Incresing Power of Advertising - Essay Example

Do you believe tht the incresing power of dvertising tht these uthors points to is hrmful to mericn culture dvertising, like television, mirrors mericn culture, but lso cretes it. It is very powerful force. Television dvertising is the most forceful, but clever dvertisers hve found dozens of other wys to mke n "imprint" on the mind of the consumer. Tody, Internet dvertising is mking lot of news. dvertising, especilly in the television ge, nd now in the Internet ge, hs lwys generted controversy. In the following essy I will criticlly evlute the opinion of severl uthors regrding the influence of dvertising on mericn culture. In book "Medi nd Messges" by Greg Brnhisel there re few chpters by Glori Steinem nd Frzier Moore who provide deep nlysis of mericn dvertisement. widely red nd generlly pprecited nlysis of mening in dvertisements is discussed by Glori Steinem where she wlks the reder through gllery of dvertisements nd discusses their ideologicl content. Her own criticl perspective is informed by vriety of theorists, including Ferdinnd de Sussure, Krl Mrx, Louis lthusser, Rymond Willims, Sigmund Freud, nd Jcques Lcn. Steinem's pedgogic objective is to tech the nive reder how to interpret dvertisements long the lines of these theorists, nd mny reders do find tht their criticl bilities re gretly developed by pplying Steinem's theories: dvertisements lose whtever simple qulities they my hve hd nd become insted texts bout production nd consumption in the consumer society, bout the plce of commodities in socil life, nd bout the cretion of needs to service n economic system tht must sell wht hs been produced. In ddition to teching the interprettion of dvertisements, Steinem explins how dvertising constructs the ideologicl principles tht re embedded in it. For exmple, mny dvertisements borrow ides from externl sources ("referent systems") such s culturl history or concepts of nture. In the process of ppropriting, reworking, nd using them, dvertising trnsforms the borrowed ides. The dvertisements for Virgini Slims cigrettes, which frequently refer to the history of women's, struggle for socil nd economic equlity in meric, illustrte this process. Selected events from this struggle re retold nd edited in selected wys, nd progress is depicted s contemporry women's hving gined the right to smoke. Similrly, hundreds of products tht proclim their "nturl" qulities re in relity highly ltered through complex mnufcturing processes. Instnces like these, Steinem clims, illustrte the construction of ideology through dvertisements. The resulting distortions over the long run lter our understndings of the originl ides tht were borrowed nd (mis)used within dvertising. Steinem's pproch to the interprettion of dvertisements is founded on her gol of trnsforming the reder's skills. She does not tret s problemtic tht uninstructed reders mke whtever sense they do of the thousnds of dvertisements populting their dily lives. Neither does she tke ny gret interest in how the copywriters who produced the dvertisements thought bout their work. Insted, she ssumes tht nive reder's filure to see the issues she uncovers is flse consciousness of their mening, flseness on which dvertising depends to do its work. The pproch hinges fundmentlly on Steinem's own skill in pplying the vrious theoreticl perspectives to the dvertisements. From the outset she bedzzles the reder by observing detils nd ptterns in dvertisements tht ordinrily slip by n udience. She repetedly points out the contrdictions between wht dvertisements seem to sy nd wht they relly men ccording to the vrious perspectives. lthough Steinem considers dvertising's udience nive, she does not ssume tht its members re merely receivers of pckged messges tht emnte from dvertisers. Rther, she rgues, the udience is implicted in the production of mening, collbortion tht dvertising continully invites: [] crucil feture of these odds nd ends of thought used by ds is tht they do not exist "independently" but in our thought: it is we, s subjects, who re ppeled to s providers of these elements.... For it is individul people, rel people, who re the connecting link here: they, we, clerly exist in time nd spce, in chnging world, but lso provide the ren--unconscious--for the ideologicl structure of ides. This only exists inside our heds (Brnhisel, 2001, p.285). Despite this sttus of udience-s-uthor, Steinem's nlysis is in no pprent wy dependent on ny evidence bout wht members of the udience ctully think the dvertisements men. Here nlysis depends entirely on her own theoreticl ssumptions nd interprettions. She tells, but never sks, her reders wht the dvertisements men. Thus, if we look behind the specific ideologies of society reveled through her pproch, we find theory bout where mening rests nd how it works in dvertising. Put simply, it sys something like this: Nive reders who do not understnd the socil ideologies in dvertising lbor under flse consciousness bout their mening. These deceptive menings crete desires for consumer