Blog X

ADVERTISING IS…

Do advertisements lie?

Whether we like it or not, advertisements do lie & deceive us to catch our attention & promote their product. That's reality.

Attention Span & Advertising

In my opinion, I think our attention spans dwindled over the years because of the increase in the amount and method of advertising. 10 years ago, the average attention span was about 12 minutes; whereas today the average is 5 minutes. I think that the advance in technology and internet advertising is mainly the cause of this. 10 years ago, the internet was still in it's baby stage. It was only really accessible through a desktop or laptop. The fact that many people (at least people I knew) didn't have access to these devices, made advertising strictly print media, television and radio accessible. People weren't bombarded with as many ads as today. Comparing this to today, we can now access the internet almost EVERYWHERE. We can access it on our mobile phones. We can access it on our iPods, iPads, tablets, laptops and desktops. Wifi is also found in coffee shops now, even at MacDonald's! Almost everywhere you go, you can access the internet. This means that the amount of advertising just doubled if not tripled compared to 10 years ago because the internet is so easily accessible. The average person spends about 9 seconds looking at an ad on the internet. Why is this so low? Because they are EVERYWHERE! I can guarantee that people are so overwhelmed with ads on the internet that they do not bother to give a good 90% a second glance. Based on my experience, when I am scrolling through a web page on the internet, I ignore most of the ads. (Unless they are very interesting) Why you ask? Because there are so many that my brain won't remember most of them anyway. And you know what the companies do? They throw more at you. So we tune them out. This turns into a vicious cycle where we start to not care and they care too much. I think if brands focused more on coming up with a creative ad campaign instead of throwing a whole mess of them at their consumers, they would have better results and spend less money. I understand that this is how advertising works. You want to promote your brand so people will buy it. I just think that is they used their resources into a creative way that will catch their viewers attention, then maybe we would give them the time of day. 

The age generation gap also plays a huge role in this. Most adults over 40 don't use a computer all that often or don't need to access it everywhere they go, so they aren't as overwhelmed with advertisements. My generation grew up in the computer day and age, making it almost second nature to us. We just scroll on by and continue what we were doing. Maybe if they made the ads 15 seconds or less, they would keep up with our attention span. As demonstrated in this article.

http://tomfishburne.com/2013/09/short-attention-span-marketing.html
http://www.statisticbrain.com/attention-span-statistics/

Shock-vertising

In my opinion, shock advertising is a great way to turn viewers heads. The average person sees about 10,000 ads a DAY, but how many do they remember? Probably 2-5. Why is that? Because we can relate to them. When we hear about world concerns like starvation or racism, we tend to disregard it because we think "Hey, it isn't happening to us, so why should we care?" When you see an advertisement that is so appalling in nature, it hits home. In these ads, they are basically telling it how it is. No sensors or sugar coating. They are explaining the root of the issue in a message which creates mixed emotions of anger, sadness and compassion. These feelings are motivational triggers for people to actually do something about the issue or at least be aware that it is happening and it COULD happen  to them. 

Take this Child Services ad for example. I don't think I could have done a better job at advertising child hunger then this ad. It is not only relatable, but it makes you sympathize for the children. It almost makes you feel guilty that you're not doing something to help, which motivates you to do so.

All of these ads may seem gruesome in nature, but I find that if they were sugar coated they wouldn't have the same effect. I know for a fact that most people wouldn't even give them the time of day. The whole point of advertising is to make people WANT to buy your product/service. I find that the best way of doing this is portraying your message in a way that they WON'T forget. 

Then there is the debate of "Does this contribute to the desensitizing of issues that are truly important?" In my opinion, the reason we as a human race don't do much to help each other is because we are too ignorant. We are already disconnected and desensitized from these issues because we live under a rock. That's the reality of it. I can understand that people may not want their kids seeing these ads, but they will find out sooner or later. In this younger generation, kids are already exposed to these things in video games and movies. If people have experienced these things, they would see the issues in a totally different perspective. I'm not saying that everyone should experience hunger, segregation or an accident to be able to see them in a different light, they just need to know that these things DO intact happen and be aware that they can help change them.

