There’s also something to be said for Microsoft’s shift in message tactics too. Isn’t it telling that the campaign went from a “comical” pointless, run-on commercial featuring Gates and Seinfeild that never mentions PCs, to a crowd friendly message directly addressing PC. In the first case Microsoft is trying to be cool with out explaining what they are cool about. In the later, the Big M hits you over the head with the message that their PCs are cool just like you. I guess it wasn’t working out for Big M to be cool through a subversive plot line so they switched to a more direct message.

Ben, I agree that they have the simplistic reading going for them on this and it’s to their benefit that most people don’t pay close enough attention to catch the distinction that Michael is making above. Advertising is as much about getting a response as it is about building perception no matter how illogical.

I do wonder, though, if most people will make this logic connection. People tend to define themselves by the products they buy, and the fast visual “vibe” of the new PC spots does makes you feel that you want to be hip of this cool, fun, smart crowd. Advertising is designed to get a response, which is often emotional and illogical — which is why sex and violence work so well in advertising; logically people wouldn’t respond to such superficial stimuli, but emotionally we do.

Great analysis… but I bet the PC ads will work because of the simplistic reading, not the deeper logical rationale.

Lukacs says the novel took the place of the epic in a world without god; what does it mean when ad copy takes the place of the novel?