The purpose of a radio commercial critique isn’t to criticize; it’s to show how the spot could have been improved.
But this commercial that’s airing on a major Los Angeles station is an embarrassment to the radio advertising industry…
Not because it’s so bad, but because the radio station allowed it to be broadcast.
I don’t care what the excuses might be:
“That’s what the client gave us.”
“That’s what the client wanted.”
“They didn’t give us enough time to do it right.”
“That spot was part of a package, and we had to cut it down from a much longer version.”
There’s no excuse for airing a commercial with such poor audio quality.
There’s no excuse for beginning with the name of someone unknown to the audience, followed by the rushed, garbled name of the advertiser. (The advertiser’s name is not particularly known in L.A., so they couldn’t rely on listeners to recognize it.)
People stop thinking about “the new year” about a week after January 1. No one is thinking about “New Year’s resolutions.”
If listeners were searching for worthy resolutions, “making this the year I finally put a BMW in my driveway” would not make the cut
Then an incredibly bad edit (probably because the station’s producer desperately tried to salvage and truncate the original recording) to a sentence that can’t be understood in its entirety by any casual listener.
Then, even a telephone number that can’t be understood (!).
“Nick can’t say no?” It’s obvious that this radio station couldn’t say no.
Because the station couldn’t say no, they made themselves, their client, and the commercial radio industry look bad.