For the second installment of Does it Work? we have a print ad from the AMPTP. Click the thumbnail for the full size picture.

The concept: Inform people as to why we shouldn't go to strike for the second time in a year.
Does it work? Not really, no.
Typically, when the industry puts out an informative ad, they try to make it as uncluttered as possible so that the text of the ad is what you notice first, and so that you aren't bogged down by interpreting image choice and so on. (You might not realize that you do that when you look at ads, but you do)
Here's an ad that is the perfect example of what an informative ad should be. "Pencils Down" put out by the WGA during the strike.

This works because they picked a straight forward headline. "Pencils Down" immediately tells you that they plan on not writing at all during the strike, and the image echoes this.
Now, back to the AMPTP's "A Clear Choice." Let's first break the ad apart into three sections, the headline, the content and the images. Given that the ad is designed to inform us why an actor's strike is a bad thing, the headline is good. The content of the ad is straightforward, breaking down what will happen if an agreement is reached, versus the after effects of another strike. (I might have used more basic terminology since these ads also work in swaying those outside of the industry, too)
The images. Oh, the images. I can already visualize the day the ad was being created. At the agency, the creative director says to the designer, "I need two images that'll show the two choices. One will have people on strike and the other will have people working. Go." Then the designer sat, staring at the pages of stock photos, trying to figure out how you show people working in the industry. "Hey, this crane looks cool." While the crane is indeed cool, it doesn't work. The layout with the headline on top and the two images side by side is a disaster. To me, it makes the ad read as though we have a choice between a strike or riding on the crane. (Note: Rej did point out
this comment someone made on the ad, and while I agree with it completely, I thought I should point out that I wasn't the only one, or the first to say so)
Here's what I learned mocking up ads - if you're a little iffy on the correlation between an image and the ad's content, don't use the image.
My solution? I would have used checkboxes with two options: Strike or Labor Agreement, with the box for Labor Agreement having an X or a tick mark. No ambiguity there. Also, I would ditched the bullet points and simply gone with using indents. To me, the bullet points look more than a little amateurish.
I do look forward to seeing SAG's rebuttal ad, and I'll likely profile it here. But first, I'll find a television ad that works - so that you won't think I'm against anyone else's work than my own.
-------------------------------
AMPTP ad source:
Deadline Hollywood DailyWGA ad source:
WGA East