Super Bowl 2019 Ads: M&M vs. Audi Effectiveness Analysis

What makes this paper effective

• Applies a consistent analytical framework—premise and claim—across both ads, allowing direct, structured comparison rather than purely impressionistic critique.
• Supports evaluative judgments with specific visual and narrative details from each ad (e.g., the minivan setting, the cashew scene, the contrasting wardrobe), grounding the analysis in observable evidence.
• Balances positive and negative assessments honestly; the writer acknowledges potential bias ("me not being in the target market") while still defending a clear position on each ad's effectiveness.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper demonstrates applied rhetorical analysis using the advertising concepts of major and minor premises alongside explicit claims. By identifying the hidden premise (White, 2016) in each ad and then testing whether the ad's visuals and narrative support that premise, the writer moves beyond simple opinion toward evidence-based evaluation—a core technique in communications and marketing analysis.

Structure breakdown

The paper opens with a brief framing introduction that justifies the choice of Super Bowl ads as an analytical subject. It then devotes a full section to each commercial, moving systematically through premise, claims, and overall effectiveness judgment. A concluding section synthesizes the two analyses and restates the criteria for effective advertising. The parallel structure across both ad sections makes the comparative logic easy to follow.