I was flipping through the Wall Street Journal on a Thursday morning when I stopped on this advertisement.
This photo was taken with a modern iPhone in excellent lighting. What you see is exactly what I saw, and what I saw looked terrible.
A 1/6 page, color placement on page A4 of the Wall Street Journal is not cheap. Granted, the Dow Jones owns the Wall Street Journal, so no money was likely exchanged. But this space has value that they could have sold to others, so they walked away from advertising revenue to run this.
Depending on advertising agreements, this ad would likely cost somewhere between $50,000 and $150,000.
This was a significant investment designed to reach CEOs, executives, investors, and business leaders.
Now, try to read it.
I could make out the headline, but everything else was a struggle.
The first mistake is one that’s been known for decades. In Ogilvy on Advertising, David Ogilvy wrote that reverse type, where light text appears on a dark background, is significantly harder to read than black text on a white background and should be avoided for body copy.
This entire ad is reverse text. By doing that, the designer ignored a strong recommendation from one of our industry’s greats. This ad is hard to read because it is reverse text, and there is not enough contrast between the background and the text.
If you make something hard for somebody, they’re unlikely to do it.
Put simply, the harder you make an ad to read, the fewer people will read it.
Then the printing made it even worse.
The copy is blurry. Not “slightly soft.” Actually blurry.
This is the physical newspaper exactly as it arrived. Since I couldn’t make out the body copy, I couldn’t tell what they were actually selling without putting in far more effort than any reader is likely to invest.
Ironically, the QR code worked. But if I can’t read the ad, why would I scan the QR code for more information?
The advertisement communicated one thing very clearly: it had something to do with due diligence. Everything after that was guesswork.
Then I looked at the image. It’s someone typing on a laptop. I’ve told our creative team countless times that I never want to see images like this used on our website or for our clients.
Why? Because they mean absolutely nothing.
That same stock photo could be used to advertise accounting software, cybersecurity, a computer, internet service, legal services, CRM software, online banking, AI tools, managed IT, or almost anything else involving a computer.
It tells no story.
It creates no emotion.
It doesn’t help the reader picture themselves solving a problem.
It simply fills space.
If you’re paying over $100,000 for an advertisement, every square inch should be working to persuade someone to take action.
Instead, this image is doing nothing.
Imagine a different approach.
Show me the ideal customer. Show me an executive confidently making an acquisition. Show me a boardroom reviewing a transaction. Show me the outcome the buyer wants.
Anything that reinforces the value of your product would outperform a generic picture of fingers on a keyboard.
Maybe this campaign generated a positive return anyway.
Dow Jones has a strong brand, and plenty of people may have already known what the product does. That’s possible, but that doesn’t excuse poor execution.
This isn’t really about Dow Jones.
It’s about all of us.
Business owners often assume customers don’t notice the small details. They absolutely do.
Your clients notice blurry graphics. They notice generic imagery. They notice awkward layouts. They notice when something feels rushed. They especially notice when you stop reviewing your own work.
This is what happens when shortcuts replace craftsmanship.
Maybe AI generated it. Maybe no art director challenged the design. Maybe nobody bothered printing a proof copy before approving a six-figure media buy.
Whatever happened, somewhere along the process, a human should have raised their hand and said, “We can’t ship this.”
That’s the lesson.
Quality isn’t created by software. It’s created by standards.
Your clients aren’t paying you to complete deliverables. They’re paying you to care enough to catch what they won’t or can’t.
One overlooked detail can undermine an otherwise brilliant campaign. And when your client is spending six figures, “good enough” isn’t even close to good enough.
Have you ever caught a small creative detail that could have turned into a very expensive mistake, or learned this lesson the hard way? I’d love to hear about it. Reply directly to [email protected].
~ Erik
About
Erik J. Olson is the Founder and CEO of Proxa, where he builds and operates multiple agencies focused on predictable, system-driven growth. He has scaled agencies across multiple markets by replacing fragmented execution with structured systems that drive consistent revenue. Erik is the author of Million Dollar Journey and writes The Business of Agency newsletter. He is building Proxa into a $100M platform with a planned private equity exit.