A lot of talk in the tech world has been focused on the new Palm Pre ads.  The Ads are clearly trying to be ethereal as the actress goes on about “everything going right”,  “the world working without even trying”, etc…  The problem is many people don’t seem to like them.  The term “creepy” has been tossed around more than once. 

Clearly this is starting to worry Sprint because they’ve hired a “communications research” company to test the ad among viewers…

A new national media study among 305 viewers of a new controversial ad by Sprint promoting their new Palm Pre phone revealed that the majority of viewers reported that “inspiration” and “happiness” were the emotions they felt most while watching the commercial.

The study was conducted by HCD Research using its MediaCurves.com® website during August 7-9, to obtain viewers’ perceptions of a new Palm Pre Sprint commercial, which has generated much controversy due to the nature of the ad.

The study also revealed that the majority of viewers (67%) reported that the ad was either somewhat effective or extremely effective, while 16% of viewers indicated that the ad was confusing.

Now before I get into the claims of people being “inspired” and made “happy” by the ads I’d like to address it’s effectiveness.  The company put up a neat little video that shows "audience interest" as the Ad plays.  A red line floats between “interested” and “not interested” telling us how those 305 people were feeling at any given moment.  Here’s how it looked…

Now that looks promising.  But lets take that picture and mark off two important points of the Ad.

You’ll note people seem to like the Ad more before it even said anything.  To make the point even clearer I put a black box over the part of the screen above the first peak (which was before the actress had even turned around or anyone had said anything). 

You’ll note the first peak is well above just about all the rest of the Ad.  At that point the audience was just “diggin’ the music”  if you will.  So to claim the Ad itself is effective based on this is ridiculous.  What they’ve proven is (a) their scale was off since people were already showing major interest before anything ever happened and (b) they spent way too much time NOT SHOWING THE PRODUCT (the point where the highest peak falls again is when they switch back to the actress and it then goes up again when the logo featuring the product comes on).

As far as the “inspiration” factor I’d argue the audience, while trying to be truthful, are giving a false picture.  Two points to consider here…

1.  More and more advertising studies are being done using Functional MRI machines because people have proven they can’t accurately judge their own emotional state.  For those who aren’t familiar with it a Functional MRI (or fMRI) can measure neural activity in the brain and by doing so can tell what people are actually feeling.  This has led to several discoveries in the field of Advertising.  One of the best examples of this is anti-smoking ads.  The ads were always thought to be effective but fMRI research has revealed they make smokers crave cigarettes even more.  But those smokers swear the ads make them want to smoke less in research groups because they aren’t aware of what is actually being done to them.  Which brings me to point #2…

2.  People have an innate desire to give others what they want.  If you watch the ad above it's clearly trying to inspire its audience.  So is it surprising that an ad audience being employed by the company using the ad will respond in a way that gives the questioner what the ad is asking for?  I don’t think so.  I think it’s very likely they're telling the questioner what they want to be feeling (because of that innate desire to please) and not what they actually feel. 

In the end it’s not enough to ask people how they feel anymore because all those fMRI studies have shown "what people say" isn’t an accurate indicator of "how people feel".  Moreover this is a conclusion that’s been clear via anecdotal evidence for years.  As a kid I loved OS/2 and I remember clearly IBM running OS/2 ads that included two nuns talking about it in a foreign language.  I HATED those ads because they didn’t even show the product.  But IBM swore up and down that the ads tested well among focus groups (and the campaign itself won several awards).

Where’s OS/2 now in the consumer market?  Completely gone.  So tell me again how effective focus groups are?