Messaging Sells

In this age of 24 hour media and service, it is difficult to process all the messaging that surrounds us. Some messages penetrate, and some get lost in the din. What is it that makes a message stick the mental landing? How does it manage to get noticed while so many others are ignored?

Take McDonald’s as an easy example. Aside from the Justin Timberlake jingle (ba-duh-bup-bup-bah), the current McDonalds slogan—I’m lovin’ it—created by a German advertising agency in 2003, was uniquely, for the time, set in all lowercase.

McDonald’s claimed “It will rekindle the emotional bond our customers have with McDonald’s through a campaign that depicts how people live, what they love about life and what they love about McDonald’s.”

The slogan is the company’s most profitable and successful campaign to date, surpassing the previous “You deserve a break today.” The Slogan Doctor, reporting in business magazine Management Today, declares “From the lower case 'i', declaring a youthful disregard for grammar, to the mysterious 'it', this slogan is desperate to give Big Mac a tiny hint of outlaw chic.”

Improper grammar though it may be, it instantly conveys the McDonald’s message, and partly due to the typography. Think that the type isn’t important? Try to imagine the type behind “It takes two hands to handle a Whopper” or “We speak fish.” For that matter, what about the typography for “Two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun?”

And then there’s Starbucks. Which recently eliminated text from its logo altogether.

For your initial post by Wednesday at midnight, please provide a link to two examples: an example of very effective messaging (a symbol that instantly conveys the precise intended meaning), as well as an example of ineffective messaging (a symbol that causes confusion). Explain why...not just why you personally think "why," but support your position with cited evidence. Critical Thinking! Do your research.

For your second post by the end of the week, respond to the findings of your peers. Add additional support or defend a different position. Perhaps you think it is a totally ineffective message or can give an example of a better (stronger/longer-lasting) message.