17.8.05

Beyond the Pale

The New Yorker devoted this week's advertising to highlighting Target. Fine - if Target wants to pay that much money for that much exposure, who am I to complain?

Well, I can. As Dan Kennedy (รพ: Maud) says:
Maybe more importantly, I would like to pose this question: How many mid-six-figure geniuses did it take to come up with the idea of ads that feature BULLSEYE TARGETS painted on New York subways, bridges, and skyscrapers in 2005?

I'm talking to you too, Minda Gralnek, VP and Creative Director at Target in Minneapolis.
After Sept. 11, 2001, that's unconscionable. The New Yorker, of all magazines, should have known better. Write and tell both parties what you think of this. I know I will.

1 comment:

Sherri said...

Tastelessness sells?

They don't see that Target Logo as a "bulls eye" of hear the word "Target" as meaning anything other than "department store". Highly limited thinking aka STUPID.