May 2006 Archives
It's every agency's dream. You've created a hip, edgy campaign that uses the net in a savvy way to generate a tidal-wave of buzz about your client's product. Sure, you had to bend the truth a bit on the promotional mini-site you created. But wrapping a product in a tissue of deception and manipulation is just another day's work, right? Or perhaps the recent failure of such a promotional site to generate more than a flicker of interest is a reminder that honesty might—gasp—be the best policy.
Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans serif. Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans serif. Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans serif. Sound monotonous? We're currently doomed to visit site after site that employs a similar string of sans serif font definitions. Almost as monotonous is the serif equivalent: Times New Roman, Times, serif. Either way, the end result is millions of cookie-cutter typographic treatments on a global scale and an increasing banalization of the visitor experience. After all, if every magazine, every book, every poster, every ad, could only draw on a few tired faces, how effective would be the role of the print designer?
Web site designer and search engine marketer Lance Dutson recently found himself on the receiving end of a multi million-dollar lawsuit. The legal action was a result of continued criticism in his Maine Web Report blog of how the Maine Office of Tourism was conducting its marketing campaign, and by extension the large New York City-based firm responsible for the campaign. The case is quickly becoming a cause célèbre in the blogosphere from a freedom of speech perspective. But it also raises significant questions for those who create, purchase or comment on marketing communications.