems to convey little sense of the product's value, Verizon's ability to serve its customer better than similar companies, and it also draws the viewer's focus to the (unrelated) subject of the advertisement (the horse), rather than to the product (the new types of Verizon phones).

Does the creative execution keep from overwhelming the message?

In a nutshell, the creative execution completely overwhelms the message -- that is an excellent way to sum up the failure of this advertisement. In fact, given that miniature horses are small and cute, good qualities for a cell phone aimed at young people, especially fashionable young women, showing the horse as an ugly, wood-chomping beast in the backyard could be counterproductive. Although not a huge market segment perhaps, horse lovers (most of whom are women) might even be offended by the unflattering depiction of the tiny horses. The idea that a young woman would prefer a cute cell phone rather than a pet as a present also seems to portray young women as shallow. Although it is not a scientific sampling, the notes on the comments page of YouTube for the advertisement included many notes by users (presumably young women, the targets of the advertisement) that they would trade their phone for a pony any day! (an equally unscientific poll of young women by the author of this paper yielded the same results).

The message of an advertisement for a cell phone should convey either the phone's added social value aesthetically or the phone's added financial or service value. This advertisement does neither.

Is the creative approach appropriate for the media environment in which it is likely to be seen?

If seen on the Internet, the advertisement might be marginally more effective on YouTube, given that some people use YouTube specifically to watch advertisements for companies they like. Someone who liked Verizon, or was thinking of switching, might watch and understand the advertisement. Viewed on a television, the meaning of the advertisement would be almost completely lost -- someone might only see the horse and not notice the phone, and miss the Verizon logo and theme song at the end and the note about the "music-playing" chocolate or the new Venus phone. The advertisement was, it should be noted, originally shown on the Fox network, during its regular evening television programming.