Proof That The Advertising Industry Is A Form Of Mind Control Part 2

I could have placed this in the first thread, which will be linked shortly to address a particular post, but I felt the amount of information and the context of discussion warranted a new thread.


In Response To Skyfloating

Originally posted by Skyfloating
I despise the premise that says I cant search out and choose the products I want myself. *Snip*
Anybody not know how or where to get a can of coke?

Wait until you get into the wonderful world of chemical/physiological influence that certain ingestable products have on the human being.

Coke, for one is an interesting example. Recall that they started out using coc aine in their recipe, an extreme example of inducing a certain physiological reaction that is then mentally associated with the product brand name. Sinister?

With coc aine, at least you could overtly and specifically feel the physiological need and recognize the cause.

Try researching Caffeine and its' relation to Cortisol production in the body. Essentially, without a huge side note, the caffeine stimulates a Cortisol reaction which in turn stimulates adrenaline release in the body.

What this does put the body into a mostly "Fight or Flight" physiological state that allows the body to be more inclined to react on a more emotional/physical level...or a very subtle physical addiction that is not always directly attributable (in the current conscious mindset of the ingestor) to the Coke (current example). But the subconscious indeed recognizes this causality(?)...

As for the topic, I copy/pasted with intent to post a long time ago. The original url is not valid, but each excerpt, save for a few, were taken from the same page, a page which is essentially selling papers/reports on various aspects of the Advertising industry. A copy and paste of relevant portions of each excerpt should bring up a google source.

As for relevance, the points of ponderance illustrated within each summary illustrates that the thought process within the industry is actually ions ahead of what we discuss on ATS. Some very interesting concepts and ideas are covered and I hope that this forum will join me in picking them apart. I included my own thoughts for each, but do not think that I have a complete understanding of what I am presenting, indeed, the discussion should help me out with this.

That said, a couple of reminders:

- It's a long read. I did my best to be succinct, but there is a lot of information here.
- All Emphasis Mine.
- All excerpted material is sourced from the link (unless otherwise noted) here. I attempted to re-visit the link and it shows as ‘Page Not Available’, though I have found a copy/paste to bring google recognition. A viewable page which these were excerpted from is World Advertising Research Center

The subject for this Comments section is a continuation of the discussion of neuroscience and advertising research begun in IJA 26(1). In the first commentary, Max Sutherland, of Bond University, Australia, and author of Advertising and the Mind of the Consumer, responds to comments made by Erik du Plessis, and Graham Page and Jane Raymond. The second commentary, by Kathy Braun-LaTour of the University of Nevada, Las Vegask sheds light on a growing area of interest in neuroscience and advertising: the use of childhood memories to make emotional connections to consumers.

Interesting. Neuroscience and Advertising bridged together. Who would have thought it?

What is interesting here is actually quite interesting. When you consider that the emerging American society with radio and television made it possible for the first time to have universal associations above and beyond that which is genetically endowed; i.e. specific audio and visual snippets (think a popular commercial jingle or the Coca-Cola logo); then you can see where they may be headed with this. By using popular brands of the past and utilizing the components that made them successful (or just blatantly re-using them) the advertising industry can induce a nostalgic mindset on the new brand endeavor.

And I am sure that I am only simplifying the concept.

The insights of neuroscience are only just becoming available for the study of advertising. This paper seeks to consolidate the contribution so far. Advertising works in two ways: it may trigger some immediate response and/or change the respondent's brand memories in some way that influences later behaviour. This paper addresses the latter process. In other words, advertising first changes brand equity, and brand equity, in turn, later affects behaviour. The paper outlines the four main techniques of functional brain imaging and reported research in this area, its limitations and the opportunities for new research. Whether the contribution to date is seen as modest or substantive is a lesser question than what neuroscience could do for our longer-term understanding of how advertising works. Neuroscientists and advertisers need to work together so that research investigates how ads are processed, how brand memories are stored and the subsequent behaviour effects relative to the intentions of the advertisers.

The insights of neuroscience are being made available to the Advertising industry.

Does that not seem interesting?