Although some of these types of ads do get negative publicity based on their content, I believe it is worth this approach because most people will not find these ads offensive. (Unless they are made to be offensive which they shouldn't if you want to gain approval from your audience) I don't think it will reflect badly on the brands or companies as long as they make them shockingly neutral. 

It is not wrong to be daring or take a risk like this. How else will you gain attention? Some products can't be advertised in a humorous way because THAT would be more offensive. Shock advertising world issues, like the ads above, are examples of things that can't be portrayed in a humorous fashion because the underlying message isn't funny. 

commfaculty.fullerton.edu/rgass/.../Shock%20Advertising.ppt‎

A Journey Into Your Opinion

Cheating has been seen as a taboo for many years by many cultures around the world. I'm not talking about hiding aces in the sleeve of your jacket during a poker game; I mean being unfaithful to your partner. Most people in North America have been brought up to believe that one day they will find a partner, get married, start a family, provide for that family and so on and so forth. Being unfaithful is seen as a sin or an immoral act. That's just it, isn't it? We believe it is an immoral act because it goes against our faith. Yes, there are many different faiths out there. Some take more than one wife, some take only one, some don't even believe in a marital status. All in all, the concept of cheating all depends on WHAT you were raised to believe. I'm not saying you have to believe in some higher power to think cheating is wrong. Most teenagers and young adults think sleeping around with another partner is wrong whether they believe in a god or not, but they are surrounded by an environment who believes that this is immoral, so in turn, they will believe it is. I don't think it is necessarily right or wrong. In my opinion, if you love someone, then you should respect them enough to either let them know, or move on. My generation think being unfaithful is immoral more or less because one person is getting hurt in the end and their friends/family don't want to see them hurt. 

What does cheating have to do with advertising? The fact that many companies/brands exploit this tactic into making the consumer switch to their brand. Why? Because they make themselves seem BETTER. In my opinion, this is actually a great tactic to gain popularity and a larger market. I do not believe that these companies are promoting adultery or infidelity in all forms. I think they are simply recognizing that this is a typical human behaviour and nothing more. Many would argue that this is not only wrong, but offensive. Yes, it can be offensive if approached in the wrong manner. For example, this Reebok ad is trying to promote their brand as being the best sport equipment for getting you in shape. I even find this offensive because they made it very personal. This kind of ad is promoting unfaithfulness. I believe if they took a different twist on it, they would have had better reviews.

This Ashley Madison ad for a dating website also promotes cheating and has been seen as offensive. They could have promoted it using a different concept or comparing different things. There is a fine line between making the ad emotional so the viewer can relate, and attacking their beliefs (even if it wasn't intentional).

Something like this Pretzel Crisps ad is a great example of this tactic. It is not directly relatable to adultery or human relationships, so it cannot be seen as offensive. It is actually playing on our basic instincts to seek out the better brand/product, rather than the weak one.

You are probably wondering what the hell I am talking about referring this tactic to be tapping into our basic instincts. If you think about it logically, we are the only species on this planet that believes that cheating on their significant other is wrong. Why? Because we believe it to be. Every other organism on the earth has survived because they are programmed to. The females seek out the strongest males to make strong babies that will SURVIVE. Where do you think the phrase "survival of the fittest" came from? The fact that 74% of men and 68% of women would cheat on their partner if they wouldn't get caught proves what I have just stated. We do it because we are programmed to, but we are afraid of the guilt and shame that goes with being caught. Many people would tell me that this is a load of crap. Here is a link to a study on how women feel more attracted to strong men when in "heat" or fertile. http://www.livescience.com/8779-fertile-women-manly-men.html

How can women even think this way while devoted to their man? Because this is how we were made. This doesn't just apply to women. The male gender of a species seeks out healthy females to fertilize and make babies to carry on their genes. This doesn't happen to be just one female, they mate with as many healthy females as they can so their species can survive.

All in all, I believe that these ads are NOT promoting adultery, but playing on our natural instincts. I do think that if they approach it this way, they should be sensitive to ones beliefs as to not offend their audience, otherwise, this was all for naught.

