Sadvertising

Once per semester, my students and I spend time during class analyzing visual advertisements. I like doing this for a couple of reasons: (1) I spent some time studying advertising/marketing/PR during my undergrad years and still consider those professional interests and (2) the rhetoric of advertising is generally pretty obvious and easy to analyze. I think we're trained fairly early to mistrust and therefore be critical of advertising, so my students usually seem a bit more comfortable in analyzing it.

At any rate, I've been thinking recently that I should use my blog to analyze ads from time to time. I already break down every ad I see in my head, so I imagined it would be pretty simple to transfer that to blog.

And now is a great time to start because Tiger Woods just made his first ad in about 6 months, which is already getting a lot of attention and which you can find here.

The thing that a lot of people are talking about is Nike's use of the late Earl Woods' voice in the commercial. I suppose the argument is that this is in bad taste, but I think the only person really qualified to address that is Tiger himself. It's his father, not the world's. So, assuming Tiger okayed it, I'm also fine with Ghost Dad's appearance.

And his appearance is obviously the focus. The commercial is very visually plain – in black and white, with Tiger squarely in the center and very little movement at all – so the focus is clearly on the message.

That message, though, is a bit unclear.

Obviously, since there is very little Nike gear in the commercial, the goal is more to advertise Tiger Woods than it is to advertise Nike. I imagine Nike is drawing its line in the sand, or perhaps retracing that line with a highlighter, since it's one of the only sponsors to stick with Tiger through this fiasco. In that sense, the commercial is saying "Tiger Woods is (and by association, Nike is) __________."

The problem is filling in the blank. We learn that Earl Woods was inquisitive, but we don't necessarily learn that about Tiger. In fact, Earl specifically asks Tiger, "Did you learn anything?", potentially the most relevant question of the whole affair, but Tiger doesn't answer.

I've consistently warned my students that, when they're trying to make a point, questions don't necessarily do that. If you ask rather than answer a question, you're ultimately relying on your audience to agree with and fill in your answer.

In this specific case, if Nike asked me if Tiger Woods has learned anything through this ordeal, my initial response would be, "No."

Event of the Week:

The 3^rd Annual Bob Duncan 5k, in honor of my late Uncle Bob, is this Saturday at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg.