<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Difference Between Metaphor and Affinity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.miconian.com/2008/09/28/the-difference-between-metaphor-and-affinity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.miconian.com/2008/09/28/the-difference-between-metaphor-and-affinity/</link>
	<description>Form and function fistfight in heaven.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Jan 2012 22:33:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Apostolia</title>
		<link>http://www.miconian.com/2008/09/28/the-difference-between-metaphor-and-affinity/comment-page-1/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>Apostolia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Sep 2008 15:56:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamandible.com/?p=144#comment-38</guid>
		<description>On point analysis and good distinction in message.

There&#039;s also something to be said for Microsoft&#039;s shift in message tactics too. Isn&#039;t it telling that the campaign went from a &quot;comical&quot; pointless, run-on commercial featuring Gates and Seinfeild that never mentions PCs, to a crowd friendly message directly addressing PC. In the first case Microsoft is trying to be cool with out explaining what they are cool about. In the later, the Big M hits you over the head with the message that their PCs are cool just like you. I guess it wasn&#039;t working out for Big M to be cool through a subversive plot line so they switched to a more direct message.

Ben, I agree that they have the simplistic reading going for them on this and it&#039;s to their benefit that most people don&#039;t pay close enough attention to catch the distinction that Michael is making above. Advertising is as much about getting a response as it is about building perception no matter how illogical.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On point analysis and good distinction in message.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s also something to be said for Microsoft&#8217;s shift in message tactics too. Isn&#8217;t it telling that the campaign went from a &#8220;comical&#8221; pointless, run-on commercial featuring Gates and Seinfeild that never mentions PCs, to a crowd friendly message directly addressing PC. In the first case Microsoft is trying to be cool with out explaining what they are cool about. In the later, the Big M hits you over the head with the message that their PCs are cool just like you. I guess it wasn&#8217;t working out for Big M to be cool through a subversive plot line so they switched to a more direct message.</p>
<p>Ben, I agree that they have the simplistic reading going for them on this and it&#8217;s to their benefit that most people don&#8217;t pay close enough attention to catch the distinction that Michael is making above. Advertising is as much about getting a response as it is about building perception no matter how illogical.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Kunz</title>
		<link>http://www.miconian.com/2008/09/28/the-difference-between-metaphor-and-affinity/comment-page-1/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Kunz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Sep 2008 11:42:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamandible.com/?p=144#comment-39</guid>
		<description>Logically you are spot on.

I do wonder, though, if most people will make this logic connection. People tend to define themselves by the products they buy, and the fast visual &quot;vibe&quot; of the new PC spots does makes you feel that you want to be hip of this cool, fun, smart crowd. Advertising is designed to get a response, which is often emotional and illogical -- which is why sex and violence work so well in advertising; logically people wouldn&#039;t respond to such superficial stimuli, but emotionally we do.

Great analysis... but I bet the PC ads will work because of the simplistic reading, not the deeper logical rationale.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Logically you are spot on.</p>
<p>I do wonder, though, if most people will make this logic connection. People tend to define themselves by the products they buy, and the fast visual &#8220;vibe&#8221; of the new PC spots does makes you feel that you want to be hip of this cool, fun, smart crowd. Advertising is designed to get a response, which is often emotional and illogical &#8212; which is why sex and violence work so well in advertising; logically people wouldn&#8217;t respond to such superficial stimuli, but emotionally we do.</p>
<p>Great analysis&#8230; but I bet the PC ads will work because of the simplistic reading, not the deeper logical rationale.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