(Sub)liminal Advertising

In my personal opinion, if the advertising companies did not want people to see/find subliminal messages or images in their campaigns, there wouldn't be such thing as subliminal advertising. I mean, what better way to pitch a product then to do it without the consumer realizing it's a pitch? Advertising is not JUST about pitching a product, it is about persuading the consumers to buy the product. What people don't realize is that advertising has a lot to do with psychology.

Advertising is undoubtably manipulating people into buying their products. What good would an ad be if people didn't want to buy it? This is where priming is a good method to use. Priming in advertising can be used in many different ways and can induce moods which can further influence how information is interpreted. Priming initially only works if the product is relevant to the consumer. It doesn't have total control over whether or not a product is successful, but it can help persuade the consumer to buy it IF it is meaningful to the target audience.

Priming is an implicit memory effect in which exposure to a stimulus influences a response to a later stimulus. It can occur following perceptual, semantic, or conceptual stimulus repetition. The effects of priming can be very salient and long lasting, even more so than simple recognition memory. For example, if a person was given multiple lists of words that all included the word cat, and later asked to complete a word starting with C, the probability of the person saying the word cat is much higher.

Some examples of priming:

Mood - The mood or tone of a TV show can be carried over into a commercial. Generally, happy TV programs followed by commercials are more inclined to receive positive evaluations by customers. (Why do you think the ads tend to be relative with the change of seasons and holidays?)

      Articles - Articles can also be used as primers. An ad for a large screen laptop generates more positive reactions when the ad is followed by an article on visual quality and versatile functionality (attributes positively related to a large screen laptop).  The interest in the large screen laptop dropped when the ad followed an article about mobility and convenience.

      Sex does sell. It is the ONE thing that every human being craves and can relate to. It entices strong emotions. Due to this fact, consumers tend to buy the products because they connect to our primal needs. (As lame as that sounds, it's true) If the sex aspect of the ad is too prominent, it is generally seen as offensive, hence why advertising companies make it less obvious in their ads.

Here are a few examples:

As far as people having too much time on their hands and looking for subliminal messages, I don't necessarily think they ALL have too much time on their hands, I think some are just pointing out the messages that most people see subconsciously and don't realize it. The Burger King ad is a perfect example. Most people would see is as though the woman is about to eat the sandwich and has a surprised expression on her face because of how amazing the food is. What the advertising company did is hid a sexual aspect in there. They put emphasis on the word BLOW. Some people, especially young teens-adults, will get the hint that they are actually implying falacio as well.

Many films and video games tend to include subliminal images/messages that are not necessarily used for advertising, but are included as hidden messages. They are called Easter Eggs in geek talk. THESE are what people who have too much time look for.

Some examples include:

1. Sex written in the stars after the scene where Simba talks to his father (cloud formation)
2. R2D2 and C3-PO are found carved as hieroglyphs on the wall beside Indiana Jones
3. The little stars on the edges of the Super Mario Galaxy title read MR. GAY
4. ET and his family are at the counsel meeting on coruscant in Star Wars
5. At the end of the Clover Field movie, if you play the last thing said backwards, it actually says "It's still alive" (referring to the alien)

Humour

It is a proven fact that humorous ads attract more attention than serious ones. I suppose this has something to do with the fact that consumers don't like a product to be pitched, but rather entertaining. There is a fine line between being humorous and offensive. I think to have a successful humour advertisement is to include a subject that is generally funny and can't be seen as offensive. For example, the little wrestler in the Koodo commercials is a funny and entertaining way to present/promote your brand name/product. Seriously, who can find a little animated wrestler offensive? If you were to come up with a campaign like the Mike's Hard Lemonade in 2002, where men working labour jobs were having freak accidents and becoming seriously hurt, you are going to not only insult people, but create a bad reputation for your name brand. You also need to take into account that if your ads are on TV or the internet, children may have access to them. Who would want their children to see men being impaled by metal bars to promote an alcoholic beverage? The target audience is the utmost important thing to consider, but the medium in which your presenting your ad is very important as well because other personas WILL see it. It's inevitable.

