by Magnus Shaw.
Last year I wrote a piece about Professor Stephen Hawking and his remarkable, personal brand. Now the professor has lent his profile to Go Compare for the next instalment of their 'Saving The Nation' campaign. This may well be very lucrative for Hawking but I think it's a shame. I greatly admire the man but I really loathe those ads.
From the very first execution ("He's only a tenor/tenner"), the Go Compare ads were an obvious attempt to catch up with their competitor - Compare The Market - and their famous meerkats. The problem being, whereas CTM chose an obviously appealing and amusing creature to represent them, GC opted for an irritating and terminally silly opera singer. Clearly this contrast didn't occur to them and a plethora of clips emerged, placing Gio Compario (as he is hilariously named) in situations ranging from pre-historic copies of B52s videos to a mummy's tomb. Whether these were ever thought of as innovative or exciting advertisements, I'll let others decide - but they obviously drew attention to the brand and presumably increased web traffic appropriately. Nevertheless, very few punters would admit to a liking for the character and he frequently topped 'Most Annoying Ad' polls. Eventually this became apparent to Go Compare and their agency Dare. In mid-2012 they made something of a creative u-turn and began to run executions showing celebrities executing Gio.
The new ads began with Sue Barker attacking the singer with a bazooka and a ripple of complaint gave the work some added profile. Personally, I found the explosion too cartoony to be troubling. In fact, I thought the clip which showed Stuart Pearce hammering a ball into his guts much more unpleasantly aggressive - but that's beside the point. What really irks me is the mess this whole campaign has become.
Presumably GC and Dare felt the destruction of their grating mascot would be amusing, ironic even - simultaneously acknowledging the annoyance caused and initiating a new slew of ads. But this is wrong-headed. If your advertising emblem is so disliked, why would you invest in new episodes featuring him? Surely re-imagining your entire approach would be a better idea. What's more, the ads featuring Gio's demise aren't nearly as smart as they think they are. A Christmas version featuring Louis Spence (and you thought Gio was annoying) made almost no sense and was dangerously close to making light of torture.
GC are now so entrenched in the love Gio/hate Gio narrative they have almost lost sight of their marketing proposition. According to the site, the Stephen Hawking clip is intended to promote a £299 car insurance offering. Having seen the ad I have no recollection of that message. Everything is subsumed by the famous face and a fancy effect sucking Gio into a black hole. None of which has anything to do with discount insurance. In effect, Dare aren't creating ads for GC, but a string of infantile and unfunny sketches based on a character acknowledged to be an irritant.
Of course, many campaigns are built around a developing story or a running joke, but to be are truly successful they mustn't allow the plot to mask the core commercial message. And it helps to be genuinely entertaining. I'm thinking of the 'Last Rolo' work, the 'Bet He Drinks Carling ...' ads and yes, even those meerkats. From beginning to end, the entire Gio Compario campaign has failed to come close to those little gems. It just isn't clever enough, witty enough, sufficiently amusing or even much fun.
Gio's creators might imagine they have produced a modern marketing icon, ready to sit with the Bisto Kids, The Honey Monster and Charlie The Cat. What they have actually built is a tiresome campaign, devoid of the irony to which it aspires and as flabby as Compario himself.
Magnus Shaw is a copywriter, blogger and consultant
www.magnusshaw.co.uk
