Though we come across distorted advertising just about
anywhere, I do not believe that ALL advertising is spun by entities with
deceitful intentions because many products are self-sustainable and do not need
to bend reality in order to compete. The degree of spin and deception truly
defines whether any given advertisement is passable or outright unacceptable.
Since a marketer’s goal is to gain profit, it is understandable to put one’s
best foot forward.
On the other hand political distortions tend to be
misleading and oftentimes corrupt. On pages 13 to 20 in “unSpun” authors
Jackson and Jamieson prove how the 2004 presidential election was severely
distorted. Supporters of both George Bush and John Kerry were deceived to the
point of ballot manipulation. More than half of the population was in the dark
on fabrications that possibly chose their candidate for them.
Another issue rises when two products are equally
competitive, leaving companies even more inclined to lie for the sake of
profit. Chemist Eiermann says, “All the cosmetics companies use basically the
same chemicals,” leading him to accurately believe that cosmetic companies had
to spin their ads to reel in consumers (Jamieson and Jackson 5).
Today we see ad corruption more than ever. While
independently navigating the 2012 presidential election I felt more secure of
the facts, but when information chanced my way (such as YouTube advertisements)
I felt attempts of manipulation and outright lies.
Ad deception in politics is absolutely intolerable. The
American political construct is a coalition of elected peoples who are supposed
to run our country, of whom I wish to assume are trustworthy and do not spin
lies to secure their positions. Yet in reality that is not always the case.
However ad manipulation for products is sometimes acceptable because there is a
clear difference between lying and trying to make the best of what you have.
- Omar Peña
In the influencing machine, Mr. Ochs states, “True opinions can prevail only if the facts… are known; if they are not known, false ideas are just as effective… if not a little more effective” (101). In accordance with Omar, Mr. Ochs supports Omar’s theory about putting “one’s best foot forward” as it is the “marketer’s goal… to gain profit”. Although Omar’s statement is true, I do not believe that this is a fair advertising tactic to use against consumers.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn’t say that Heinz J. Eiermann’s comment applies to all advertising/marketing like Omar stated, but I would say that it applies to the majority of it. There are only some beauty products out there that perform to the expectations of its advertisement.
How do we see this in effect today? We see it in eyelash, weight loss, and food commercials (basically anything). What we buy today isn’t always what we expected. Sure, the mascara we buy will darken our eyelashes, but not all mascaras will give us the same voluptuous look as the model on TV who is secretly also wearing fake eyelashes. Yes, the weight loss commercial might have a legitimate program, but it most likely will not dramatically change your physcial appearance or miraculously change you hair color as most of the ‘after’ pictures show.
I always question myself about the legitimacy of each ad. Is it really the same person? Will the product really make me look like that? The transformations shown look make-believe and fake most of the time. Sometimes commercials, like weight loss ones, are literally selling you on a whole new you! Is the goal of advertising to sell you on a new and improved you under false pretenses? Advertisements always seem to make you feel like you are missing out on something big. Make-believe or true, advertisements stick with you and often become unforgettable. In the end, advertisements fulfill their major job and purpose: to sell; however, what they are selling most of the time is not always what you thought you were buying.
Like Omar, I believe that spin is inevitable in advertisement. However, certain products are more prone to using spin than others. Things like beauty products, carbonated drinks, or tobacco products—stuff that is inherently simple to make and hard to differentiate—fall into this category. Because the products are so hard to be distinguished from one another, the companies then can’t simply sell the product. They have the sell the dream that is attached to the product. For example, Coke (at least in Thailand) equates to happiness, while Axe products are guaranteed attract women. This means that in these industries “much of what we pay for is make-believe.”
ReplyDeleteAnd although we don’t pay for the “make-believe” spin as clearly in other industries, this type of spin is being used everywhere in advertisement. As Omar stated, one of the most obvious places is in politics, where candidates seem to be able to conjure up damaging stories of their opponents almost at will. Another is in lobbyist ads, where facts are often left out to lead the audience to a certain conclusion. However, while the “make-believe” spin is often necessary in business ads—as it serves to differentiate products—I think that it is absolutely detrimental in political and lobbyist ads. In these situations, instead of aiding the consumer by painting a certain dream that may appeal to him or her, it only serves to hide the true facts or the complete story.
