The Rule of Seventeen?

Continuing in my mini-series-thingy on the Rule of Three, I will now focus on why other lengths and methods are not as successful.

I'm not going to sit here and tell you that 4 or 5 or 6 (etc) word slogans don't work. All I'm saying is they don't work as well.

The first reason why actually has nothing to do with the Rule of Three: Three word phrases work well because they're short. You don't have to stand there in front of the poster for 30 seconds to read it, all it takes is a glance. This isn't necessarily a novel idea--slogans are pretty short to begin with--but sometimes people don't put in the effort to make it as short as possible.

Just compare these posters. Which do you find most effective and visually appealing? Furthermore, which one are you most likely to actually remember?

   

Sure, they're both memorable right now, but if you were in a hurry to class, I think we can all agree on which one is easiest to read. With each extra word, the message becomes more jumbled.

Yes We Can has a simple structure, with three distinct parts. See my previous post for some background. If you add a fourth and fifth word, like "Yes We Can Do It," it messes with the message, and makes it exponentially less effective. Also, the word "Do" limits the possibilities put forward by "Yes We Can." Yes We Can says that we can do anything, or not do anything, if so we choose. Also, notice that it doesn't say 'Yes America Can', or 'Yes the People Can.' These just complicate the simple message of the Obama campaign.

[Kind of going off on a tangent, another thing I've noticed is that the farther back you go, the longer the slogans. This could be because people have learned from their mistakes, but personally I would argue that it shows our shortening attention spans.]

Well, this closes out my two-part rant about campaign slogans. Who knows what the next half hour (and another blog post) will bring.