Recently I saw a billboard for a bank (or credit union or something similar). The ad showed one apple surrounded by a bunch of oranges. The apple had the bank logo on it. I don’t remember what the billboard actually said, but it was playing on the whole “you can’t compare apples to oranges” spiel. What the ad was obviously trying to say is that no other bank compares to its own. “We are one-of-a-kind.” That sort of thing.
If you think about it, however, the whole apples-vs-oranges maxim is based on two things being incomparable to each other—not because one is far superior, but because a comparison isn’t even valid or fair. People may incorrectly use it to mean the former, but that would be a mistake. The point is supposed to be that you literally can’t compare them, not that you shouldn’t or that it’s pointless to do so. You CANNOT! Moreover, this adage is often used to suggest that two incomparable things are, within their own respective spheres, worthy of equal esteem. For example, one might ask, “Which is better, fettuccine alfredo or Seattle, Washington?” The respondent may rightfully pull the apples-and-oranges axiom out of their hat, claiming the question is unfair and arguing that both Seattle and fettuccine alfredo are wonderful in ways that have nothing to do with one another.
So what is the underlying message of the billboard I saw? That the bank being advertised, while perhaps one-of-a-kind, is actually no better or worse than any other bank. They just do things differently. Not differently in a good way, mind you. Just differently. In other words, you could be just as happy banking somewhere else. The possibility even remains that the advertised bank is of lesser quality than the other banks. But you still couldn’t compare them.
If you’ve seen the Yoplait® Light commercial that’s been playing recently (and which has played annually for several years now), you’ll notice a similar problem. In the ad, a woman looks forward to wearing her bathing suit with confidence. To achieve this goal, she spends her days snacking on Yoplait’s low-fat yogurt. A crucial component of the commercial is its use of the 1960’s pop-tune “Itsy Bitsy Teenie Weenie Yellow Polka-Dot Bikini.” Ironically, anyone truly familiar with the song will know that its lyrics tell of a woman who feels horribly uncomfortable in her swimsuit and dreads the idea of anyone seeing her in it. Its message is the polar opposite of what the Yoplait commercial wishes to convey.
Bottom line: perhaps there is more truth in advertising than we’d ever supposed.
This was brilliant. Thanks for making my morning a good one, Benny K.
ReplyDeleteHi Benny,
ReplyDeleteDon’t even get me started on advertising, because I have a hard time shutting up about this particular pet peeve once I get going.
This reminds me of the commercial for Oust spray. You know, the lady says something like, “I thought Lysol was an air sanitizer. But it isn’t. So now I use Oust!” The first thing I think when I hear this is, “If Lysol is not an air sanitizer, then why are you even making a comparison to Oust?” The next thing I think is, “I’m sorry for your ignorance, Lady!” I mean, she says, ‘I thought Lysol was an air sanitizer.” Where would she get this idea? And why is she so proudly telling us all how stupid she is? I’ve used Lysol since the day I got my very first apartment. I never once EVER thought it was anything other than a surface cleaner. It even says so on the container, for heaven’s sake. This Oust ad doesn’t make me want to buy any product that this lady is recommending. I prefer to take my advice from people who are at least a hair smarter than a radish. And, just as a side note from one who insists on a clean home: If your surfaces are clean, you do not need an air sanitizer—whatever on Earth that is!