On Saturday this Globe and Mail Kia was parked in Dundas Square. At first I didn’t take much notice, thinking it was just another promotional stunt in our square-for-hire, but then I saw one of the captions and it managed to grab my attention as it wasn’t what I expected. They all (except one) make reference to an undesirable facet of car culture. I’m not sure I get it, or if I’m missing some subtlety, but it appears to be a “sign-of-the-times” thing where automobile culture has reached a sort of tipping point and is so “bad” (or “troublesome” or “difficult” or “vexing”) that an ad can play on that and spin it as a reason to buy something. Though the “Imagine where it can take you” written on the car would seem to complicate this and send a mixed message, which leads me back to my initial thought: “I don’t get it.” Any other takes on this strange ad?
14 comments
The only “take” worth noting are the ad agency people who’ll be giving one another hi-fives in the a.m. for making it onto this blog.
At least they didn’t give a shout-out to Streets Are For People.
I read it as saying “here’s this single thing that can be written about in a different way in each section of the paper.” It’s kind of a rip-off of the similar York University ads.
It’s just a variation on an ad campaign they have underway on billboards in the city. There’s one version with an apple… I’ve also seen another version which escapes me at the moment. The observation that 4 out of 5 panels are generally auto-negative is probably just a coincidence.
I think you are overanalyzing it. To me, the point is just that the Globe has articles about all these things and many more. They are just highlighting automobile related stories for this particular ad.
My guess is they weren’t trying to make any statement except “we write interesting articles, so buy us and read them”.
I like it, it’s simple and interesting to look at.
chicken and/or egg:
you’re right. this deserves your attention/confusion alongwith and the ensuing commentary. the “ad’s” reference points are topical; they’ve made this conversation and engaged various “legitimate” means of representation/transportation/critique. at the same time they reference these modes and complicate our seemingly singular investment in them as meaningful. so we have the now confused entry point: the ad, the globe, the signs, the car, this website, their meanings and intents, and this comment box. this ad’s different layered way of reaching us, and for us reaching it—as a newspaper, an ad, an ad for a newspaper, as (pseudo-)installation art, a waste of a parking lot, a mismanagement of priorities, a car, website, and finally a reactionary comment box, is precisely its catch. thus we wonder and reel for meaning, hoping to be able to take some permanent refuge in accusing the ad of trying to be clever, misunderstanding that this is the fundamental part of its derisive cleverness. i think the ad purposely makes the globe look suspect simply in order to involve us, however uncomfortably.
I’m pretty sure the point of it is to demonstrate how the Globe and Mail has articles ranging from T.O to the World and everything in-between.
It’s just a continuation of their current ad campaign. Lots of outdoor G&M ads around which feature an object (a chicken, a gun) and different connecting headlines above.
I don’t think Kia brand fits the G&M readership demographic very well.
This car was sitting in the parking lot at Front & Simcoe for a week or so. I just thought it was a way to link a common thread (the car) to stories in different sections of the paper, sort of like those York U ads where different people see different things from the same item. If it’s supposed to be more esoteric than that, I missed it.
I haven’t seen the related ads – that makes more sense now. Still, out of context…
cinique> Do they high-five when we link to Globe stories every morning too? Readers here are quite sophisticated and know all about the Globe (and either like it or don’t) so this ad making it on to this blog isn’t converting anybody.
Ads in the square now.
How wonderful.
I guess this is a “step up” from the Captain Highliner RV that was handing out deep-fried samples of drag-net plunder from our oceans a few weeks ago.
This space at Yonge and Dundas is truly “the asshole” of Toronto.
According to Christopher Hume it is an Urban Oasis though, something akin to what a pedestrian might experience in Paris.
Nothing in the City makes me more routinely ashamed of Toronto than this square at the moment.
bang on for noticing this odd “sign-o-the-times”. i think it is interesting that things like climate change, car-induced urban blight, and auto-addiction with it’s life-threatening consequences are coming into the mainstream as our primary reflections on the personal automobile. That the very same stories sit side by side in newspapers with car ads and entire sections devoted to machine-love marks the disconnect between our green thoughts and our lemming-like actions.
i also wonder whether the ploy here is to bring people over to look at it thinking it’s one of those “win this car” promo campaigns. i enjoy the thought that the subtle message “cars suck” is what one gets instead.
ps its lucky for them they didn’t give a shout out to streets are for people, we would have had to cut it open and fill it with dirt and plants if they did!
I would guess we are supposed to find all the information we need to make a decision on any aspect of life (e.g. buying a car, or not) by reading the Globe & Mail (daily, and from cover to cover, of course).
[in other words – we are not very bright!]
Bruce> Once our lifestyle and celebrity blogs are up and running (soon!) you won’t have to read anything else but Spacing.