Five Questions Before a Static Goes Live

Most static ads get approved the same way: someone looks at it for a few seconds, decides it looks fine, and it goes into the account. Then it does nothing, and the conclusion is that statics don’t work.

The problem is the review, not the format. “Does it look nice” is the wrong question, because a reader on their phone doesn’t experience an ad as a whole. They experience it in a sequence: the first thing their eye lands on, then the next, then the headline, then maybe the copy, then the click. Review the ad in that order and most of the problems show themselves.

Five questions, in sequence.

1. Where does the eye land first, and what does it say?

Your eye goes to the biggest element on the canvas, then the highest-contrast one. White space steers it towards whatever’s left. That order is fixed by the design, so it’s the first thing to check.

Whatever the eye lands on first sets the audience for the whole ad. If the largest thing on the canvas is the product name, the ad is talking to people who already know the product, and no amount of clever primary text will pull a stranger back in. If the largest thing is a symptom, a claim or a question, you’ve got a chance with someone who’s never heard of you.

While you’re there, look for the dead weight. A logo in the corner of a Meta ad is doing nothing the page name above it isn’t already doing. It’s taking contrast away from the thing that should have it.

2. Is it clear, or is it curious?

A static that works on a cold audience does one of two things. Either it’s completely clear: within three or four seconds you know the product, the angle and who it’s for. Or it opens a deliberate gap: you have no idea what’s being sold, and you have to read the copy or click to find out.

The failure is the middle. “Guaranteed energy in five minutes” over a pack of gum is too vague to sell anyone and too clear to intrigue them. It’ll pick up a little retargeting attribution, never look bad enough to switch off, and never grow the business.

So ask which side the ad is on. If you can’t answer in one word, it’s in the middle.

3. Does the copy sit on the same rung as the image?

The image, the headline, the primary text and the landing page each assume the reader knows a certain amount. They need to agree.

A common miss: the image is a product shot that only makes sense to someone who already knows the product, and the primary text opens by explaining what the category is and why it matters. Product-aware image, solution-aware copy. The people who know the product skip the copy. The people who don’t never got past the image. Nobody is served.

The pairing to aim for works like a YouTube thumbnail and title. The image raises the question, the headline gives just enough context to make you want the answer, and the copy or the page delivers it. On a static, people do read the headline and the primary text, far more than on a video, so both deserve the same care as the image. Most briefs give them none.

4. Where does the click land?

If the ad opened a curiosity gap, the page has to close it before it asks for money. That means an advertorial, a listicle, a founder story, a quiz. Something that educates. Send a curiosity click to a product page and you’ve paid for a stranger to arrive confused and leave.

If the ad was fully clear, a product page is fine. The reader already knows what they’re buying.

Either way, check the promise carries over. If the ad implied a specific result, the page should say the same thing near the top, in the same words. The single biggest cause of “our top-of-funnel statics don’t work” is a good ad wired to the wrong page.

5. Does it look like an ad, and should it?

There are two honest ways to stop a scroll. Look native, so the reader doesn’t clock it as an ad at all. Or jump out and interrupt the pattern. Both work. Looking like every other ad in the feed doesn’t.

Native works because it borrows a format the reader already trusts: a screenshot of a tweet, a text-message thread, a note on a phone, a founder photographed doing something ordinary, a photo that could have come from a friend’s account. The format stops the scroll and the copy does the selling. Running it from a person’s page rather than the brand’s keeps it native for longer.

Two cautions. A format that’s working for another brand is a strong starting point, but it only works for you once it’s rebuilt around your product and your customer. A straight copy with your logo swapped in is still someone else’s ad. And native has a line: implying a partnership that doesn’t exist, or using someone else’s packaging and hoping the blur covers it, isn’t clever. It’s a complaint waiting to happen.

A word on design

None of the five questions is about how the ad looks, which will sound odd coming from someone who designs statics for a living. Here’s the reconciliation. Design as decoration doesn’t move the numbers. Design as hierarchy is the whole of question one, and design as craft decides whether a claim carries any weight when it’s read. A specific clinical percentage in bold loses most of its authority when the product beneath it is jammed into a corner with no breathing room. The reader doesn’t consciously notice the spacing. They just trust the ad less.

The recap

• Review a static in the order the reader experiences it, not as a whole.

• The first thing the eye lands on sets the audience. Put your highest-awareness message there and cut the dead weight.

• Be completely clear or completely curious. If you can’t say which in one word, it’s in the middle.

• Image, headline, copy and page must assume the same amount of knowledge.

• Curiosity clicks need an educational page. Clarity clicks can go to the product.

• Native or interruptive, never generic. Borrow familiar formats, stay on the right side of the line.

• Design earns its keep through hierarchy and craft, not decoration.

Or skip the blank canvas altogether. I send monthly batches of statics modelled on ads already working for other brands. Get in touch if that’s useful.