

Here's an, um, interesting series of after-shave ads that apparently ran in a Brazilian newspaper (can't tell which one). The ad agency involved is Giovanni, FCB, a branch of which was responsible for those "flags as infographics" ads you may remember from last year. The ad's tagline, incidentally, is "For the man who dares to take care of himself."
(Thanks, Ben!)
They seem like pages of the 'Gazeta Mercantil' of Brasil. Just 99% sure.
Posted by: doncristal at February 18, 2006 3:31 AMWonder how many readers saw that first page and wondered what a razor had to do with a meeting to decide the future of the PMDB (whatever that is, and yes, I was guessing at what the hed said). Did Mr. Stipple need a shave? Maybe the industrial production story on the next page needed a trim....
Posted by: Douglas E. Jessmer at February 18, 2006 11:49 AMThe PMDB (Partido do Movimento Democrático Brasileiro) is a political party of Brasil. This time, 100% sure.
Posted by: doncristal at February 18, 2006 12:31 PMThe first blade lifts the credibility away from the newspaper, the second blade cuts it off and the third trims any remaining credibility...
Posted by: Jonathan Kleinow at February 18, 2006 9:53 PMDo we know if these ads ran on consecutive pages the same day, or on the same page on consecutive days?
Posted by: Sara Reeves at February 19, 2006 7:31 AMWell said, Jonathan.
Breaks my heart to see newspapers vandalize themselves for a few extra $.
Posted by: dave at February 20, 2006 10:39 PMHaving worked as a ad designer at a newspaper for over 10 years in the advertising department, I can tell you that the ad dollars are not what they used to be. I don't see a problem with doing something different and fun every once in awhile. I actually thought the razor ad is great! If the newspaper can make a few extra bucks to keep employees from being laid off, then so what?
Posted by: Johnny Griswold at March 9, 2006 9:52 AMA) The credibility of newspapers is in jeopardy today for far greater errors in judgment than this, which ...
B) Is a rather cool treatment, and should hardly confuse all but the most obtuse readers. "We" tend to overthink things in the name of protecting our ethical standard when the "violation" is hardly on a par with, say, outright faking a photo. Or as hypocritical as taking away a staff's stock options to give huge bonuses to the top brass. Or passing off a largely derivative "redesign" as "more navigable," etc. etc. etc. when it's primarily window dressing.
Posted by: Geoff Giordano at March 9, 2006 1:40 PM