@oluseyi Do I have data to back that up? No — but it doesn’t mean the point isn’t worthwhile. I made it obvious from the outset that it was simply an opinion, not the result of an extensive series of focus-group tests.
@oluseyi I must say — I don’t really understand what the motivation for your criticism of my criticism is — (metacriticism? hah!) I’m just expressing my dislike for a particular ad, and my suspicion that it wouldn’t resonate as well as it could.
@oluseyi This is just media criticism. I haven’t done market research or anything to back up my point — I’m basing my opinion on the fact that the advertisement didn’t resonate with me at all — yet Apple’s other ads do. And that’s reasonable!
@oluseyi I’m not suggesting that all advertisement is rejected critically. A lot is very effective—I believe I made that point clear about Apple’s other ads. I merely feel like *this particular ad* and its ilk are not.
@oluseyi Because an advertisement has an explicit reason for existence — selling something, convincing people of something, building recognition — (or it’s not an advertisement — it’s just art. And in this case, I’d argue, poor art.)
@oluseyi For the most part, parody isn’t telling us something new. It’s reflecting what we already know. The parody resonates because we’ve all thought these things about corporate advertising. Nothing less, nothing more.