Spank your product until it admits it's strength. The strength that eventually embellishes your brand. Brands may exist in the mind, but the financial objectives they purport isn't abstract. Brands are built at every point of contact with a consumer. If a functional advantage can be matched by another, the job is to chalk out an advantage in terms of character/personality/deliverability. No can clutter. But confidence that reaches out to the consumer.
Consumers like being self-indulging. Unfortunately, they don't expect the same from the advertisers and marketeers. Under the circumstances, "Mine's the most skin friendly soap" doesn't quite resonate with the consumer. Contrarily, "Dove's" litmus test is an example. A simple test allows each consumer to indulge in the affirmation and strengthening of the brand. It doesn't "claim" fame. It doesn't attack Oil of Olay. But defeats it.
A contrast needn't be achieved by changing the background. But perhaps by changing one's own presentibility against that backdrop. Dove achieves that. Similarily while 'Tide' takes to reprimanding those who dirty themselves (in all it's commercials) and suggests it's detergent as a 'corrective measure', Ariel takes to dirt as a 'residue of enjoyment', be it the kids playing in the dirt, eating mustard dripping hot-dogs, mehendi sessions etcetera. And suggests itself as a 'utility' as it is rightly so. Life is about enjoyment. And detergent is not the center of it. That's how this message comes across. Swell!
Point: Not always about what you say. It's how you do and say that matters. What you do and say accumulates to your brand over time. But you can't say one and do the other. So the product and the deliverables have to be in consonance with the vouch. Meaningfulness ought to be the objective. Not 10 seconds of TV entertainment. Not logos and stars and painting the town red.
Gibe: Pepsi Bubbly ad (I had to get this out of my system) is the shoddiest example of this. It fails at both.