I ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, AND UNEQUIVOCALLY BELIEVE IN information optimizing.
Information optimizing is making the most of any benefits whatever you're selling has to offer. It should be the core of a direct response message…or, for that matter, any message whose intention is to cause its target to perform the positive act you want performed.
But does that mean using the wretched asterisk to qualify what you've presented as an unconditional claim? No. That's cheating. That's copping out. That's following the gnarled mice-type path down which auto manufacturers stumble when they're suggesting some optional gadget representing an extra charge is part of the price quoted in 36-point type.
So it's unsurprising that the asterisk following “Presenting the 36 mpg Ford Escape Hybrid, the most fuel-efficient SUV on Earth” leads to “Actual mileage will vary.” Hmmm — not may vary; will vary.
A Honda ad says, unequivocally, “At Honda, we continue to show our commitment to ‘Safety for Everyone’ by developing new technologies designed to help protect you and your family in the event of an accident.” Oops — it isn't safety for Everyone, because an asterisk at the bottom — does type come in 3-point size? — says, “Does not include specialty vehicles: Honda Insight, Honda S2000 and Acura NSX.” Honda, why not legitimize that claim by modifying it to “Safety for Almost Everyone”?
Jaguar's ad for a 24-month lease is all too representative: “$699/mo.**” Even though that number is followed by the more realistic “$4,513 due at signing,” adding another $188 a month if apportioned through the lease, the doubled asterisk is a typical tipoff — “After $1,125 Lease Cash and $1,000 Jaguar Lease Flat Cash.” Now, let's figure this out: The lease costs $699 a month for 24 months. That's $16,776. Then we have $4,513 due at signing, plus $1,125, plus $1,000. The total is $23,414, and if we divide that by 24 the actual number is $975.58 per month. See why I hate asterisks?
Hyundai follows right along. Boldface type leads the text with “Nicely equipped, under $20,000.*” We know what to expect, and although our buying impulse is disappointed our expectation isn't: “LX model shown, $23,495. MSRP excl. taxes, title, license, and options. Dealer price may vary.” Uhhh — if that additional $3,495 doesn't cover options, what does it cover? Aw, forget it.
Cars set the pace, but plenty of others slide down the asterisk exception incline/decline. Allstate doesn't bother with the asterisk, so we have to give that company one Brownie point…but just one. A full-page full-color ad touts its “Accident Forgiveness” feature. At the bottom of the ad, microscopically, what Allstate giveth, Allstate taketh away: “Feature is optional and is subject to terms, conditions and availability. Safe driving bonus won't apply after an accident.” So “Forgiveness” is available only to those who don't need it. Neat.
My favorite is Fidelity Investments, which loads up its two-page ads with so many disclaimers and semi-explanations that it runs out of asterisks and has to start on numbers. The one I'm looking at has five numbered footnotes, the first of which, tied to a “No-load Funds” heading, states baldly: “Other fees and expenses applicable to continued investment are described in the fund's current prospectus.”
Earthlink doesn't seem to know what its own offer is. The ad for “trueVoice” says: “For only $24.95 a month*, you get: Unlimited local and long-distance calling in the continental U.S. and Canada.” Now, what's your definition of “unlimited”? Same as mine. But that ain't Earthlink's interpretation, because the asterisk begins with “Offer and rates subject to change. Service not available in all areas.” Then it continues, “trueVoice Basic plan is billed at a rate of .04/minute after first 500 minutes each month.” I looked for the word “basic” in the regular text. Nope. So “unlimited” has its limits. But wait, there's more: “Activation fee may apply…Certain taxes, shipping, handling and other fees may apply…Directory or operator assistance charges will apply…Other restrictions may apply.” Know what? I'm not going to apply.
Another favorite is the ad for NutriSystem, the weight reduction plan. In a neat red reverse circle we read, “Amanda lost 35 lbs.*” Now, where is the mate to that asterisk? Ah, here it is: “Results not typical.”
Maybe not, but the technique sure is.
All right. Are you asking, “What would you have done, Bunky?” Fair question, especially since asterisks have been the take-back crutch of choice for more than a century.
I'd have replaced the most egregious uses with parentheses. Those underused devices, immediately following the claim you want to deny you've made, play down the disclaimer rather than playing it up as asterisks do. They don't drag the eye down to the bottom of the page, destroying reading impetus.
For situations in which the qualifiers are either so numerous or so heavy the writer has hoped no one will notice the asterisk — a nonsensical and, in fact, dishonest hope in a sales situation — I'd adjust the entire approach.
And so would you. Please? So would you. Yes…without an asterisk?
HERSCHELL GORDON LEWIS (www.herschellgordonlewis.com) is the principal of Lewis Enterprises in Fort Lauderdale, FL. He consults with and writes direct response copy for clients worldwide. “Burnt Offerings,” his 30th book, explores DR fundraising techniques and will be published later this year. Among his other books are “Open Me Now,” the curmudgeonly titled “Asinine Advertising,” and “On the Art of Writing Copy” (third edition).