Indeed, the above cited is an explicit call for advertisers to work with neuroscientists for the purpose of better understanding how they may influence not only what types of information the citizen takes in (control the questions, don’t worry about the answer type scenario) but how the citizen will likely interpret and react to the information (profits).

I am sure that neuroscience is indeed concerned with the betterment of the mental health of an individual; however, this strongly suggests a possible scenario not too dissimilar from pharmaceutical companies paying Doctors for their endorsement of a particular prescription drug.

What if the drive for profits in the form of the Advertising industry in some case directs the activity/direction/(and most importantly) the interpretations of neuron-scientific research?

And how often do we hear about this research in context to their motivations?

Erik du Plessis, chairman of Millward Brown South Africa, reports on an experiment looking at the effects on viewers of fast-forwarded commercials. Firstly he reviews current opinion on the effect of DVR viewing, and then explains 'inadvertant' attention and how it affects brand recognition and awareness. He concludes that, because avoiding ads requires concentration, the viewer gives more attention to the screen than he would if the ads were ignored. This has some important implications.

The important implications here are the effectiveness of semi-subliminals.

Have you ever fast forwarded through your pre-recorded TiVo show?

You don’t entirely skip the commercial process, as if you were watching a DVD version of the show. You end up seeing snippets of the commercials and what Erik above seems to think is that the perception of the viewer is so engrossed to the television in order to ascertain when to press the play button again that there is a higher attention being paid to the snippets of commercials that are being briefly flashed in front of the eye.

For those who have a pre-disposition against believing subliminals work, let us segue a bit…

ScienceDaily (Aug. 28, 2008) — Although the idea that instrumental learning can occur subconsciously has been around for nearly a century, it had not been unequivocally demonstrated. Now, a new study published by Cell Press in the August 28 issue of the journal Neuron used sophisticated perceptual masking, computational modeling, and neuroimaging to show that instrumental learning can occur in the human brain without conscious processing of contextual cues. My EmphasisSubliminal Learning Demonstrated In Human Brain

ScienceDaily (Mar. 9, 2007) — University College London researchers have found the first physiological evidence that invisible subliminal images do attract the brain's attention on a subconscious level. The wider implication for the study, published in Current Biology, is that techniques such as subliminal advertising, now banned in the UK but still legal in the USA, certainly do leave their mark on the brain.Subliminal Advertising Leaves Its’ Mark On The Brain

The two examples above demonstrate that controlled experiments have verified the voracity of the Subliminal and has found that it is possible for the Subliminal to have an effect.

What is interesting though, is the Advertising Industries attempts to work out how to successfully implement these ideas into an uncontrolled environment. Indeed, the attention of an individual is difficult to keep.

Which is why the genius observation of an individual’s attention to the screen while fast forwarding through commercials is very important. By inducing the attention of an individual to avoid commercials (which most if not all of us are interested in) the variable that is direct human attention is made nil. The entire focus of the individual is now centered. The only thing left is to decide the frame rate of the fast forwarding and which aspects of each commercial are made to ‘jump’ out at the awareness….

The only variables that remain are personal preferences, which can be bridged using universal/pre-conditioned symbols/archetypes and the environmental cues, such as a family member explicitly diverting attention.

The following is a similar study that highlights the potential importance of this particular direction/focus.

This paper will outline a research project commissioned by Sky media to investigate what happened when viewers watch ads at x30 fast forward (as if they were fast forwarding through an ad break on a PVR). The finding was that even ads shown at this speed can have a positive affect on the viewer. This finding demonstrates how better understanding of cognitive psychology, in this case of implicit memory, can be used to solve the new problems. It also highlights why it is not always prudent to take consumers conscious reportage at face value. Part 2 describes Sky's approach to researching the impact of advertising by setting up the SkyView television viewing panel. This not only measures what people view but also in a single source captures what they purchase. This provides a wealth of information, based on actual consumer behaviour, on which to base marketing decisions.