Advertising is informational, persuasive and profitable. Large corporations are constantly battling to be at the top. This requires them keep up with the ever-changing trends of our world. I would agree with Celine in that Heinz J. Eiermann’s idea applies to the majority of marketing.
ReplyDeleteIn today’s market, we see false commercials all the time. Beauty products rarely give us the outcome of what we see on TV. There are just simply not enough restriction on what you can and cannot do when it comes to commercials and other forms of marketing. Without restrictions, companies will do whatever they can to sell as much product as possible. In magazines, on television, on the internet, almost anywhere you look, you are a victim of these advertisements that are usually very appealing to the eye. Advertisements are designed to capture people’s attention and leave them wanting and wondering.
Something I have noticed recently is the increase in designing products similar to those that have become popular. For example, UGGS were and still are extremely popular. When UGGS first became popular they were one of the only companies making these unique boots. Over the years, more and more companies have designed a boot almost identical to the UGG, like the company EMU (also a three letter word). These companies have high hopes that if they design a boot almost identical to the UGG and sell it for less, they might be profitable. The problem is that most consumers want the boot that says UGG on it not a fake version also known as a FUG. Marketing is manipulative game and always will be. Although I don’t like the way advertising and marketing is done, I couldn’t see a different way to do it. As long as the consumers consume, the producers will produce.
-Maggie
Like Omar, I also believe that although there are many deceitful advertisements out there that not all of them are in fact lies. Sure there are cases like “Snake Oil” but I cant believe that every advertisement is claiming to be something that it 100% is not. Vita Coco for instance advertises to me made from 100% coconut juice, and it is in fact 100% juice! Yet on the other hand there are companies like Ocean Spray and Minute Made that advertise their beverages are made with real fruit juice, but then when you read the nutrition information it says that the beverage is only made with 10% juice. This is not necessarily lying but its false advertising in a sense because it makes the average person believe that they are drinking something that is made completely with real fruit juice. My questions are; is it the fault of the customer buying the drink, because it was their responsibility to read the label and to know better? Or is it the responsibility of the company to advertise what their customer is really consuming in a way that is clearly communicated? Although I am not completely certain, I lean towards the responsibility of the customer, because I am a believer that people should take responsibility in knowing fully what they are consuming. It is a tough subject to debate but it is worth the time and discussion.
ReplyDelete-Georgia
I agree with Omar that some advertising is not distorted. But, most advertising is these days.
ReplyDeleteIt is not hard to understand why advertising is distorted, companies or entities are trying to get a step ahead in the marketing of their product, idea, candidate,etc.
I agree with Omar that lies and misrepresentation in advertising are wrong. Lying to a consumer or tricking the consumer with misrepresentation should not be allowed in advertising. If it is, there will be no limits to what can be done in advertising and the whole industry would be pointless.
While lies and misrepresentation should not be allowed in advertising, I think that clever jokes and ideas in advertising, even if they are obviously not factual, should be allowed. For example, in a bud light commercial, a man cracks a can of bud light, and all of a sudden, three extraordinarily beautiful women appear around the man. This obviously does not happen when you open a bud light, but it's clever and the public should be smart enough to know it's not true. These types of things should be allowed in advertising. It enables advertising to be interesting and artistic.
Lies should not be allowed in advertising, but cleverness should be. It's a fine line, but I hope the media can distinguish it.
