It’s five days (as of writing this) until the California primary elections are held, and, as always, campaign billboards and banners are out in full swing, offering information such as, “Dave Johnson: Values we trust” and “Joe Clark: Professionalism, Integrity, Good Hair,” and other vital voter information that the general public, come election day, will use to place an informed vote for the candidate who they have seen the most billboards for.
One such campaign banner caught my attention — not because of what it said, but rather because of what it failed to say. I’ve spotted this banner, pictured below, in a lot of places, one of which is by the main street near my house.
This photograph was taken from a car on the actual road, so that’s basically exactly what it looks like to a driver (at least, a driver who actually looks at it). At first glance, it looks like just another billboard that serves no purpose other than to display the candidate’s name (in this case, that of Congressman Doolittle’s) in big, bold letters, in an effort to boost the candidate’s name-recognition. It’s pathetic that the majority of political campaign boards are in this shallow vain, but it works. As a political candidate, simply getting your name as recognizable as possible by the public is a huge part of winning an election, and it appears that Congressman Doolittle understands this idea.
Here’s another picture of the same sign, this time a little bit closer and taken from the side of the road.
Again, it’s Congressman Dolittle’s name in big white letters contrasted against a solid black background. But this time the text above his name is more obvious. Let’s take a closer look at what it says.
Surprise — the banner is not for Congressman Dolittle after all. The text above his name reads, “How do you spell corruption?”, and it’s followed by “Congressman Doolittle”.
The sheer advertising stupidity being exhibited here leaves me in awe… Whoever sponsored this this campaign banner intended to approve the design of a billboard intended deface their opponent’s name, but actually managed to approve put his name in big, bold, white letters against a black background and the message defaming him in smallish, dark blue letters against a light blue background, creating an effect such that Doolittle’s name glares out broadly and clearly but the message against him basically blurs out and gets lost.
Close up, all of the board’s text is easily readable. But as you can see from the two previous photographs, the most critical part of the text isn’t so obvious to a driver. Scratch that, it isn’t obvious at all. I drove past that very sign for at least 3 weeks before I noticed what it actually said.
The average driver, judging from the driving habits I’ve seen, isn’t necessarily watching the road, much less scrutinizing every bit of political propaganda that they see. Your average driver is coming home from a long day of work, rushing to the store before it closes, trying to read poorly written directions, talking to a friend, thinking about the term paper they’re turning in that day, or trying to remember whether or not they remembered to close the garage door when they left the house. Whatever their situation, they are not interested in scrutinizing a hard-to-read by the road.
When it comes to boring roadside banners, making it such that the reader has to exert effort to get the message will lose you 90% of your audience. You have to make your message in-your-face obvious or it simply will not be read.
But even though the banner fails to get the desired message across, the true marvel of it is that it actually does its sponsor more harm than good. On average, the worst a poorly designed political billboard can do is not be readable, and thus not result in any net gain for the candidate sponsoring it. But this billboard actually scores negatively, because it not only fails to make its real message readable, but it blatantly looks like a billboard supporting the opponent. Doolittle’s name is in big letters, while the critical message against him is obscured. To the average passer-by, this looks like a blatanent ad for Doolittle.
So what lesson did we learn? Simple: If you have to create a visual advertisement, be sure to consider how and where your audience will see it. Make your message bloody obvious, and, above all else, do not leave any room for misinterpretation. Readers are much more likely to remember a name than a concept, so ensure that any information you provide about a name you’re trying to defame is more obvious than the name itself.
I wonder if Doolittle chuckles himself to sleep at night, thinking of the free advertising he got from his opponents… and this article.