It is true that funny ads will die out in time, but they DO help brand recognition. Variety is key in humour! If one ad starts to fall off the shelves, add another spin to it, or make a new funny ad. You need to keep the consumers interest and humour is one of the easiest and most effective ways of accomplishing this. I do think it is worth all of the work and risks because humour is universal. You don't  need supporting text to get the message across. All in all, you can have an ad made in Germany and still have the same impact if you brought it here in Canada.

Food advertising and Obesity

Advertising
Some people see fast food advertisements as false advertising because the products in the images ALWAYS look better than the food served on your plate at the restaurant. These "sexy" food images are the product of good advertising. I don't believe that it's the advertising agencies fault for causing the increase in obesity. They are paid to advertise the products, so they do their job. Speaking realistically, if the MacDonald's BigMac  was portrayed as the one they serve at the restaurant, who would want to eat it? If it looks like it's made of fresh ingredients, consumers are going to CONSUME it. There are clearly more fast food restaurants advertising their food than organic/natural food products.

Consumers
The consumer has a choice whether to eat or not eat fast food. Advertising agencies have NO control over that. If the agencies made fast food seem disgusting, no one would buy it, therefore they would not make any money out of their ads. The fact that process food commercials take up 50% of kids television shows is not the main cause for obesity. In my personal opinion, if you let your kids eat MacDonald's and sit at home watching cartoons all day, it's your fault as a parent to have let your kids become fat and lazy. The amount of exercise has drastically decreased in today's society. It is souly up to the parents to promote healthy eating habits and exercise for their children.

Photoshop: Nay or yay?

Personally, I think that this is a very touchy subject and all depends on circumstance and what the photo is advertising.

Metaphorically

I believe that photoshop can be used to portray a metaphor depending on the circumstance. In makeup advertisements, the woman modelling for the product tends to look "perfect" because they want you to believe that their product will make you look perfect and beautiful. I find that this is perfectly acceptable because quite frankly, if the woman  modelling for a coverup foundation has freckles and sun spots, it gives the consumer the image that their brand doesn't do its job efficiently. In this sense, this could be seen as "false advertisement".

Photoshop Fails

Photoshop can also seem foreign in the terms of portraying realism to the consumer. Advertisements for clothing brands such as Victoria Secret tend to be seen as false or fake. The models you see displaying the underwear are surreal and almost god like. By this, I mean the woman are perfect. To the consumers, this is rather intimidating because the average woman isn't 5'8-6 feet tall or have D cup breasts, flat stomach and perfect facial features. In this respect, photoshop has been overused in a negative way. Young women now believe that if they don't look like the girls on the covers of magazines, they are ugly. 

Good photography should only need moderate retouching, not changing the picture entirely to look like something/someone else.

The Mic Mac Mall Back to School Campaign

Regarding this campaign, I honestly think that the message is completely sexist and demeaning towards women. The way they designed their campaign was poorly thought out and executed. Firstly, a Back to School campaign should not be souly directed towards women considering that school is unisex. Secondly, they executed their designs using very insulting stereotypes. The messages they use to advertise back to school shopping suggest that women are nothing but a pretty face. They make women seem as if they are incompetent in subjects such as science and social studies. 

Whether they included young men in their ads, judging on the way they executed them, they would still receive negative feedback from viewers. I think that it would be insulting either way. In my personal opinion, I think that they should completely redesign and plan their campaign in a nondestructive way.

In this particular case, I don't think that the agency gets shoppers at all. The reasons being that:

1. They are only targeting half of the school population

2. They aren't sending the right message across

3. Their ads are insulting

I think ultimately this campaign turned away many consumers, or at least made them think twice about shopping at the mall. The fact that they donated a cheque of $5000 helped with their apology, but I think that there will always be a black mark on their reputation.

Regarding the ads on The Mic Mac Mall's Facebook page and website, I find these advertisements to be a little less insulting towards the intelligence and school priorities of women, but I still find them to be a little offensive considering that shopping is not only for women. They have failed to consider the possibility of shopping to be unisex.