My initial reaction to unSpun was similar to Omar’s reaction: I considered that ad deception by a marketer may be understandable, while ad deception for a political campaign is intolerable. Like Omar, I figured that “The degree of spin and deception truly defines whether any given advertisement is passable or outright unacceptable.” A mild degree of spin, I thought, is no big deal. For example, Georgia’s example of spin in advertisements for Ocean Spray fruit juice hardly bothers me. However, examining the difference between spin for commercial products and spin in political campaigns calls me to question the ethics behind spin. All spin, no matter the degree, is a form of deceit and I certainly believe that deceit is wrong. I also believe that, though a small lie may not do as much harm as a greater lie, both lies are wrong. If I apply this same rule to advertising spin, deceit is unacceptable in both commercial and political advertisements, no matter the degree. So, why did I initially feel unconcerned about ad deception by marketers? I was probably indifferent to this kind of commercial spin because I have learned to accept and even expect it. This sentiment indicates just how deeply engrained spin is in advertising and demonstrates just how “much of what you pay for is make-believe” (Eiermann). Of course, I am still the most troubled by spin in political campaigns, as I think that this kind of spin has the potential to cause the most harm. But, I am no longer indifferent to commercial spin. Commercial spin can cause consumers to waste money and even damage their health. There is no reason for consumers to have to accept deceit – instead, demands should be made for a filter against lies in advertising.
ReplyDelete- Charlotte
I agree with both Omar and Win in that spin is unavoidable in advertising, but I also believe that it is necessary. The main use for advertising is for business, and with business comes competition. It is very rare to find a product today that is completely unique and perfect in every way. So how can you sell a product and make profit, if another company is selling almost the exact same thing? How do you show consumers that your product is different? How do you make it sell? Easy – you put a little spin in it.
ReplyDeleteIn the book Jackson and Jamieson write how “deception is highly profitable” (8). Without this deception, both you and your product won’t stand a chance in the business world. Indeed this can be negative if, lets say, certain foods don’t include negative ingredients on the wrapper, and ultimately leads to the harm of consumers. But when you are sitting in a college interview and they ask “What is one of your weaknesses?”, you’re not going to say “My addiction to Farmville” – you are going to lie and say “Working too hard!” You are going to avoid talking about what makes you look bad, tell a few lies, and ultimately try to present yourself as the best student ever. You are going to sell yourself to this college, you want to gain their interest.
Yes, it is annoying that models wear fake eyelashes in mascara commercials, or that Ocean Spray says its 100% real fruit juice, but that’s just the way things are. Jackson and Jamieson even state that, “The art of advertising, in fact, has been described as the art of promoting a false illusion” (20). Having an older brother who is an editor at the ad agency A&G, he has told me how a main part of his job is to make commercials unique – “to make them stand out ”. Without the spin, there would be no profit, and since money is what makes the world go round so that would present a problem.
Spin is very prominent in the advertising and marketing world. This deception can easily be found while flipping through channels on television. Building off of Win's point, the most obvious examples I can think of for advertising are commercials for restaurants. Obviously, a McDonald's burger seen on T.V. and a McDonald's burger in the flesh are completely different things (the television burger looks far more appetizing). This burger, though it's a simple example, demonstrates that what we pay for may simply not exist. Of course, I have no qualms with this because this sort of spin is merely an advertising strategy. No one wants to buy a burger they see on T.V. that looks unappetizing - of course there will be some editing and tweaking done.
ReplyDeleteWith that said, this sort of spinning can warrant negative consequences. During election season candidates will use anything they have against each other in any way possible. A simple sentence could be stretched and used in another context to make an opponent sound/seem a certain way, even if it's not true. As Omar said, this is in many respects what our political world has come to: ad corruption. By this point in time, however, I feel as if people have become more aware of the multitude of spin in the advertising/marketing world. Ultimately, a lot of attempts at spin are null and void (mainly with marketing), however, the more negative effects of this spin is seen in the political and industrial world. Though we as citizens have the right to exercise our freedom of speech, I find it disturbing how full of lies our world can be.
