-
sponsorship
So I'm reading the most recent issue of the Economist (April 4-10, 2009), and on Page 9 is an ad for Fidelity Investments, which reads like so:
In medium-size bold type at the top:
Retirement income guaranteed.
In very large bold type in the top-third sweet spot:
There are no guarantees in retirement. Except maybe this one.
In medium-size bold type below, in the middle of the page:
Guaranteed income for life.
In regular-size, nonbold type below that:
With an income annuity through Fidelity, you can rest assured that you, and your spouse, will always have income.
It's all sounding pretty good, right? Safe, secure, steady, guaranteed for chrissakes, just like old times. But then comes the kicker in parentheses but the same type size immediately below that:
(Guarantees are subject to the claims-paying ability of the issuing insurance company.)
And my bubble deflates.
This is how ads are supposed to work: Each line of text, each image is supposed to make you say and feel "Yes!" in your head. There should not be a "No!" in there. And if they need to put in a No for legal reasons, they put it in way at the bottom of the page in tiny type.
But no longer.
So really, there are no guarantees in life. This ad reveals its own lie. AIG, your reach is far and wide and nightmare-inducing! Or maybe it's good that they can't baldly lie to us anymore.