Emotions beat facts
I was just reading this interesting article about the ways in which emotions trump facts
“…people are not automatons. People are flesh and blood, heart and soul, and we aren’t moved by numbers alone. We live on stories. We thrive on emotion. We want to laugh, to cry, to rage. So if the political establishment wants to prevent a slide to ever increasing extremes it needs to learn the lesson that Brexit has taught us so starkly: learn to speak to people’s hearts as well as their heads. Otherwise, we may find ourselves headed for some very dark political times indeed.”
So far so understandable, but the tricky thing is that emotions are ever-shifting, subjective, personal and hard to nail down. We can always try to tug at the heartstrings to exactly the right extent, but how many times has ‘touching’ come off as mawkish or sentimental? How often has ‘thrilling’ fallen short and instead become dull? And I’ve lost count of the myriad times ‘funny’ has ironically been more like its opposite.
Emotional persuasion is taking more of a risk: presenting facts is a fairly simple and straightforward process, but emotions carry baggage. Many of us don’t like to feel as if we’re being manipulated into some kind of reaction, particularly if the intention behind it is to sell soap powder or cars. Huge companies spending large sums of money to employ ‘experts’ in an attempt to make us cry/sympathise/worry in order that they might make large profits are not the most likeable entities.
Then again, when it’s done well you don’t really notice the blueprint beneath. Or at least the effect works well enough for you to forgive any manipulation. Then you’re left with an experience that allows the irrational to supersede the rational and a communication that hits harder and becomes far more memorable.
What are the tacts behind this? These Levi’s jeans are a bit roomier? I have a feeling very few people left with that new piece of information, and if they did I don’t think it’s what made them seek out the trousers. But I’ll bet thousands asked their friends if they’d seen that Levi’s ad where they run through the walls:
The facts: John Lewis sells stuff that people might like. Is that really going to get you to visit one of their shops? Of course not. But a little story about what that stuff might mean to someone, a story that has you blinking back tears? Perfect.
Kmart ships stuff. So do loads of other shops. Big deal. Then again, if you make that point in a very funny way you can jump to the front of the shops-that-ship queue.
Clearly emotion trumps logic, but in my experience we rarely get explicit about that during the brief or creative review. It’s kind of left unsaid or assumed that the work we produce will elicit an emotional reaction. Perhaps a more deliberate approach would leave us with more hits than misses.
“What role do facts play in 2016 Western Society? Discuss”
An actual question in this year’s GSCEs.
Probably.
Hey, people who think it’s purely about reason – wake up – it’s also about emotion…
Hey, people who think it’s purely about emotion – wake up – it’s also about reason…
Let’s lose the dogma…
I like Bernbach and Dave Trott’s take…
http://davetrott.co.uk/2009/05/is-advertising-a-con/
“I’ve just finished reading a speech by Bill Bernbach.
He talks about the need for both emotion and reason.
Start with a fact, but don’t stop there.
How you say something may well be more important than what you say.
But you have to have something to say in the first place.
If you have nothing to say that will soon be apparent.
No one will be fooled.”
How does that explain beer and chocolate advertising? Or indeed Levis?
People seem to have great success saying (pretty much) nothing.
(Having said that, I’d say what you said slightly differently: we need both information and entertainment. One without the other is useless.)
Haha well you’d have to ask Bill.
I’m a firm believer that there are many different ways to make great advertising. But I’m open minded about that too…
I worry about those who claim there’s one way that’s right for everything.
Bill also said something like “in a work of genius, execution equals content”. Bill said it all.
Haha yes!
Sadly, genius is in very short supply.
The truth is if we read enough stuff we’ll find people who back up what we already thought anyway.
I just like to remind myself there’s more than one way to knit a bagel…
Re Levis
501 briefs were pretty much always based on a fact when I worked on the business.
Drugstore = watch-pocket.
Swimmer = The more you wash them the better they get
Launderette – Now available stonewashed
Way after my time – Odyssey was about the ‘freedom to move’ that Engineered 501s offered.
Maybe those facts got buried beneath the emotion?
If the ad got talked about (they did) and shifted stock (same) is that such a bad thing?
Sounds about right… start with a fact or benefit relevant to the audience – then take that somewhere amazing that connects with people… what you do with it can become far more important/motivating than the original fact, but the fact is still there. You could make a list of the best advertising ever made and loads of them would fit this simple (but difficult to do) pattern…
[Then again some don’t, like Oliviero Toscani’s genius Benetton work. But there you go… there’s more than one way to knit a bagel…]
I liked Bill’s (or whoever he stole it from) phrase: The magic is in the product.
Thus I think that’s why the ads that use only emotion and no acceptable link to the actual product don’t work.
Likewise, the ads that use no emotion but do actually link to the product don’t work either cos there’s no magic!
In conclusionL
The magic must be in the product.
Or
The product must be in the magic.
Effective communication is about being heard correctly.