goods nd thus promote selling. Socil theorists re privileged with the bility to decode rel mening. Nive reders my lern the decoding process nd thereby develop their own bilities to derive the true mening of dvertisements. Regrding the pges written by Frzier Moore nd her position on dvertising effects to mericn culture, she drws bout the role of dvertising in twentieth-century meric stting tht there is no rel evidence in this otherwise crefully documented book bout wht members of the udience for these dvertisements ctully thought bout them. dditionlly, there re only inferences bout the reltion between dvertisements nd behvior. When ll is sid nd done, Moore's pproch to the mening of dvertisements shres with Steinem's its dependence on the skill of the criticl interpreter. Wht ech seeks to illuminte in the dvertisements differs, but the overll pproch in both instnces is one of teching criticl bilities. Moore's nlysis of dvertisements is driven by his interest s historin. He explins how he first pproched dvertisements s culturl documents tht would help him tell story bout meric in the 1920s nd 1930s. s he worked with them, he cme to understnd tht rther thn being reflections of socil life nd culturl vlues in previous decdes, dvertisements were t best refrctions. He turned insted to n investigtion of dvertisers (both compnies producing goods for sle nd dvertising gencies helping promote them) nd their role in the construction of the idelized world of dvertisements. For his dt, Moore reviewed thousnds of dvertisements ppering in mgzines nd newsppers s well s vrious documents contined in the rchives of dvertising gencies nd corportions. From these mterils he is ble to piece together n impressive ccount of mjor themes in the dvertisements of the period s well s n overview of the motives nd objectives of the dvertisers. It is unfortunte tht the sources themselves do not contin much informtion bout the intentions behind prticulr dvertisements. Such detils, interesting s they would be, seem to hve been lost. More trets udience response s outside the bounds of his inquiry. Here is wht he hs to sy bout this issue: dvertisements present problems tht differ more in degree thn in kind from those involved in interpreting socil relity from more conventionl historicl sources. We my not be ble to prove the specific effects of n dvertisement on its reders, but neither cn we prove the effects of religious trcts, socil mnifestos, commemortive ddresses, nd politicl cmpign speeches on their udiences.... dvertisements merely shre the chrcteristics of mny other suspect forms of evidence bout populr ttitudes:... we do not know if udiences shred or dopted the ides presented (Brnhisel, 2001, p.140). Moor discusses in wht wy mericn culture is influenced by n ctive dvertisement through mericn citizens. He sttes tht when deling with dvertisement, we know tht we re members of their intended udience nd tht we must decide in ech encounter whether n dvertisement is relevnt nd whether we wish to follow its recommendtions. Mny of us deny tht we re much ffected by the dvertisements tht pper in the mgzines we red nd the television progrms we wtch. Some of us even go so fr s to mintin tht we despise dvertising, py little ttention to it, nd ctively void dvertisements whenever possible. We clim to hurry through the dvertising sections of mgzines nd newsppers, nd we tout our skills t zpping television commercils. The more suspicious mong us mintin constnt gurd ginst covert dvertising tctics designed to overpower our resistnce. cts of sying no to contemporry dvertisements, of denying their relevnce, nd of refusing their dvice differ distinctly from the ttention we more willingly py to old ones. The question of wht the dvertiser ment in constructing n dvertisement is worthy one, but too much ttention on it deflects our understnding of how dvertisements men wht they do to us. In our interprettion of them, we my receive the mening exctly s the uthor my hve intended, we my djust it in some wy, or perhps we supply mening t odds with the intention of those who mde the dvertisement. Whichever hppens, the dvertisement mens to us exctly wht we think it mens--no more, no less. Once we grsp tht the consumer is the ultimte uthor of the mening of n dvertisement, the intentions of the mkers become of secondry importnce. Ultimtely, they my even be irrelevnt. Indeed, some contemporry dvertising leves interprettion wide open, the dvertisers inviting the udience to prticipte, wre tht wht they intended my not help t ll in the consumers' comprehension of the mening. It my simply be tht the intention of the mker ws to crete n dvertisement tht we would use s skeleton to which we would dd flesh nd into which we would brethe life. Bibliogrphy: 1. lsop, Ronld. 1988. "dvertisers Put Consumers on the Couch: Reserch Probes Emotionl Ties to Products". Wll Street Journl, My 13, 21 2. Brnhisel, G. 2001. Medi nd Messges. New York: Routledge. 3. Willimson, Judith. 1978. Decoding dvertisements: Ideology nd Mening in dvertising. London: Mrion Boyrs. Read More