If you haven't seen it yet the new and already infamous Apple ad (the one where a giant mechanical compactor violently crushes a bunch of musical instruments, books, sculptures, art supplies, and toys, turning them into an iPad Pro), then Apple executives are probably happy. You've seen the headlines: “Apple's iPad Ad Is Bad”; “Why the bad smell of that terrible iPad ad won't go away”; “Apple's new iPad ad is a clear metaphor for the end of the world.” They've seen the mocking posts on social media. They are aware that Hugh Grant twitter.com/HackedOffHugh/status/1788183871504204257″ title=”” rel=”noopener noreferrer” target=”_blank”>has weighed. (“The destruction of the human experience,” he wrote in x. “Courtesy of Silicon Valley”). In response, Apple has done what it almost never does: tech-news/apple-apologizes-ipad-pro-crushed-ad-it-missed-mark/2559321″ title=”” rel=”noopener noreferrer” target=”_blank”>He apologized. “We made a mistake with this video and we are sorry,” said one of his vice presidents. Apple will not air the ad on television. He wants to move on and he wants you to do the same.
But I can't move on and I'm sure I'm not alone. The ad, titled “Crush!” – it's just too good. I don't mean to say it's intelligent, wise, or edifying. I mean, like many Apple products, it was clearly made with exacting attention to detail and no expense spared. The high-resolution, slow-motion approach to each object's destruction—the way we watch up close as they bend before breaking, as if resisting the inevitable—has a visceral effect that's hard to shake. The electronics company LG manufactured essentially the same ad in 2008, as an advertisement for its Renoir camera phone, but it lacked the Apple touch. Unfortunately for Apple, “Smash!” It achieves the goal of every ad creator: it sticks in the mind.
Equally paralyzing is the real-world backstory involved. Imagine it: a team of experienced, well-paid professionals spent months perfecting a strategy. Ideas were proposed, selected, refined and simulated. Finally, after countless steps, a winner emerged, and somehow it was this. They could have depicted all that gear happily shrunken and compressed on an iPad, just waiting for creative fun. Instead, they chose to demolish everything. Didn't anyone point out that people are increasingly distrustful of the impact of tech companies on creative professions? That people have become disgusted with Silicon Valley's apparent desire to monetize human creativity in as many ways as possible, from extractive streaming deals to collecting human-made art as ai training material? Did no one feel how bad Would this be seen? It's not just that the ad is a car accident; It's just that the people who invested so much work and money into something so unpleasant seem to have thought they were orchestrating a parade.
it was not so It's been a long time since technology companies could advertise by informing us of new possibilities. Whatever their flaws, they really were injecting genuine novelty into the human experience: you could suddenly carry thousands of songs in your pocket, take a decent photo on your phone and share it instantly, make a video call with someone on the other end of the network. . planet. It wasn't difficult for the ads to set an optimistic tone; They simply showed people using new products in their daily lives and having fun with new flavors while doing so.
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js” charset=”utf-8″>
