Ads are not meant to be over analyzed, they are to be felt. Any ad that doesn't evoke an emotion - hate, love, desire - from you is not doing it's job. And they are meant to give you a message. Well, at least good ads are meant to.

But what happens when you run across an ad like the recent ad from D&G in Esquire Magazine. D&G ads have been bugging me for a while - it is form over function, style without substance. The ad depicts.. OK you can see it so I won't describe it. But what the hell is going on in the picture? What is supposed to be happening there?

Is it meant to be provocative?

Is this meant to be creative?

Yeah, it's edgy, suppose to be cool and high-fashion, but what else does it want to say? As a fashion brand it needs to be exclusive, but this style over substance message has just got to stop. I am sorry, but there is no creativity there - perhaps just a desire to be "different," at any cost.

Obviously there are enough people in the world buying into this thing to keep D&G in the creme, but if a brand is meant to represent who we are, do the D&G users want to be associated with this type of "promotion." Yes, this ad evoked a strong emotion from me (so in a way it is doing it's job), but I can tell you that it is not the one they want. However since I have never bought D&G and never plan to, they will not give a hoot either.

In fact the National Organization of Woman saying that they are disturbed by the ads. While I do not believe in being PC for PC sake, I have to agree that the ad crosses certain lines.

Ultimately this is what a lazy Ad Exec (or Creative Director) would do if they are creatively bankrupt and want attention at any cost.

Thanks to the original article from Brand Week