Jakob de Lemos, chief technology officer and co-founder of iMotions-Emotion Technology A/S, looks at the issue of measuring emotional response to communications and describes a proprietary eye tracking methodology called Emotion Tool?. He starts by discussing why it is important to measure emotions, describes what an emotion is and how it is expressed, and how emotions are currently measured. He then describes the development of Emotion Tool? and explains how it works.

I think this to be a very important aspect of the human mindset and how it interacts with its’ environment. Chemicals are essentially (I suppose arguably) electro-chemical reactions in the brain as a response to an environmental cue. These electro-chemical reactions have evolved over the lifetime of our species (why we cry at funerals) and are also environmental in nature (difference between what makes a sports fan happy and what makes a masochist happy).

The above blurb is merely an over sight; I have no idea what an Eye Tool is…great research, eh

Although women are the most important target audience on earth - they remain misunderstood and under-catered for by the marketing and communication communities. So argue Jane Cunningham and Philippa Roberts, from PrettyLittleHead, who explain the differences between the sexes revealed by recent scientific and anthropological research. The implications are immense, and they conclude by summarising Four Feminine Codes, areas that they believe determine the success of brands targeted at women.

This is important as it is obvious that the hormonal make-up of the female sex is generally and fundamentally different than that of the male sex. This constitutes an awareness of the Advertising Industry towards various personality types as it pertains to chemical make-up in individuals and highlights how specialized they are making their efforts.

A major goal for advertising is to have an enduring emotional impact on an audience by facilitating their creation of personally relevant understandings of an advertisement. This is achieved through a process of cocreation in which consumers integrate advertising content with their own attitudes, beliefs, and values to produce the meaning of an advertisement. This article proposes an approach to evaluating advertisements that builds on the reconstructive nature of memory, the dominant view of memory today. The reconstructive view of memory holds that the memory for the same event is different each time it is recalled and that the person doing the recalling is unaware of these changes. We present an experimental paradigm that assesses advertising's influence on consumers' own memory of their beliefs. We demonstrate that advertising can unconsciously alter consumers' beliefs as reflected by a change in how consumers recall their earlier reporting of these beliefs following an advertising exposure. That is, advertising that causes consumers to remember differently earlier (preadvertising exposure) reported beliefs and in which the change is in the direction of the advertisement's message is an advertisement that contains information the consumer has unconsciously adopted as their own and therefore is likely to be personally relevant and to have an enduring impact on their emotions.

This study is taking into consideration the impact a current physiological state has on the recollection of a previous memory. The goal, if I interpret correctly, is to instill a brand with the associations of core personal values that allow the consumer to recall an abstract in relation to the brand that minimizes the variance in memory, kind of like being patriotic to a particular brand.

Or, likely to be more specific, the goal of this strategy is to induce a recollection of a core belief/feeling and to then transfer that core belief/feeling to the brand so as to instill a sense of familiarity and unconscious preference based on personal identification.

Some help on this one would be nice…

Recall, one of the key metrics in advertising testing, has been criticized over the years as favoring rational advertising over emotional advertising. An analysis and reconsideration of the available evidence show that emotional advertising is not penalized by recall, and that emotional content in well-executed commercials can actually boost recall. Strong empirical evidence shows that recall, when used in combination with other measures, is a valid measure of advertising effectiveness and, as the analysis here illustrates, does not miss the emotion in advertising that builds brands.

To anticipate and understand the impact of an advertising message, marketing professionals are looking for new solutions. This paper presents the IM! (Impact Memoire) Method, which is particularly useful in increasing effectiveness during the campaign conception phase. The IM! methodology was invented to help create and deliver effective advertising messages in conjunction with discoveries from Cognitive Sciences on the functioning of our memory.

The creation of advertising campaigns that are designed on the latest discoveries of neuron and Cognitive sciences.

And these advertising campaigns are being designed to take advantage of the ignorance that the average human has regarding their own conscious awareness. Not that what we have here is an entirely negative thing. It is necessary for our society to grow through competition and the economic battleground(at least a large portion of it) is centered on the capacity of a company to make it self heard and to gain a substantial following. Hence, advertising.

