One of my gifts/curses is that I often spot typos and mistakes that most people would miss, even if the problem is there for only a few seconds. For example, I recently spotted a glaring error in an ad for Huawei on a digital bus stop advert.
It was only up for a few seconds before being replaced by another ad, but nevertheless, my proofreading klaxon went off the second I saw “it’s” (contraction of “it is”) being used in the first line of the quote instead of the possessive “its”.
Naturally, of course, I wanted to know whom to blame. Was it T3 or the copywriters at Huawei’s agency. Now, it may be some eagle-eyed T3 sub spotted the problem in the ad, or someone pointed it out to the magazine and they went back to change the original copy. But I like to think they wouldn’t have let something so basic through in the first place.
At the very least, that’s not how the review reads now:
So, let’s assume it’s Huawei’s agency. Is this a reflection of the reduced emphasis on subbing with digital copy (although my online subbing services are available…), with digital ads somehow being processed differently to print ads? Maybe, but to be honest, I’ve now seen enough print ads with glaring typos to know that print isn’t immune to the issue.
However, this is the first time I’ve seen a B2C high street ad with such a problem, particularly in the focus copy. I hope it’s not a sign of the shape of things to come.