You know how online advertising works. You shop for something on the Internet — socks, refrigerators, hotels — and you get a torrent of related banner ads wherever you browse.
So me, politics. I’m getting a load of banner ads from candidates. Ironically, mostly Republicans. (The tracking software doesn’t detect sarcasm.) And, given the relative rate of spending, mostly about Bruce Lisman.
My conclusion: whatever he’s spending all that money on, he’s getting screwed on graphics. Just look at this.
Ugh. Looks like a quick cut-and-paste job by a hyperactive five-year-old with a rudimentary grasp of Photoshop. Cluttered, random, doesn’t stand out, doesn’t guide the eye, too many messages. And then there’s that terrible photo crammed into the middle: why would you want to show your candidate squinting?
More bad banners… after the jump.
Well, if that looks like a hastily assembled pile of pieces, the Lisman design team went way too far in the other direction with this masterpiece.
That’s it. Plain white box, plain lettering, subtly limned clickbox.
I’m sure the genius designer would call it dignified, subtle, refined. Me, I call it nothing, and if I were paying the designer, I’d be asking for time sheets.
Then again, a dignified subtle nothing is preferable to the faintly disturbing phiz that’s been infesting my Internet for months.
You know, it’s not easy to make Phil Scott look bad. He’s got an open, ruggedly handsome (if just a teensy bit past prime) look that dovetails nicely with his political persona. But somehow Team Scott managed to turn him into Used Car Salesman with a touch of Creepy Uncle Who Gets Handsy at Thanksgiving Dinner.
Isn’t there a better picture of Phil Scott out there somewhere? Anywhere? Was this really the best that Team Scott could do?
Maybe these guys should go looking for a hyperactive five-year-old to design their banner ads. Might at least come up with something entertaining. Axe Cop, for instance.