# Subliminal Seduction - Fact or Fantasy ? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 28, 1999, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685 "1999-06-28T00:53:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 1999, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/21 "1999-06-29T18:28:00Z")
Dragonfly: Are we talking about a portrait of Siegmund Freud woven out of straw, with the word SEX hidden in the background? I saw one at a yard sale years ago and said “I want that two dimensional Psycho strawman with subliminal adversising” but I didn’t have the Fifty cents ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 1999, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/22 "1999-06-29T19:35:00Z")
A straw man is a false argument. Basically what it means is that one debater sets up a weak argument with the supposition that his/her opponent will use it. The debater then easily defeats the argument (just like you’d easily defeat a man made of straw in a fight), and puts forward the assumption that “hey, I just destroyed the argument they would have used, so I must be the correct one”. However, I’d venture to say that the only one using a straw man argument here is Dragonfly99. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 1999, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/23 "1999-06-29T20:53:00Z")
Kudos, Ambushed on your treatment of this subject. Many years ago, I wrote a college research paper on this very subject and used some of these same sources. My only objection is to your inclusion of Vance Packard’s _The Hidden Persuaders_ in Wilson Keys’ class. It’s been a while since I read Packard, but as I recall, he argued that advertisers used psychology to influence buyers. Surely this is manifest to anyone who has watched a few TV commercials. Packard may have overestimated the sophistication of advertisers in the 50’s, but I don’t think he said there were imbedded pictures in magazine ads which drove us to purchase rum. _The Hidden Persuaders_ was more an examination of how advertisers used psychology and sociology to present their products to the masses. * * * President of the Vernon Dent fan club. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 1999, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/24 "1999-06-29T23:37:00Z")
**AuraSeer** wrote: > [@](#): > > “You also wrote:…the non-dynamic and non-responsive nature of my one-dimensional psycho strawman… There’s that strawman again. Once again I ask: what do you mean when you use this term?” Dr. Key says it best: > [@](#): > > The heaviest opposition to the notion of subliminal stumuli originates among groups or individuals with strong predisposition to view human behavior in a mechanical-man perspective, quantitatively measurable, environmentally motivated, derived from deterministic free will, and defined by consciously knowable criteria. > The Clam-Plate Orgy Marshall McLuhan once commented: > [@](#): > > “1984 really happened around 1930, but we didn’t notice…” Dr. Key points out that: > [@](#): > > …this could have happened only buy first convincing intellectuals to restrict their efforts to the study of cognitive (what is consciously perceived) psychology, sociology, anthropolgy and linguistics. And so we did. > The Clam-Plate Orgy * * * “Right is only half of what’s wrong” - George Harrison _- Old Brown Shoe -_ ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 1999, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/25 "1999-06-29T23:48:00Z")
Ambushed I will return to your far-fetched reactionary claims later. On the surface they appear to be only nothing more than thinly disguised personal attacks on Dr. Key. ## Once again you rely on frivilous lawsuit type logic and laughable personal attacks (with references no less) than with any hard proof or valid science._Sans cajones_ “Right is only half of what’s wrong” - George Harrison _- Old Brown Shoe -_ ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/26 "1999-06-30T01:50:00Z")
Silly, silly ambushed. You responded to a incredible claim with logic and facts. Bad ambushed, bad. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/27 "1999-06-30T02:23:00Z")
Excerpted from the [FCC’s 1984 Statement on Subliminals](http://www.parascope.com/articles/0497/sublimdc.htm) > [@](#): > > Subliminal perception has been a persistent issue at the Commission > spanning over 35 years but it has seldom required significant amounts of Commission time and resources. That is largely because the Commission’s stand on the issue has been clear and consistent. > The FCC’s position is that the use of such techniques involves intentional deception and, thus, is inconsistent with a licensee’s obligation to broadcast in the public interest. The Commission defines subliminal projection as a technique of projecting information below the threshold of sensation or awareness. > This is not the subtle but overt message delivered by the attractive model selling toothpaste, this is the message that is so subtle the person is not intended to be at all aware of the attempt to persuade. * * * “Right is only half of what’s wrong” - George Harrison _- Old Brown Shoe -_ ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/28 "1999-06-30T02:36:00Z")
