After reviewing this week’s slides and article, I was able to find an advertisement from a magazine that fits under visual argument. Crizal does a good job comparing their brand of lenses to “ordinary” lenses. This advertisement is very clear in what it is trying to portray. The argument is that Crizal lenses are glare free and a lot clearer compared to the “ordinary” lenses. This advertisement also does a good job with the play on words when comparing the lenses by saying, “GLARE” and “The choice is clear”. I also find the idea of visual arguments intriguing. I believe when advertisements compare their product to other in a small compact page ad, it really shows the viewer why their product is “better” than the other. I believe this is very effective. In my case, it usually causes me to do further research, as I am not one to just go and buy something because of the advertisement. However, it still makes me do something about if it is a product I am interested in.
This advertisement shows a product that will allow one to be “glare” free when wearing glasses. By wearing Crizal, the ‘Choice is clear’ and you will have clear non-glaring glasses. The images of comparison are the evidence.
This advertisement does a good job comparing their product to “ordinary” products. It uses the analogy of showing their lens compared to another lens. This gives a visual of what the consumer will be seeing if they choose to get Crizal lens.
The word “GLARE” implies that wearing ordinary lens will be useless. “The choice is clear” implies that choosing Crizal lens will be the better option as noticed by the comparative images.
By using Crizal lens, the advertisement suggest that the consumer will have clear lens that is resistant to glares, scratches, smudges, dust, water, and UV rays.