OUGD401 Advertising Essay

‘Advertising doesn’t sell things; all advertising does it change the way people think or feel’ (Jeremy Bullmore). Evaluate this statement with reference to selected critical theories (past and present)

There is no denying that advertising and advertisers bare a strategic gift in making promises to change a consumer’s lifestyle for the better. In many cases, advertising firms manipulatively capitalise on a viewers fear, self-conscious or perhaps a highly anticipated event, for example the Olympics or the Presidential Election, playing on the interest that the public have on it. As a result, advertising is forever changing depending on the time of year, the weather, the economic climate, fashion, health, and the list goes on. Mark Twain said that “Many a small thing has been made large by the right kind of advertising”, which supports that advertising revolves around the superficial, whether to make a member of the public look better, or to make them feel better. Jeremy Bullmore’s quote is a fairly mild-mannered explanation for why advertising is so important to marketers. Realistically, the advertising that depends on the manipulation of others is a reflection of how the product could never sell without it.

Multiple theories have emerged as a result of the study of the power of persuasive energy in advertising; none quite as opinionated or convincing as those art critic John Berger discusses in his 1972 BBC programme ‘Ways of Seeing’. His theories explore the idea that advertising exhibits an alternative and more desirable way of life which “stimulate our imagination by memory or anticipation”. While his opinions are quite audacious, when explained it’s difficult not to be inclined towards them. He compares advertisements with traditional paintings and demonstrates the “disconnection between each page” of a magazine, jumping from one trivial advertisement to natural disaster and back to an ad again, blurring the usually distinctive line between what is reality and what is imagination.

The last instalment of Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ focuses heavily on publicity and advertising and the importance of “manufacturing glamour” through publicity. He explores the idea that many advertisements prompt the viewer to be transformed but, more importantly to be enviable to others, as “being envied constitutes glamour”. Without jealousy from others, glamour cannot exist. This alters the relationship one would have with the people around me, that “relationships become radiant because of our new possessions, but only such radiance can be achieved if we have money. This urges each of us to scramble competitively to get money” (Berger, J., 1972, Ways of Seeing – Advertising, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmgGT3th_oI, Part 1). This attitude paints the idea of money in a magical way, and plays upon a fear of being undesirable, prompting people to stop at nothing to be wealthy and, subsequently, envied.

Berger manages to shift the focus of what people might think of the advertising world; not a collection of creative’s using their imaginations to better a product, but a group of strategic dictators, bending and stretching the real properties of a product. This breaks all the way down to such things as layout and colour, discussed in ‘Decoding Advertisements: Ideology and Meaning in Advertising’ (Williamson, J., 1994, London, Marion Boyars Publishers Ltd). In the  ‘Currency of Sings’ section, Williamson states “use of colour is simply a technique, used primarily in pictorial advertising, to make correlations between a product and other things”, showing that advertisers try and use colours and layout to make a connection to something that might make the viewer happy or sad to reflect the nature of the product or campaign.

This technique features heavily in charity advertisements such as Cancer Research or Wateraid. Cancer Research bases it’s adverts on statistics, and with such a high and ever increasing level of Cancer patients the number of people that are affected by it in some way or another is huge, enabling them to use emotional vices. They know that people who have been affected would never want to go through the same or others to have to, prompting them to donate. Similarly, charity campaigns like Wateraid are masters of triggering guilt in the British public, most of which have no problem accessing water. No matter what the product, advertisers want to provoke a reaction by finding common ground with the public.

However, effective these advertisements are, they lack variation and when based on the ads alone it is hard to create a distinction between them. “The first function of an advertisement is to create a differentiation between one particular product and others in the same category. It does this by providing the product with an ‘image’; this image only succeeds in differentiating between products in so far as it is part of a system of differences” (Williamson, J., 1994, Decoding Advertisements: Ideology and Meaning in Advertising, London, Marion Boyars Publishers Ltd). All forms of advertising are essentially competition between products that bare similarities to each other. Advertising will never focus on negative qualities of a product, and only on the positive qualities so when a product is thought of as ‘too good to be true’ that’s because it isn’t true. Ads that try to promote their product above any other in the same category uses ‘expert’ opinions and surveys to make theirs seem flawless.

Use of surveys is common in advertising but they will only be exhibited in the advert if the results are positive. A perfect example of manipulative use of surveys in advertising is the recent television ad for Avon A-F33 anti-wrinkle cream, claiming that after seven days use, one hundred percent of the women who tried it noticed a reduction in the wrinkles on their face. While this may be true, not once does the ad mention how many women tested it, for all the audience knows, when it could have been as little as five, promoting the idea that this product could not sell without providing some sort of ‘proof’ to consumers that it works. However all this example proves is that “advertising is not judged by what it says, it’s judged by what people think it says” (Roman, K., Mass, J., 2005, How To Advertise, St. Martins Griffin). These are the types of superficial ads referred to when Berger discusses the fact that products themselves are “neutral”, so they need to be “inserted into some sort of context to make it arresting”. These are the products that can’t sell when left to their own devices.