I wish I wasn’t such a strong partisan in this debate so that my words would carry greater weight, but I just have to humbly and sincerely congratulate **bill422** on his intellectual integrity. It’s very reassuring that reason, logic, and evidence can still lead people to change their views. I guess The Straight Dope just seems to (usually, anyway) attract people with a higher degree of self-knowledge and honesty! **CKDextHavn** and **Frankd6** , I thank you for your very kind words. It’s nice to know my efforts were appreciated! Thanks! **smegmum V** , I want you to know that _you’re_ responsible for all the little beads of mucousy milk all over my monitor. What a mess! And regards **slythe** “scolding” me for my foolish arguments: I’m so embarrassed, slythe… ☹ If only I had the powerful and lucid intellect of a flying insect! Alas, I’m forced to settle for reason, logic, science, evidence, and reality. Perhaps I should try to get my hands on one of smegmum’s artistic door mats! ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/29 "1999-06-30T03:38:00Z")
somebody wrote: > [@](#): > > “It’s very reassuring that reason, logic, and evidence can still lead people to change their views.” Oh. Is that right? I’m still waiting, and not too surprisingly I maight add, for any semblence or logic, reasoning and evidence in any of your posts. Personal attacks seem to be the order of the day. But what can you expect from someone who bases several redundant and highly superficial posts on a frivilous lawsuit? Who continuously blurs lines of logic? Who can only resort to euphemisms and factual distortions and wholesale misrepresentations? You keep dodging the issues at hand here ambushed. And for good reason. You don’t know what you are talking about. Your “dumbing down” of this thread is simply ineffective but amazing. 😉 * * * “Right is only half of what’s wrong” - George Harrison _- Old Brown Shoe -_ ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/30 "1999-06-30T03:56:00Z")
Hey, folks, I was just passing by and I thought you might be interested in some of the sad-yet-silly history of the FCC’s formal position on so-called “subliminal” messages and images in broadcasting. I’m sure you won’t be surprised to learn that it all stems from the lies James Vicary told in 1957 about his fabricated “experiment” of “Eat Popcorn / Drink Coke” infamy. Nobody knew for _certain_ that he was lying until he admitted it five years later (and very few people ever heard about his retraction anyway). In the meantime, Vicary was hyping his bogus “subliminal advertising” baloney for all it was worth. When people started hearing of what was erroneously referred to as the subliminal Popcorn/Coke “study”, the American public did what it _always_ does with unsubstantiated but “catchy” allegations: it accepted the stories as scientific “gospel” truth! From that point on, any hope of enlightening the public at large about the non-existence of “subliminal advertising” was doomed. **Doomed, I tell you!** Naturally, the public was anxious and frightened by the idea that they might be manipulated subliminally (nobody seems to mind very much about overt manipulation). Though in reality there was nothing to be frightened about, people understandably demanded protection from what appeared to be an insidious plot to “brainwash” them. Thus, they turned to the Government to save them from this apparent technological and psychological peril. Representative William Dawson, a Republican from Utah, jumped eagerly to the rescue! Falling for Vicary’s silly “subliminal” BS as thoroughly as did just about every other layman, Dawson wrote a series of letters to the FCC demanding that they outlaw “subliminal” messages in broadcasting. After each letter, the FCC would reply with more and more conciliatory language and modify their formal position a bit in order to placate Dawson. Then the cycle would repeat. And repeat. The eventual result is that we now have an FCC regulation that prohibits something that doesn’t even exist! Ain’t politics grand? Next we’re gonna have a law that prohibits us from mistreating elves, or maybe ghosts! (Interestingly, a lot of this information can be found in a series of articles at a URL recently given in another post!) ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/31 "1999-06-30T05:43:00Z")
For the record, I’ve decided to start drinking a shot everytime I read the phrase “one dimensional psycho-strawman” or whatever. As of this posting, D99 owes me a new bottle of vodka. * * * “I guess it is possible for one person to make a difference, although most of the time they probably shouldn’t.” ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/32 "1999-06-30T07:35:00Z")
