CLOSE-UP: LIVE ISSUE - DRTV. DRTV advertising needs higher creative standards.(direct response television advertising)

Why should such a useful medium have such a bad reputation?

Over the past decade, the DRTV commercial has established itself as a regular fixture of TV schedules. Anyone who's ever been sick or out of work and forced to watch daytime TV will tell you as much.

Yet quantity does not seem to have bred quality. DRTV advertising still has a poor reputation among critics and creatives alike, with many viewing it with the same distaste and suspicion they reserve for its much-maligned relative, the advertorial.

But why should it be that an ad's creative worth is demolished by the mere addition of a response mechanism? Is there something intrinsically damaging to a brand about such a direct approach?

Or is the image of the DRTV ad unfairly dragged down by a small number of cheap and nasty executions?

A big part of this image problem stems from the type of products DRTV ads tend to promote. The medium is a favourite tool of both the financial services and charity sectors. The ads for the former are too often dry and dull, the latter, predictable and crudely direct.

'One of the worst culprits is fundraising,' Bright's creative director and founding partner, Chris Martin, says. 'These clients behave like sausage factories. A lot of them place far too much importance on the bit at the end that says: 'For just pounds 2 per month, we can ...' This may well be based upon research, but these advertisers are putting that research before what the consumer actually needs from the ad.'