<p>This book was a big surprise. It was in my reading list for a long time because I kept hearing about it, but I never cared enough to buy it. What lessons could a designer learn from advertising? I didn’t expect much.</p>
<p>After enough people recommended it I looked it up and noticed it was a very short book. What the hell, let’s give <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Scientific-Advertising-Claude-C-Hopkins/dp/1599869160" class="external">Scientific Advertising</a> a shot. Now I wish I read it the first day I heard about it.</p>
<p>Almost everything Claude Hopkins wrote seems to align with the way I think about design. It was like he was telling me things I already knew, only with much more clarity and purpose.</p>
<p>To start, much of what bothered me about marketing websites was summed up in just a few sentences:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Don’t think of the people in the mass. That gives you a blurred view. Think of a typical individual, man or women who is likely to want what you sell. Don’t try to be amusing. Money spending is a serious matter. Don’t boast, for all people resent it. Don’t try to show off. Do just what you think a good salesman should do with a half-sold person before him.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Then he articulates why most marketing messages don’t resonate with customers:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“The maker of an advertised article knows the manufacturing side and probably the dealer’s side. But the very knowledge often leads him astray in respect to customers. His interests are not in their interests. The advertising man studies the consumer. He tries to place himself in the position of the buyer. His success largely depends on doing that to the exclusion of everything else.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Followed up by what messages effectively persuade people:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“The ads are based entirely on service. They offer wanted information. They site advantages to users. Perhaps they offer a sample, or to buy the first package, or to send something on approval, so the customer may prove the claims without any cost or risks. Some of these ads seem altruistic. But they are based on the knowledge of human nature. The writers know how people are led to buy.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And, finally, he drives the point home with something people seem to so commonly forget:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“People can be coaxed but not driven. Whatever they do they do to please themselves.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>At this point I had to put the book down for a while. I needed to digest the ideas. I decided not to come back to the book that day and sleep on it. The first thing I did the next day was tell everyone I worked with to read it.</p>
<p>That night I continued with what effort is involved in creating great advertisements. The research and focus aspects of his advice seemed to reiterate everything I care about with design, only better. This guy was starting to piss me off.</p>
<p>On taking the time to find your core audience:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“What you have will interest certain people only, and for certain reasons. You care only for those people. Then create a headline which will hail those people only.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Then validating and verifying your assumptions through showing and testing your work:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“All guesswork is eliminated. Every mistake is conspicuous. One quickly loses this conceit by learning how often his judgment errs – often nine times in ten. There one learns that advertising must be done on a scientific basis to have any fair chance of success.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Followed up by calling out your weak arguments:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“To say, “Best in the world,” “Lowest price in existence,” etc. are at best simply claiming the expected. But superlatives of that sort are usually damaging. They suggest looseness of expression, a tendency to exaggerate, a careless truth. They lead readers to discount all the statements that you make."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This was the second time I had to put down the book. It’s a tiny book. I bought it for a quick read. Why the hell is this taking so long? I don’t feel like I’ve read anything I haven’t read before, but it still feels like I’ve learned a lot. It’s amazing how ruthlessly editing and refining an idea can produce something so awesome.</p>
<p>The next pass revolved around being personal and direct:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“We must consider individuals, typical people who are using rival brands. A man on a Pullman, for instance, using his favorite soap. What could you say to him in person to get him to change to yours? We cannot go after thousands of men until we learn how to win one.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>While maintaining some dignity and inspiring respect:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Give samples to interested people only. Give them only to people who exhibit that interest by some effort. Give them only to people whom you have told your story. First create an atmosphere of respect, a desire, an expectation. When people are in that mood, your sample will usually confirm the qualities you claim.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Then further educating your customers with a positive and appreciative approach:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Show a bright side, the happy and attractive side, not the dark and uninviting side of things. Show beauty, not homeliness; health, not sickness. Don’t show the wrinkles you propose to remove, but the face as it will appear. Your customers know all about wrinkles.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In a nutshell, it seems like Claude Hopkins is advising us to really dig deep and understand our customers, talk only about their needs and desires, and treat them with respect. If we can do that, we’ll gain their trust, loyalty, and business.</p>
<p>Hopefully all of this sounds obvious. Which is exactly why you need to read it. Go get <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Scientific-Advertising-Claude-C-Hopkins/dp/1599869160" class="external">Scientific Advertising</a> right now!</p>
You're reading Scientific Advertising by Claude Hopkins, a post from the Wurkit blog. If you enjoyed this post, you can follow @danritz on Twitter for more design related thoughts.
]]>