> [@](#): > > In your behaviorist zeal to refute and of course oversimplify the notion of subliminally embedded advertisements, you seem to gloss over the non-dynamic and non-responsive nature of my _one-dimensional psycho strawman_. > > **Therefore I shall resurrect him… as a multi-lingual death head! He speaks and contains tremendous amounts of information and communicates and thinks only in abstract (to some) symbols, relative of course to the language that he is currently speaking.** (I just thought **Jophiel** could possibly use another drink. Maybe that’s the only way it makes sense!) ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 7:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/33 "1999-06-30T07:38:00Z")
D99: > [@](#): > > But what can you expect from someone who bases several redundant and highly superficial posts on a frivilous lawsuit? Of course, the “frivilous lawsuit” was the silly waste of court time brought by your boy, Keys. You are the one who has refused to provide a single shred of evidence for your demented ideas beyond your own obvious dementia. To date, the closest thing you have provided as evidence has been a handful of links to quotations from (the confessed liar) Vicary, the deluded Keys (in which he makes assertions without providing evidence) and a college kid who simply accepts the statements of Keys at face value. I know, you scoff at psychology and the behavioral sciences. Fine. I also read Keys when he first published. Reviewing his original book I discovered a phenomenon that has often been repeated with “backward masked” records: people can only see his images after he tells them to see them and where to find them. On most of the photographic enlargements in the book, it is impossible for a person to see the same thing that Keys claims without having Keys explain where to look. This is on the enlargements where the alleged pictures have supposedly been made large enough to see plainly. We tried it in college. We would show the enlargement to several people. Among the people who were told what to look for and where, maybe half the people could make out some image that bore a resemblance to Key’s claims–the other half could not. Among the people who were told that there was a suggestive image in the picture, but who were not told where it was, only a quarter of the people could find a suestive image and they only rarely saw an image _where_ Keys claimed it would be and they _never_ saw the image Keys claimed was there. Among the group that was asked “Do you see any images in this picture?” with no preparation of what to see, no one found any images. The only subliminal messages in Keys books are the ones that Keys creates by claiming to have found images and then stating where he found them. Utter poppycock. * * * Tom~ ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/34 "1999-06-30T14:18:00Z")
## Another quotation from the FCC statement DF posted (directly following the part he quoted): That said, two things are important to state at this juncture. First, as a social scientist I must note that there is considerable doubt in the scientific community that these techniques are very effective. There is a whole host of problems, stemming from such things as the fact that individuals have highly varying levels of perception, making generalized threshold levels of subliminal perception very complicated. Another such problem is that to the extent that these messages are designed to change people’s behavior, scientists as well as advertisers know that subtle appeals are often more interesting than they are effective. ## But my second point is of more direct relevance – that the Commission’s prohibition against use of this technique by broadcasters is clear regardless of whether the technique is effective or not. In other words, the efficacy of this technique is irrelevant to the FCC. Ambushed, your statement that the FCC “prohibits something that doesn’t even exist” seems overly strong, but I could stand behind “doesn’t even work”. As long as enough people believe \ that subliminal advertising works, I am sure that \ somebody has tried it. I don’t think it is common. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 1999, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/35 "1999-07-01T05:45:00Z")
Perhaps you could clarify a point for me, Dragonfly. Lets assume that images are being embedded “subliminally” into photos in advertisements. What effect will a skull in an ice cube or a skeletal Uncle Sam have on me as a consumer? What effect should they have? Why would a subliminal image in an ad be more effective than an overt one? I know nothing of Dr. Keys as a person, only what I’ve read through your links. His assertions show no links between subliminal messages and buyer preference. Which (I assume) is the point that both he and you are trying to make. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/36 "1999-06-30T18:05:00Z")
