What Works in Copywriting Today: Selling or Entertaining?

Since time immemorial, or maybe not quite that long, there has been and continues to be a raging debate about the importance of creativity in advertising. Meaning, should advertising strive to be creative—and specifically entertaining, dramatic, artistic, and funny? So that the ad agencies can win industry awards…and TV viewers can be entertained?

(7 Powerful Archetypal Headlines for Copywriting.)

Or should it avoid being creative and cute? And instead be more straightforward, clear, and direct—with the focus on the product and its virtues—with the goal of selling more merchandise?

Here are some guidelines that may be helpful in shaping your approach to the creation of advertising for your particular products, audience, and markets.

For products sold through such direct response channels—especially those that can be sold directly from an ad or commercial—audiences can skew to age 40 plus.

These older consumers respond well to advertising that help them make an intelligent and informed decision about whether to purchase your wares.

To many of us in the older generations, money-spending is serious business, not something to clown around about.

“Ads are not written to entertain,” wrote Claude Hopkins in Scientific Advertising. “This is one of the greatest advertising faults. Ad writers forget they are salesmen and try to be performers. Instead of sales, they seek applause.”

For small and medium-size businesses, local as well as many national, awards are a non-starter. When you are the CEO of your own business, or the manager of someone else’s, you are charged with the singular goal of increasing revenues, sales, and profits.

So there is no de facto preference for creative advertising. In fact, the more far-out your proposed ad is, the more wary and skeptical the business owners may become of investing in your advertising guidance.

Madison Avenue agencies that create national ad campaigns for big consumer brands have a reputation for and highly value creativity in advertising.

One reason is that in the ad agency industry, awards are overwhelmingly given to the most creative campaigns—and those awards are desired by ad companies, because winning a Clio causes the agency’s star to rise.

As for younger consumers, a post on Later Blog says that Gen-Zers respond best to advertising that entertains them. Many young people place a premium on being—as old people like me would put it—“hip” and “with it.” And so hip and trendy commercials resonate with them.

A study published in the Journal of Advertising Research (September 2013) sought to determine whether there is an optimal level of entertainment for advertising. The study found that most advertisers believe that entertainment in ads is a powerful tool to get consumers’ attention and entertaining content can contribute to effectiveness.

However, the study also notes that entertainment does not necessarily make an ad effective—and further, too much entertainment could make it less impactful. Reason: The entertainment distracts the viewer from the brand and its attributes, thereby harming comprehension. The research also confirms that the funniest ads are not necessarily the most effective.

One example of a famous “creative” ad campaign that failed spectacularly was the sock puppets for pets.com. In about half a year, the company spent more than $60 million on the campaign. And in those 6 months, it generated only $22 million in revenues—making it a big loser on any accountant’s ledger.