M2 - Squack Advert Report

Squack Advertisements

(Prototype)

Justification

For my advertising, I've chosen to stick close to the brand since its not popular and it's important making the audience familiar with Squack. Therefore, for the classic lemonade flavor, I've stuck with the solid yellow and sky blue colors. These colors are chosen because they're bright and associate with summer and fun, which fits with the image of a rubber duck in a bath. Even though the designs use blue as a common color, it doesn't connotate anything else other than water. This should be mentioned because blue is commonly associated as a male color and Squack is a brand for all.

The camera angles in the TV, web and billboard advertisements are usually static mid-shots including only two important factors: the ducks and the drinks. The brand is quirky but modern so the lack of strong camera angles are used to make the image sit in (like a sort of mise-en-scene).

Speaking of which, this is the main idea of both the advertisements and the brand. This is because it appeals to not just the target demographic of 16-30 year old, but everyone in general. The image of a friendly, harmless rubber duck is both recognizable to everyone and universal; Everyone knows that a rubber connotes bathtubs and cleanliness.

The layout of my advertisements are minimalistic and simple, only showing basic imagery that conveys the message of the advertisements (that Squack is weird) straight forwardly. It's minimalist design also makes it appear modern and semi-professional which appeals to an older audience.

The rubber duck toy is public domain, meaning anyone can use it as or for a mascot or character. Therefor, the idea can't be copyrighted or trademarked by myself or anyone else, making the property legal. Any legal issues including the drink or brand itself aren't affiliated with the advertising making them void.

My advertisement also follows all the rules and regulations of the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) in which it doesn't contain inappropriate, harmful or misleading content in any format. However, it can be argued that the content in my TV advertisement counts as false because it shows an untrue step-by-step guide of how Squack drinks are made. On the other hand, this can be argued against, as it's clearly a fictional scenario and obviously unreal that its not trying to convince the audience that this is true.

Although the adverts are mostly safe, the TV advertisements may have ethical issues with how the rubber ducks are treated. They're comedically squeezed for their juices like a lemon and left shriveled and scrunched after. This can be seen as problematic and violent as it could imply animal abuse or mistreatment of wildlife. Our reasoning against these possible claims are that the ducks are clearly shown to be lifeless objects and more cartoony than realistic.

As regulations are concerned, my advertising follows ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) terms by understanding their four main rules: to be legal, decent, truthful and honest. My advertisement doesn't promote anything illegal, it promotes the product in a decent way and it's honest about the product provided. The only passible issue would be truthfulness as my advertising campaign exaggerates how the product is produced in order to stand out. On the other hand, I could argue against this as merely being fantasy storytelling to engage the audience in a comedic way.