If you travel the Stanford overpass heading east, you’ve probably seen this billboard for Zara’s Collision Center: “We’ve replaced more headlights than Pamela Anderson.” Let’s review.
First off, Ms. Anderson-Lee-Rock didn’t replace those headlights* herself; she enlisted the services of a plastic surgeon. So what they mean to say is “We’ve replaced more headlights than Pamela Anderson’s surgeon has replaced on Pamela Anderson.” Not nearly as catchy, but it more clearly communicates what they are trying to say.
I’d be willing to accept the slightly misleading statement for the sake of a punchy headline, but only if it were actually saying something that would make me want to go to Zara’s for my next headlight replacement. Claiming that they’ve replaced more headlights than Pamela doesn’t really speak well to Zara’s experience because what they’re saying is that they’ve replaced more than two (or four, if you count her breast reduction surgery as another set of replacements.) So in their quest to be clever, they’ve unintentionally sent out the erroneous message that they may be novices.
My third quibble is this, and it’s a big one. Actually, it’s two big ones.
The only reason to include Pamela Anderson in an advertising campaign is because she can be expected to show up at the photo shoot with her, well, her headlights. She isn’t prized as an endorser because she is a savvy consumer or a trusted public figure. PETA doesn’t use her in ads because is able to effectively articulate that the cruelties being inflicted upon animals is a pox on our humanity. No, they hire her in hopes that people who are drawn to gaze at her breasts will divert their eyes just long enough to read whatever words are floating around beside them. Passing on the photo shoot and merely printing her name on a billboard doesn’t produce the same effect.
