“The first rule of Fight Club is: you do not talk about Fight Club. The second rule of Fight Club is: you DO NOT talk about Fight Club,” Brad Pitt’s character Tyler Durden proclaims in the 1999 film, Fight Club.
Well, we’re about to break all the rules (HR, if you’re reading this, it’s not a real fight club; it’s more of a friendly debate). Recently, two of our very own — VP, Creative Director Mike Herman and Content Creator + Designer Indey Moureau — went head-to-head in our internal ad nerd version of Fight Club, the “VS.” format of what our creative team has dubbed the “Lunch Bites” series.
VS., which usually begins with our EVP, Executive Creative Director David Olsen doing an a capella intro that sounds a lot like the Wayne’s World theme song, typically pits two creative team members against each other, each picking a side and debating on behalf of it. Past VS. debates have covered topics ranging from Influencers vs. Content Creators, Brand Mascot Battle Royale, and Superbowl Hits vs. Misses. You’re probably wondering, Where does the “lunch” piece of this come in? Well, as your economics professor probably told you, “There’s still no such thing as a free lunch.” But, this debate usually happens during the lunch hour, so our creatives can eat their PB&Js and learn something too!
Mike and Indey decided to go head-to-head in a traditional vs. social media design battle. In corner No. 1, we had Mike, repping Team Traditional, armed with his self-proclaimed “old school” design weapons of choice: a Black Warrior No. 2 pencil, because people still use those, and his Field Notes notebook. And, in Corner No. 2, we had Indey, repping Team Social Design, armed with an Apple Pencil and a slew of apps. With both competitors armed with their trusty design tools and undeniable passion for the topic, the debate began.
During the design approach portion of the battle, onlookers quickly learned that not only does Mike still use a pencil, but he also uses a printer! Mike walked everyone through his approach to traditional design, showing off how he’s transformed cubicles into the equivalent of large-scale Pinterest mood boards when looking for design inspiration and working through a creative challenge. Meanwhile, Indey brought the heat, referencing some of the key apps they routinely turn to for inspiration, including TikTok, Instagram, Pinterest and CapCut.
Now, you can probably guess where our competitors netted out on the print vs. digital format portion of this debate — no surprises there. It wasn’t until the debate set its sights on audience and engagement, that we saw Mike really make a comeback, demonstrating that print isn’t dead, and often has a lengthy shelf life, remaining relevant in some cases for decades. Indey took a heavy hit during this round, acknowledging the “blink and you’ll miss it” nature of digital.
When it came to design techniques, both competitors brought their A-game. Mike came out strong, highlighting the value of the high-quality images, unique substrates, and printing effects and techniques, which are not viable on social media. Meanwhile, Indey countered with a roundhouse kick and the idea that on social media, the audience isn’t looking for something so polished. Instead, they seek content that’s more organic in nature or something so interesting or bizarre (we see you Nutter Butter) that they can’t look away.
Copy is where it got really interesting. Team traditional design got to play both sides of the coin, pointing out that with print, there’s flexibility to include longer, more detailed copy but it’s just as important to be succinct on out-of-home boards as it is on social media. Meanwhile, Indey doubled down on the idea that people aren’t coming to social media to read a novel — they want copy to be short, sweet and easily readable. Oh, and, they love their subtitles!
Then, our competitors got into the topic of trends. While Mike made the point that traditional design follows timeless design principles and trends, Indey acknowledged the wild west nature of social media design. In other words, social media design is more often shaped by what’s trending because it’s important to play the algorithm game.
Last, but certainly not least, our competitors touched on metrics, because, after all, metrics tell us if the work is doing its job. Traditional design took an L because metrics are harder to track and feedback loops are generally slower. Social media metrics on the other hand are like drinking from a fire hose all the time, which means there’s a lot of information out there to continually tweak the creative approach to meet the audience where they are.
The competition for this VS. was fierce, but ultimately, the audience declared the debate a draw! Mike and Indey concluded that there’s no right or wrong way and both approaches share some of the same foundational elements:
Both design approaches are geared toward delivering a message visually — whether it’s promoting a product, sharing information, or building brand awareness. They use design principles such as color, typography, layout, etc. to achieve this.
Storytelling is central to both design formats. Whether through a single image, video, or a series of posts, both types of design work seek to tell a story that connects with the viewer on an emotional level.
Both types of design work to reflect a brand’s identity consistently. This includes maintaining the same tone, color palette, and visual style to create a recognizable and cohesive brand image.
Both social media and traditional design consider the target audience. Each designer tailors their visuals to resonate with specific demographics, interests and behaviors of their target audience.
While Mike and Indey were forced to pick sides for this debate, the truth is, they work in both of these mediums every day. If they had to pick a side, we know where their loyalties lie, but they emphasized these two design approaches significantly influence one another.
