The naffest adverts

They are supposed to charm, seduce and persuade us to part with our money.

But, despite costing millions, many advertising campaigns - with their annoying jingles, patronising payoff lines and cheesy celebrities - simply drive us mad.

Today the three most aggravating adverts of the year were revealed as: the cartoon superheroes used to promote directory-enquiries service 11 88 88; the "Should have gone to Specsavers" campaign for the high street optician; and the Linda Barker-fronted adverts for electrical retailer Currys.

"The ads that annoy people most tend to be repeated too often and contain insidious jingles," said Jennifer Hiscock, of Marketing, the magazine behind the survey. "Other irritating features are a patronising tone of voice, implausible plots and the over-use of D-list celebrities." The "worst" advertisement of 2003 was for the directory enquiries service 11 88 88. With its mix of animation and a nerve-jangling jingle, the £13million promotion irritated 60 per cent of those surveyed .

Nigel Long of Euro RSCG Wnek Gosper Partners, which created the campaign, said he was concerned the number was not easy to memorise. He said: "We worked at making it memorable and intrusive."

Another cardinal sin of advertising is to be smug, confirmed the survey.

Runner up in the poll was Specsavers with 41 per cent of those polled disliking its adverts.

Then there was the Currys campaign, featuring Changing Rooms star Linda Barker. The ads in which she brandishes a pair of scissors to illustrate the endline "Currys: always cutting prices" polled 38 per cent.

One advertising industry expert quipped: "It has the air of a hooker at work in a brothel. She's got nothing to do with the brand and you know she's only in it for the money."