Advertisements like these try desperately to tap into a consumers self-conscious, fear of aging, fear of getting fat, and ultimately “fear of being undesirable” (Berger, J., 1972, Ways of Seeing – Advertising, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmgGT3th_oI, Part 2). They use techniques and focus of a particular emotion, which captures a viewer and can temporarily change the way that person looks, feels and thinks about themselves. When this sort of method is put into practice effectively, it can eliminate it’s competition because any sort of advertising that “resonates emotionally stands more chance of inducing a change in beliefs, values, motives, wants and desires than one based on logic alone” (O’Shaughnessy, J., O’Shaughnessy, N, 2003, Persuasion in Advertising, Routledge, p.32).

Such power that a product can gain through the right advertising is portrayed ideally by the first Christmas Coca-Cola ad, featuring Santa Claus in 1931. Before this iconic print ad, Santa had been portrayed in greens, browns and whites, and white Coca-Cola did not yet have the power to just change this tradition on it’s own, it made Santa a chubby and jolly figure and played a huge role in the addition of the red suit due the overwhelming popularity of the print ad. “An important influence on the media element of the mix is how well a medium works with the style or mood of the particular message" (Arens, W., 2010, Contemporary Advertising, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, p.323), and this campaign did just that, by playing on a Christmas atmosphere and changing it.

“Advertising messages differ in many ways. Some are simple messages: “’Just Do It (Nike). Others make emotional or sensual appeals to people’s needs and wants: ‘The great taste of fruit squared’ (Jolly Rancher candles).” (Arens, W., 2012, Contemporary Advertising, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, P.323). Some campaigns are opposite in nature and product but when compared in terms of campaign, many are similarly overwhelming. Two product giants I think are a faultless example of this are Nike Sports and Paco Rabanne frangrances, specifically the ‘1 Million’ fragrance, opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of product and although one is more ridiculously unrealistic than the other, they both boil down to striking their viewers fear of being undesirable and need to be envied.

Despite the fact that Nike ads try to tap into a natural and healthy attitude, they are as manipulative as the rest. They differ in the target audience to reach so many people, from a more natural approach, encouraging people to be healthy and using young, attractive subjects, to tapping into a competitive edge that so many people have. As one of the biggest brands in the world, with such a memorable ‘Just Do It’ slogan and noticeable ‘Swoosh’ logo, it has a huge amount of power over the sports world. Several times in a year, whenever there is a sporting event, Nike is able to exert this power. Some of the most captivating and passionate examples are the advertisements for the Nike Stadium that were brandished on the wall of Selfridges, featuring celebratory footballers. The vibrant designs by HelloVon are, for many people so relatable, especially since teams like Manchester United have 659 million fans worldwide, all of which will have experienced the levels of excitement, anticipation and euphoria that oozes out of the images. Even those who aren’t football fans can relate to the kind of passion and pride that others feel in those kind of moments, captured perfectly in the colours and detailed muscle definition.

On a more superficial side, lies almost every perfume and make up campaign around the world, each implying that their product leads to a better and more luxurious life. Although the examples of this are endless, the TV advert for Paco Rabanne’s ‘1 million’ fragrance is one of the much more shallow of men’s fragrance advertisements, which ordinarily tend to be ever so slightly more stripped down and simple than women’s. Paco Rabanne was originally a French fashion house founded in 1966 by Fancisco “Paco” Rabaneda Cuervo, a fashion designer known for the unconventional materials he used like metal and paper. The fragrances were designed to embody the same eclectic style.

The whole ad hints at the idea of wealth and popularity with women, with brief shots of high-class, expensive looking cars and people photographing the featured man. Rabanne is not advertising an aftershave; he is exhibiting a lifestyle and attitude. Even the speed at which the 30-second ad jumps from one shot to another is portraying a busy and bustling lifestyle of a celebrity. Between the not-so-subtle shots of women grabbing the man from behind in desperation, the glamour oozing out of the gold fireworks, the shots of casino tables, the women responding to his attention grabbing finger clicking and the fact that the product shines gold through the black and white advert, the reasons for buying this product are endless. However, what people don’t seem to see is that instead of this product resulting in immediate wealth and popularity, one will only be fifty pounds poorer.

With a very different approach, Nike TV ads also try to portray and hint at a certain lifestyle, but what they consider to be a natural one. However in spite of encouraging what could be considered to be some healthy competition, the Men Vs Women Challenge in 2009 was also deemed sexist and immature, mainly by women who don’t exercise. Those arguing the latter seem to be forgetting that Nike is a sports brand, directed at those who are or could be interested.

