My initial reaction to the ad was that it carried both a sarcastic and comedic tone to it. The element that stood out to me the most was the pictures. One ad depicts a runner as if they are on fire from running so fast. Another portrays a dirty pair of sneakers, obviously set aside after, not a jog, but a run.
I do not run anymore. I used to run and jog when I played field hockey. As I said before, I first found the ad humorous. However, when I took a deeper look at the website, Pearl Izumi is not just praising runners, but condemns joggers. Everyone has their opinion about sports, but to run a campaign primarily based on making fun of another sport rather than commending your own seems like a low shot.
The elements of the advertisement stem from familiarity. The ad is very conversational; it invites the reader in. This may be because it is targeted at a young demographic. The dirty shoes imply that someone has already done “their civic duty” for the day.
Hard work is a value promoted in this ad, and naturally, fragility is not. The ad implies anyone who jogs is weak.
I think the intended audience is a young one, because of the tone it is written in. I imagine a young demographic purchasing the outerwear they are promoting, perhaps because a young adult is searching to “put their mark on the world”. I also see many joggers buying the apparel to prove they are not weak. By excluding joggers from runners Pearl Izumi beckons the jogging population to prove their worth. And what better way to do that than by buying some new sneaks?
I believe pathos is the strongest rhetorical appeal. This is because the campaign continuously protests jogging. This will likely boost the ego of any runner, compelling them to buy the product, and will enrage a jogger, driving them to prove their performance.
I believe the Pearl Izumi ad is more effective at selling its product than Reebok. The Pearl Izumi ad evokes more emotion in a reader by either bring them up or putting them down.