The ad did its job perfectly. It created controversy and that spread iPad news way further than paid ads do. It pays to be controversial, not good or on message these days.
Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'
721–730 of 1001 posts
Re: Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'
#722I didn't like the ad. I think the people creating it wanted to imply that it's as if they took all these things and put it in an iPad, where you can still achieve all the creativity while carrying a thin device. I don't think it's impossible to convey that message without destroying instruments and creative tools that are precious to so many. Maybe if they had made the animation very fast it would've appeared as a jo…
The original idea is sound: "we are squeezing all tools into the iPad". The problem is that you can't squeeze an object without resorting to animation. So instead they went for crushing , which carries destructive undertones. A lot of people have strong emotional attachments to objects like pianos and vinyl players; destroying them is a powerful trigger. If this had been done with animation, with some djinn magically…
There is a growing backlash against technology and its harmful effects though. People are rightfully getting suspicious about that handful of tech companies and their intentions. Few are willing to give up on technology, nor should they as it's futile to fight progress, but the debate and guard rails are being shaped, and the tone deafness of some of these big technology companies is not helping their cause.
The astronomical user base of companies like Google and Apple should not be an indicator about the actual goodwill of people towards these brands. Getting away with something does not mean your behaviour isn't causing increasing animosity and feeding general discontentment.
Re: Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'
#723Should have reversed the add..
Re: Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'
#724Earlier quoted context omitted.
I took the message that all that culture is now available in an even slimmer form factor. This is the problem with art. Unambiguous messaging is impossible as one casts a wider net of interpretation
1. It's not a problem, it's the point. 2. It looks like you're implying the ad is somehow a piece of art. It's not, it's an ad.
Why does something being an ad prevent it from being art?
Re: Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'
#725The fact there is a huge backlash on something like this shows how much free time people have
Re: Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'
#726Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the big thing here is that if you don't have an attachment to any of the items being crushed you probably don't feel as strongly. If you're a trumpet player, seeing a trumpet being crushed is going to be a bit distressing. If you're a photographer, you're putting a monetary value on those lenses being destroyed. If you're into old arcade machines, you're thinking about how many of those cabinets are left in t…
You mean the arcade cabinet that conveniently switches to a GAME OVER screen while it has sparks flying and smoke pouring out of it when it gets hit by the crusher? Somehow I doubt you lost an actual cabinet. I'll be surprised if it's even made out of wood and not polygons.
Was the entire ad CGI? I cannot tell anymore. I find it unlikely they built a gigantic hydraulic crusher just for the ad.
Re: Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'
#727This ad said the quiet part out loud about what the average technologist thinks of the average liberal arts pursuit. It just had to manifest as an ad from an insulated marketing dept for it to finally happen “in the open.” No surprises, and it was nice to see it out stated clearly.
Technology (especially comp sci) falls under liberal arts.
Re: Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'
#728I didn't like the ad. I think the people creating it wanted to imply that it's as if they took all these things and put it in an iPad, where you can still achieve all the creativity while carrying a thin device. I don't think it's impossible to convey that message without destroying instruments and creative tools that are precious to so many. Maybe if they had made the animation very fast it would've appeared as a jo…
It seems odd to complain about one old upright piano being crushed for the video when thousands upon thousands of them are out on the streets, living under bridges, because no one wants to move the piano anymore, or wanted the convenience of an electronic keyboard. I implore you all: adopt a piano today! You may find yourself saying "I didn't rescue it, it rescued me."
I think this misses the mark. The ad is inherently symbolic—it’s not this particular piano, but the fact that they’re destroying all of these beloved instruments of creativity in such a gratuitous and evocative manner. That’s what upsetting, not the literal fact that one piano was destroyed in the making of the ad.
Re: Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'
#729Ironic there's an angry bird there. I'm sure I had angry birds on my phone years ago, and I assume I paid for it, but it no longer seems to exist.
It's not the only thing on my phone that has vanished. I had the recent monkey island, but that no longer exists
I don't do apps any more, I'm happy to buy things, but it seems people aren't willing to sell them any more.
Re: Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'
#730My initial reaction to the ad, upon watching it in the launch event was "huh, that's a fun reference to the Hydraulic Press Channel". The slapstick elements (trumpet noise, squishy balls) made it come across as light-hearted, rather than an ominous display of force by a large company crushing artists' tools. This idea of 'squashing all these tools down to a thin slab of glass' made sense given their somewhat unusual…
The clear meaning I got from the ad was: we want to destroy everything and make you buy our product instead. I know that wasn't what they were going for (I'm pretty sure, anyway), but it's very hard for me to interpret it differently. I never connected it to the hydraulic press channel at all for some reason.
You either get the symbolism of "let's crush all remaining vestiges of creative culture" or you don't.
If you don't, that's fine. Policing the extent of people's reactions doesn't make for constructive conversation, and, ironically, is merely a different form of "over-reaction."