Once advertisement was used as a way to keep the cost for newspaper down. But not for long. As newspapers expanded, advertisement wasn't in the need for help anymore, so then they simply were doing their job just placing an ad in the Newspaper. This is called commercial media, where it is a system for delivering audience to advertise their stuff. This whole point was that the company's trying to sell their products were using the audience as their "market." They basically reflect the orientation in where we stand in the current media system, and work from there.
Advertising is a very useful to people and the information that does the job, advertising, helps the consumers make better decisions on what they are buying, stated John Calfee. Calfee is a former U.S. Trade Commission economist, and strongly agrees with his position, saying that there can't be any negative criticism that beats his. He argues that the Ad's help and benefit the consumer on what the right product is to buy. Advertising is a tool for communicating information and shaping markets in any way possible. This is where persuasive comes in, this provides an immense amount of information that benefits to primary parties. An example would be that eating a lot of Fiber, can reduce the amount of chances to get cancer. So here comes Kellogg, advertising that their article is high in fiber; this makes more people want their cereal, for their own health. Not only can Ad's be good, but they can also be bad. But the whole point is to sell the product. Someone is always trying to change someone else's mind, that the product is better then another. I believe without the use of advertising, no one would know from right and wrong; where to fit in.
On the other hand, Dinyar Godreg highly disagrees. This person believes that advertising doesn't tell us anything. Where i disagree, with out the Ad, we wouldn't know anything about the product and what makes it so good or bad. But Godreg states that Ad's don't tell us anything "new." We the audience should already know about the product, and know from our common senses, but this isn't always true. I do agree with Godreg that us Americans consume way more then we actually need; but ad's only want and make us come back for it. This pretty much permeates our lifestyles as whole. Either way ad's don't really worry about the product it's self, but they try to relate and make a connection to the consumer or buyers. They work with your image, lifestyle, dreams, and emotions. Once the Ad clicks into your emotions, your done. It has done the trick. Human beings only care about their image, and their image only. This is our everything, so if i ad can make a connection and make you look even "better," your going to want. Godreg once said, all the effort can fail or succeed. This portrays our lifestyles, and were are viewed as "apolitical."
But in the end, we all know with out the use of Advertising, nothing would be sold. Not only are ad's helping out their sellers, they are also reducing prices and helping handle money with Newspaper Company's. The Ad industry has responded to many criticism's in many ways, nothing can change that. Everyone will have different views, but in the last line, Ad's wont change or they wont leave. Since technology is being more and more used, Ad's will to. Ad's will be placed as pop up ads, banners, and will promise easy consumption in sites. This all makes it complicated. Both authors came to conclusion that Advertisement will always infiltrate society on many levels, not just one.
I liked your blog, you managed to put both sides of the issue when you states “helps the consumers make better decisions on what they are buying, stated John Calfee” and then you went to show the other side of the issue by bringing up what Dinyar Godrej said, “states that Ad's don't tell us anything "new." We the audience should already know about the product, and know from our common senses”. I liked that you showed both views and used them to prove your point as to who you agreed with more
ReplyDelete