In 2006 Nike launched Nike+, designed so that, when wearing the accompanying shoes, the runners data and stats, including time, pace and distance, will be wirelessly transmitted to an IPod Nano, IPod Touch or a Nike+ SportsBand. In 2008 these stats could be logged on to the Nike+ website, which allowed the Men Vs Women Challenge to be followed worldwide. The TV advert for this campaign included Roger Federer, Eva Longoria, Paula Radcliffe, and Fernando Torres, a variety that allowed the watchers to be able to recognise at least one of them. This collaboration with Apple products made the campaign unavoidable, as did the ease at which people could keep up to date with it. While blogs and news websites launched a battle of the sexes, the TV ad remained neutral, never once claiming that one could run faster than the other but just encouraging people to run. This is clear in the smiling faces and jokey nature of the runners when over taking one another, and the missing finish line, not showing a winner at all.

When this TV ad is compared with the Nike Stadium advertisements, it does exhibit some variation in the spirit and vibe of the Nike campaigns as they vary, while the print ad for the Paco Rabanne fragrances maintains the money hungry attitude, which is consistent throughout the entire campaign. This ad features the woman with the same man from the TV ad, and persists with the woman grabbing at the man, although with less desperation and more possession in her grip than the other. The woman’s hand gesture suggests that by holding onto this man in the way that she does is of some sort of value, namely wealth. The combination of their hungry facial expressions, ridiculous body language, expensive and glamorous attire and the shining product and type amid the black and white image, gives off the impression that this product needs promoting, immediately making it seem tacky, instead of sophisticated or alluring.

The delusional aspect of this ad seems reminiscent of smoking advertisements pre-1991, before it was banned in the EU. All of these ads featured well-off, good-looking businessmen and glamorous young women smoking cigarettes, usually accompanied by a slogan designed to tap into the viewers self-consciousness. The advertisements for Philip Morris cigarettes claim to be made “for those with keen young tastes” and Du Maurier cigarettes “for people with a taste for something better”. Both of these sentences depict elements of status and class, as people want to be part of that elite “with a taste for something better”. Similarly, in the More cigarette ad, the advertisers claim that the cigarette is “more you” and, combined with the image of the woman riding the bicycle, implies that “more you” is prettier, healthier and more fashionable like the featured woman. Berger claimed, “Publicity promises happiness, happiness gained by being envied by others, and this is glamour.” In many cases, with the right advertising, any product can be painted in this light.

Returning to Rabanne’s ‘1 million’ fragrance, the over-indulgence doesn’t stop with their print and television advertisements. The website for the fragrance immediately confronts the viewer and pushes them to join the ‘Million Club’, offering privileges to members and the opportunity to win gifts and possibly a diamond when a member collects four Million Club emblems. The shining type and huge image of a diamond that are emblazoned on the home page trick viewers into believing that, with the potential promise of a diamond, they will benefit hugely from becoming a member, embodying the glamour of the man and woman modelling the fragrance.

It may seem that these two campaigns differ hugely but despite the magnitude of differences between them, the techniques they used to get their products on the market bare little distinction, proving that advertising seems to adhere to some sort of universal formula. Publicity as a whole is made up of convincing but empty promises and it “replaces the present with the activity of an imaginary future, all pictures conjured up by publicity” (Berger, J., 1972, Ways Of Seeing, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmgGT3th_oI, Part 4). In this generation, people don’t just want a pair of shoes or an aftershave; they want the pair of shoes and the aftershave, so advertisers are left with little choice but to sell a lifestyle over just a product. They toy with a consumers fear, most commonly the fear of becoming “faceless, almost non existent” with the absence of these glamorised products, and since advertising relies so dependently on the publics ability to feel envious towards others, without a universal sense of social envy, glamour as a whole could not exist and as a result, this style of advertising could never exist.

Word Count: 2735

Bibliography

Berger, J., 1972, Ways of Seeing – Advertising, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmgGT3th_oI, Part 1

Williamson, J., 1994, Decoding Advertisements: Ideology and Meaning in Advertising, London, Marion Boyars Publishers Ltd

Roman, K., Mass, J., 2005, How To Advertise, St. Martins Griffin

O’Shaughnessy, J., O’Shaughnessy, N, 2003, Persuasion in Advertising, Routledge

Arens, W., 2010, Contemporary Advertising, McGraw-Hill/Irwin

Director: Gore, P., ‘1 Million’ Paco Rabanne, 2010, http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qpj2U8G1gDc

Director: Boiler, J., Nike+ Men vs Women, 2009, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMzFKTqI07w

‘The Marxist Critique of Consumer Culture’, 2009, http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/marxism_and_culture.html

Anon, ‘Is Marketing Manipulation?’, 2010, http://www.geniusbusiness.com/is-marketing-manipulation/

Pallotta, D., ‘Why Can’t We Sell Charity Like We Sell Perfume?’, 2012, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444017504577647502309260064.html