How can we say that TV ads are powerful but the moral content of shows is irrelevant?

I think the OP is overestimating the impact of ads. Think of the thousands of ad hours you’ve been exposed to? Have they all influenced you to buy the products?

I’ve never once been motivated to buy tampons, Captain Morgan’s, get my degree in “Learning the personal computer” (even though I’m generally disposed to lke Sally Struthers), a sham-wow, or anything from the Franklin Mint.

Why should I necessarily feel the urge to disable a guard by twisting his neck rapidly if I don’t feel compelled to send in my gold for cash?

Err…they most certainly do test the effectiveness of ad campaigns. It is a HUGE part of the ad business. Do you really think companies have ad budgets running into the tens-of-millions of dollars and just kinda sorta hope it is all worth it?

They study these things with a microscope.

I know companies evaluate their own ad campaigns. I don’t think they are out there studying whether or not ads work in principle.

I think it’s accurate to say that both advertising and programming have an effect on a person, but cannot be quantified in blanket terms because of the widely-varying skills in marketing/storytelling.

I think it’s a significant oversight to discount the viewer’s contextualization to an advertisement (hm… this is a product or service I may or may not find desireable) vs. a program (I want to be told an entertaining story). I’m sure there are some cases where people tune into a fictional story in search of guidance on how to live their lives, but my guess is that it’s in the minority.

I will give you that the more a behavior appears in our culture (whether 1st-hand experience, 2nd-hand experience, news item, or movies and media) AND the societal approval or disapproval of that behavior is consistently for or against, THEN a person’s acceptance of that behavior can be influenced.

Well…if a company assesses their own ad campaigns and determine they spent $10 million on ads and sales rose $50 million (coinciding with the ad campaign) then by default can’t we say the ads work in principle?

Ad agencies and companies assess these things with excruciating detail. Companies would not spend money on it if it didn’t work. But they do so it does.

I wont speak for anybody else, but I buy stuff when I need or want it, and not because an advert encourages me to.

I think we have to differentiate between advertising’s content and simply generating awareness of one’s product. Advertising “works” by making people aware of your product. It doesn’t work by instilling the belief that smelly sprays will make you irresistible to women or that soap will make your whites whiter. Sort of like television may make you more aware of violence, but it doesn’t make people violent.

Well…yes and no.

There actually is a better effect having the Swedish Bikini Team selling your beer than just showing a picture of the can so people are aware it exists.

Some ad campaigns fail, some succeed spectacularly, most are somewhere in between. Clearly though how the message is presented has an effect. No one may actually believe that if they spray something on women will be drawn to them irresistibly but the person using it is likely using it to be more attractive in some fashion and that is the message they present the product in.

I know people want to think they are too smart for advertising to affect. Fact is advertisers/marketers have done gobs of studies and are master manipulators and understand the psychology of selling. It is rather scary what marketers and advertisers can tell you about you based on some seemingly scanty info. An excellent (albeit quite old now) NOVA episode called “We Know Where You Live” explored this. Quite the eye opener. If you can dig it up have a look. Interesting show.

(NOTE: Once way back in the mists of time I went to college to learn advertising and marketing and worked in it for a little bit post college…by no means am I an expert in this but I did have some experience with this first hand and it is more a science than you’d think.)

People would like the Sweedish Bikini Team with or without the beer.

Also the fact that it’s easier to commit to a new product than a new way of life. If I see an ad for a new movie/TV show, I might say, “Ooh, that sounds nice, I’ll check it out some time.” If I see Samantha Jones having random sex with a new guy every episode of Sex and the City, I’m probably not going to say, “Oh, promiscuity sounds nice, I’ll go burn my purity ring.”

I agree. I just think the bikini team “makes people aware” a little bit more than a picture of the can. They think about the advertisement more often, tell their friends, look it up on youtube, etc. I doubt very many functioning adults actually believe they will attract (or be as attractive as) the Swedish Bikini Team if they drink the advertised beer.

I used to work in advertising and currently work with it in marketing. Believe me, those of us making decisions don’t all pull in 6 or 7 figure salaries (entry level advertising can pay quite low salaries).

Yes, we do study the results. Over and over and over again we analyze the data and then reanalyze it. But all of us are aware of the limitations of advertising. If it were so very powerful in making people choose a product, I’d have no trouble making that 7 figure salary!