Sh\*t It’s a “ONE dimensional psycho-strawman” According to Euclid the only one dimensional figure is a LINE. substitue the word “line” for “one dimensional psycho-strawman” and D99 almost sounds like a rational person, rather than some ranting Art Bell caller * * * \ ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/37 "1999-06-30T20:24:00Z")
tomndebb wrote: > [@](#): > > “Utter poppycock.” Then why are you here? Either you are a _junk scientist_ in training or just sadly misinformed on the subject matter at hand. Remember that at one time \*\*state of the art \*\* science believed the earth to be at the center of the universe and that the earth was shaped like a disc and if you sailed off far enough into the horizon you would fall into the Abyss. Kinda like what’s happened [here.](http://www.graffiti.org/nyc/fchof99.jpg) * * * “Right is only half of what’s wrong” - George Harrison _- Old Brown Shoe -_ ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/38 "1999-06-30T20:38:00Z")
Does anyone here support Dragonfly’s position? If so could you please step in and provide a better explanation. Incidently, your last link labeled “Here” to the wall of graffiti made about as much sense as the rest of your arguments…but I do have an urge to drink a Coke. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/39 "1999-06-30T20:41:00Z")
**Mojo** wrote: > [@](#): > > “Perhaps you could clarify a point for me, Dragonfly. Lets assume that images are being embedded “subliminally” into photos in advertisements. What effect will a skull in an ice cube or a skeletal Uncle Sam have on me as a consumer? What effect should they have? Why would a subliminal image in an ad be more effective than an overt one?” Exactly the kind of question[s] I innocently wanted to ask at the start of the original thread (now closed). Instead I ran into a firestorm of psuedo-logic, pseudo-science, misrepresentations, personal attacks ( directed towards I and Dr. Key!)and scientific-flavored propaganda (read: mainstream denials). I couldn’t help but notice the _San Cajones_ quality of most of their remarks and “statements of facts”. In fact they were engaging me in obvious obfuscation tactics either to misrepresent my innocent inquiries or distort the truth. I soon found out that it was both! As I have mentioned earlier I have read Subliminal Seduction in the early 1980’s but in reality I had forgotten how provocative and ground-shattering his ideas and hypotheses were. Hence my innocent entrance into this thread. I really was expecting a debunking along the lines of “Yeah, it’s there, but it can’t be tested in a clinical situation”, “it’s a shot in the dark”, “absolutely no noticable effect”, etc. I have yet to see it. If these others who publicly state that they doubt the validity of Dr. Key’s work really believe what they publicly pronounce, I sincerely doubt that they would invest as much time and energy as they have here in an attempt to discredit him and on top of that, placate me with shallow propaganda, junk science and threats of censorship. Their motivations to me are cystal clear. You have to look no further than the reincarnation of my one-dimensional psycho strawman. * * * “Right is only half of what’s wrong” - George Harrison _- Old Brown Shoe -_ ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 1999, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685/40 "1999-06-30T20:55:00Z")
Okay, I’ve read this thread, I read the previous thread. I’ve also spent 25 years in advertising, marketing communications, and related fields. I’ve written literally thousands of ads, I’ve gone on press checks, I’ve seen television production. Forget the mumbo jumbo. In 25 years, I have never seen an instance of subliminal advertising. (I’m not talking about the catalog incident that Cecil spoke of, which was traced back to an angry employee, I’m talking about the real deal.) In an industry where we are quick to accuse our competition of everything from shady business practicies to outright crimes, I have never heard of anyone accused of trying subliminal advertising. I have never even had a client ask if we could slip some subliminal stuff into an ad. Furthermore, I’ve talked to advertising people who have been in the business longer than I have, and they agree – it’s a great urban legend, and nothing else. If you want to believe in subliminal messages, it’s okay with me. It just means you’ll be looking at the ad more and more closely, inspecting every word, every photographic dot on the page, every curl of the typeface, every fluctuation in the density of the ink. You might even remember the ad the next time you go to the store. You might even be so influenced by what you’ve spent hours scrutinizing that you pick up a product without even considering its competitors. And in the unforgettable words of Bartles and Jaymes, “thank you for your support.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/subliminal-seduction-fact-or-fantasy/1685.md?page=3)