I have a hard time agreeing with Omar because I do believe that every advertisement and marketing objective has some element of “make-believe”, exaggeration or enhancement. If companies truly marketed their products and services in it's truest form and were completely transparent, consumers would have a harder time buying products and many of the companies we consider to be most successful would not be in those positions right now. To support my claim I'll use the sports company Nike. Nike was seen as the greatest shoe and athletic gear maker until the world found out about the severe conditions they had factory workers undergoing in sweatshops in Indonesia, China and Vietnam. There was an outbreak against Nike and supporters of human rights demanded change. Up until this point, Nike never mentioned how and in what type of conditions their products were manufactured in. Needless to say, Nike did not advertise their sweatshop workers mass producing the shoes we wear, instead they advertised their sneakers and athletic gear on famous basketball and baseball players to enhance the “star quality” of their products. Luckily, Nike was able to turn their image around and better the conditions their workers In order to remain competitive in today's marketing-genius world, advertisers must embellish the truth or use different tactics to market their products and make sure consumers buy their products.
ReplyDeletePerla
With regards to this quote by Heinz Eiermann and Omar’s response, I believe that advertising and marketing are, slightly differently than the media, divided into two categories. First, I believe that there is the marketing of products, as Omar refers to, such as cosmetics or appliances. Secondly, there is marketing of people, such as political candidates. In both instances, an “object” is being advertised but because of the very differences in their nature, I respectfully disagree with some of the aspects, which Omar has brought forth.
ReplyDeleteWhen advertising a product, one is, just as the media, selecting which features to present forth. An advertiser generally asks, “What are the most desirable features/qualities of this product?” when they market it. In my mind, advertising a product is, not in the slightest, negative because it is just presenting a product and the desirable traits to the consumers. Another I am inclined to say that advertising products is not negative is because, unlike the media, they always have disclaimers. While this may sound odd, the media doesn’t give consumers a disclaimer, saying what the negative aspects of their news is. Products, on the other hand, because of legal obligations, say that there are x, y, and z effects of the product or may be side effects of the product.
In the second subsection of advertising, marketing people or candidates, there are distinct differences. Agreeing with Omar, there is spin on the policies and actions of the candidates in the elections; however, this because of the primary difference between the two subsections of advertising – humans are much more important than products. In short, because the advertising is about somebody who is trying to affect the world on a global scale as well as act as a guardian for the welfare of citizens’ rights, there must be much more consideration. With much consideration also comes competitiveness in order to win – this is where the spin play in. Spin in elections, is to win, which is much different than maximizing profits. Also, one advertisement for a candidate affects millions of more people than an ad for a product. This was evident, as Omar eluded to, in the election this past year when hundreds of ads aired erroneous information on both presidential candidates. In an attempt to stay brief with regards to politics, spin is always negative, because, as discussed in Practical Politics, it is up to the citizens to decide who is fit to lead. Regardless of which subsection though, there must be the consideration between putting your best foot forward and sheer lying (paraphrase of Omar).
I do not agree with the sentiment expressed in unSpun that almost all of what you purchase is advertised through “make-believe” ideas. But rather it is just that these types of advertisement Every product we as consumers purchase is meant to fulfill a desired a purpose. I only need a deodorant to smell nice and stop me from sweating, or a soda to taste good. However, I end up buying a deodorant because its commercial showed a man being swarmed by women and the soda because the guy who drank had a great sense of family. To an extent, it seems like marketing corporations have discovered that they don’t need to sell us a product or service as much as they need to sell us an emotion or fantasy lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteAs for Omar’s comments pertaining to shameless lies in political advertisement, in a way they are doing the same thing as tobacco and cosmetic companies- finding a way to differentiate themselves To the average American somewhat following an election most politicians seem to echo the ideas of keeping America safe, generating jobs, and lowering debt. Politicians can’t promise a better feeling when you wake up like a particular cosmetic product could to differentiate itself. Therefore, politicians resort to the opposite and try to show you how dangerous or frightening another candidate will make your life. All advertisement is extremely deceitful, and at the end of the day we all fall for it at one point or another. With that being said I wonder, are we at a point of no return in terms of deceitful advertising everywhere we look?
The Le_Meridian Funding Service went above and beyond their requirements to assist me with my loan which i used expand my pharmacy business,They were friendly, professional, and absolute gems to work with.I will recommend anyone looking for loan to contact. Email..lfdsloans@lemeridianfds.com Or lfdsloans@outlook.com.WhatsApp ... + 19893943740.
ReplyDelete