I got a B on this one. It took a while to get it back from the Professor. My next paper is already in the works. Wish me luck on that one.
Edward Ellsworth
Professor Longoria
WRC 1023
3 October 2008
The Irresponsible Ad
After booting up a computer and turning on the Internet, it is not uncommon to see a woman dancing in the corner of the screen, or to have a wrestler walk out in front of the article being viewed. Without even looking, the individual knows that it is an advertisement. Advertisers do everything they can to try and grab the public’s attention. Sometimes their methods cause the audience to question the need for advertising. At times it is considered more of a nuisance than an aide. As such, advertising needs to be held accountable for their methods of selling, because advertisers are not following any type of ethical guide and they know how to take advantage of the public.
Advertisers have used a variety of techniques to get their client's products to the consumer. The effectiveness of their techniques has caused companies to look for new and more sophisticated means of selling a product. In a recent New York Times article, Stewart Elliott covered the American Association of Advertising’s annual conference. According to Elliott, “Creativity as the pathway to consumer persuasion…” was the theme for the conference (Elliott, par. 2). Advertisers do not have any trouble being creative. The creativity in Mr. Elliott’s article was addressed as the “accountable kind that is rooted in insights derived from hard data about customers shopping patterns” (Elliott, par. 3). Accountable creativity may sound great, but the consumer needs to ask who advertisers consider themselves accountable to. Advertising firms are only accountable to their clients. While laws exist to help protect the consumer and competing companies, they are limited and difficult to enforce. Also, advertisers have learned to be flexible and often push their limitations.
Marketing experts evaluate target market segments like mice in a laboratory. Mr. Elliot observed, “Omnicom has on retainer consultants like M.I.T. Laboratories to stimulate ideas for clients that include the Air Force, BMW, and South West Airlines” (Elliott, par. 16). Chuck Brymer, president of DDB Worldwide, noted that “research techniques… would offer ‘new opportunities…’ [to] help agencies understand why shoppers prefer one product over another ‘and how to influence customer behavior” (Elliott, par. 15). The attitude of media outlets focuses more on the needs of their clients than the needs of the public at large. Jean Kilbourne author of the book “Deadly Persuasions” said, “Behind the scenes, however, it [MTV] tells potential advertisers that its viewers are lemmings who will buy whatever they are told to buy” (Kilbourne, pg. 329 par. 13). The attitudes and motives of the advertising world are appalling. They view the public as fat lazy Guinea Pigs ripe for market experimentation.
Advertisements are not as straight forward as the marketing companies would have the public believe. They use catchy slogans and repetitive words to lead their audiences towards a buying decision. One of the most popular advertising methods focuses on a need for rebellion. John Leo, contributing editor at U.S. News and World Report, says, "But the central message here is very serious and strongly antisocial: We should all rebel against authority, social order, propriety, and rules of any kind" (Leo259). The way that advertising agencies keep feeding the public their misguided social doctrine gives the impression that companies believe the things they tell consumers. However, this idea is false. Mr. Leo goes on to say, "The peculiar thing is that so much of the rule-breaking propaganda is largely funded by businessmen who say they hate it, but can't resist promoting it in ads as a way of pushing their products" (260).
The most dangerous part of advertising is the market segmenting. Advertisers are very careful to target younger audiences. Companies want the younger consumers to grow up on their products. Jean Kilbourne commented, "Marketers attract children to their Websites with games and contests and then extract from them information that can be used in future sales pitches to the child and the child's family" (Kilbourne, pg. 330 par. 18). Is it any wonder that children break from their parents’ values, after combining the message of rebellion and then focusing that message on a young impressionable audience? With the current economic down turns do children really need to be encouraged to spend impulsively?
The old saying buyer beware no longer holds any weight today. It is true that a certain degree of responsibility falls on the consumer, but how much thought does a child put into buying a product? If a child wants something, he will either whine about it, or he will just go get it. If that child is taught and coached to respond to advertising, will they really be smarter buyers when they reach maturity? The recent crash of the housing market on Wall Street would suggest that the effects of a frivolous generation are already being felt. One way to counter the negative effects that the advertisers are having is through the consumer. Consumers can stand up to the advertisers by not responding. There is nothing like a million dollar advertising campaign with negative results to send a message. When the public stops responding to commercials, maybe they will stop running them. When is this going to happen, not any time soon!
Since it seems ridiculous then to ask the public to give up their buying habits, restraints need to be put in place to restrict negative advertising influences. With mediation between advertising professionals and concerned activists, a set of guidelines can be laid down to guide the industry. Television broadcasting companies get tired of a complaining public and came up with a rating system for television programs. In this same way, leaders in the industry could set up an ethical board to review and grade advertisements. This would lead to a competition among agencies for reputation. The company with the better reputation wins more clients. If advertisers are unwilling to police themselves, then the public’s last course of action is to turn to the government for aid. This action is the most costly one for companies and the public.
There is nothing wrong with advertisers being creative. They do a service to the public and to the companies that employ them. However, it can not be denied that advertisers are influential. With the power of influence comes the responsibility of restraint. This is a hard lesson the public is learning today. There needs to be a way to make advertisers accountable to the public for their products.
Works Cited
Carpini, Dominic Delli, and Jack Selzer, ed. Conversations. New York: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2006.
Elliott, Stuart. “Agencies Hear a Call for More Creativity, but Also More Accountability”. Editorial The New York Times Online. 20 Apr. 2007. 30 Sept.2008
Kilbourne, Jean."Buy This 24-Year-Old And Get All His Friends Absolutely Free.” Carpini 325-335.
Leo, John. “The Selling of Rebellion.” Carpini 258-261.
No comments:
Post a Comment