Advetising can raise awareness, build a brand image, and influence purchasing. But it’s not all powerful. A good (meaning effective) ad may make you hungry or make a hungry person choose the food promoted, but it’s not like it can completely erase your moral code. I don’t think even the best advertisers could make you kill someone! Only entry level people assume that we’re all sheep who will buy what the ads tell us to.

Since advertising is designed to do a particular thing (raise awareness, promote a brand image, etc.) the words, images, themes, etc. are all carefully chosen towards advancing that goal. The posters who mentioned that the intent of advertising is different from a TV show or movie were spot on. Every single minute we spend working on an ad is spent trying to further the ad’s goal. We’ve had multiple meetings and done cutomer research over one or two words or a model pose. Even after an ad is completed, it’s refined and tested over time.

These days, advertising is losing it’s effectiveness. With all the alternate media out there and new ways for consumers to research choices, it’s harder to find your audience and convince them of your message. Even if consumers see your ad and it intrigues them, they’re likely to research your product (especially if it’s a large ticket item) and find other views that diminish the ad’s effectiveness. That’s why companies are branching out into social media and trying to develop word of mouth campaigns.

Do you really want me to rattle off a list of people making 6 and 7 figure salaries who believed in at least one bit of utterly ridiculous twaddle?

I didn’t realize they were flammable.

I’m sure there are plenty of gazillionaires who will believe 6 impossible things before breakfast. The point is that senior people in charge of approving and targeting large amounts of ad dollars tend not to be irrational and ineffective idiots at that particular task.

Advertising is deceptive because it “gets you” in a hook and your not realizing it.

If I go to a movie with Arnold Schwarzenegger in it, there is a good chance it’ll have violence in it. He certainly has made non violent movies but still I see the name and I am prepared for it.

In today’s world advertising rarely lasts more than a minute. Commericals are often 15 or 30 seconds. They push ideas on you without giving you any background or chance to think.

Now I’m not saying people are mindless drones who can’t think, but we’ve all been taking in by ads. It’s like going to a “June White Sale,” and finding out June White died and they’re selling her stuff. :slight_smile:

One advertising gimick that gets me is the two for one. Especially with food. I see Chip Ahoy Cookis Two for One and I think “I’ll buy two but only eat one.” Then I’ll save the other for later. Yeah right like that has EVER happened to me even once. Of course I’ll eat one then at 3am I hear the cookies calling me “What if you die tonight Mark, you’ll be sorry you didn’t eat those cookies.”

Advertising comes in and hits you fast and disappears. Stories, unless it’s pure porn tend to give background to why there is sex. Or why there is violence.

So that is the difference, ads sneak in appeal to your emotion and don’t encourage you to think. Plays, TV, Music, Movies, tell stories, they aren’t encouraging you to buy things.

Again I’m not saying people don’t have a responsibility, “Let the buyer beware,” still applies but you have to have a compromise

That’s where you lost me.

This is why advertising works to change behavior and regular shows don’t change behavior.

Take Captain Morgan. After seeing the ad, would you expect a teetotaler to rush out and buy CM? The people who change behavior are folks who are thinking about going out to buy some hard liquor, maybe something for a mixed drink, and figure “Hey, why don’t I give CM a try this time?”

With respect to morals, the OP seems to expect that we will change our core values because we see different values on the TV. The most behavioral change that you would ever see is a slight shifting of values, and a slight shifting of attitude, like a shift from Bacardi to CM.

What you really see a ton of is a change in awareness, something advertising is good at. People believing that child abductions are commonplace, causing hypernervousness about certain situations that are really rather safe, but appear unsafe because it’s a good plot point for Without a Trace. There is also the “CSI effect” where jurors expect more from forensics by virtue of being made “aware” of what is “possible”.

I lean to the left and agree with the OP. I think in a few years time it’s going to be considered morally wrong to make shows and movies which depict violence in the same way that no one does minstrel shows anymore.

In particular, the amount of negative depictions of black men engaged in violent and anti-social behavior has got to have at least some correlation with the disproportionate number of young black men in prison.

Interesting question.

Let me posit that the purpose of most advertising is to make you buy something that you’d buy anyway, just from a specific manufacturer/shop/brand. Which is much easier than selling something that you weren’t going to buy anyway.

In other words: don’t buy a pizza, buy brand X pizza.
Don’t buy a wussy car, buy a CrysFordHummer!
When you get shoes, get Nikidas.

Etc.

Not to mention that hell of a lot of advertising dollars are spent on promoting specific “A”-brands of pretty much indistinguishable products, like washing powder, toilet paper, cleaning products - you know: whatever unilever sells.