But I find it relevant to note that the advances in these fields are actively being implemented upon a human being without their comprehension of what this entails. To have your own memories and feelings used merely to gain your dollar seems like an incredible imposition, especially when you consider that McDonalds spends about 500 million a year on advertising to a nation that many people consider to be over weight. We have Pharmaceutical companies spending billions of dollars, [source], on marketing their drugs, reaching an audience whose majority very likely doesn’t need them. We have car companies advertising billions a year; General Motors to spend ~1.8 billion for online advertising alone; to sell brand new vehicles to people who have perfectly operable transportation, not to mention that this money is being spent on what will soon be an obsolete fuel source.

My point is, people are being intentionally manipulated to do things that they don’t need to do, that in many cases are against their best interests. This encourages a society that is ignorant and a society where the rich maintain and increase their personal wealth and the poor stagnant.

If that isn’t an incredible indication of how a generalized Mind Control works…then I don’t know what is. And if generalized techniques to influence the population are this advanced (indeed beyond many of the populations awareness or even capacity to fathom) then more personalized methods are likely just as advanced, though that is a different thread(s) in and of itself.

[edit on 5-9-2008 by MemoryShock]

Wonderful thread, MemoryShock.

A questions and some comments...

The PrettyLittleHead women who explain the difference between the sexes' reaction to ads came up with the 4 feminine codes, or 4 types of women. What are they? And why do they say women are "the most important target audience on earth"?

~~~~~~~~~~~
I watch this show on AMC called Mad Men and it's about an advertising agency. Here's a clip that I find pertinent to emotional advertising.



It perfectly illustrates the way an advertisment can pick at your brain and tug at your heartstrings without even knowing you.

"Nostalgia...is a twinge from an old wound in your heart, far more powerful than memory alone. It takes us to a place where we ache to go again."

You said

I find it relevant to note that the advances in these fields are actively being implemented upon a human being without their comprehension of what this entails. To have your own memories and feelings used merely to gain your dollar seems like an incredible imposition

and I totally agree. How can we win this fight when we don't even understand the tactics they're using against us or our own weaknesses? If we ignore the ads they still effect us. If we listen to the ads they effect us. The only way not to be effected is to not leave the house and never turn on a radio, tv, or look out the window.

Originally posted by sc2099
The PrettyLittleHead women who explain the difference between the sexes' reaction to ads came up with the 4 feminine codes, or 4 types of women. What are they? And why do they say women are "the most important target audience on earth"?

To be honest, I didn't know the specifics when I posted this. But you (and hopefully others) are why I did, so that our collaboration would help each other. So I went searching...

The Four Feminine Codes

I don't know if the following is accurate, though I suspect it might be, based on the basis for this code to be presented earlier in the article and as well an answer to your second question.

The four feminine codes

We have developed four feminine codes that reflect the day-to-day strategies women employ in order to achieve their Utopian ends. The rare brands that appreciate how central these codes are to female behaviour will capture the imagination of the female customer.

 

The altruism code

This code reflects the female tendency to focus on the wellbeing of others rather than focus on their own individual success or achievement. It is borne out of the female ability to empathise - the ability to put oneself in another's shoes.

 

The aesthetic code

The aesthetic code reflects the female desire to make the world an attractive place. It is borne out of a belief that a more attractive environment is a safer, more harmonious and pleasant place to be for everyone.

 

The ordering code

This unglamorous code reflects the female belief that order offsets risk and creates harmony. Women's tendency to take on responsibilities like the running of the home, family matters and the meticulous planning of events are evidence of the ordering code.

 

The connecting code

The connecting code is concerned with the female need to build relationships and communities, the desire to draw people together and find common ground between them. Businesses that recognise the power of communities in building or destroying brands and use female networks to help provide momentum for the growth of their brands will benefit from 'free' marketing. They will also develop deeper, more commercially rewarding relationships with the audience.
What Women Want

And there they are. Check out the article and read the supportive advertising companies and corporate success that these 'codes' were based upon.

And why does the source you reference consider women the most targeted audience in the world?

My first impression would be to answer on my thoughts. I think the fact that women, historically being the oppressed sex, have finally stepped beyond that label and are now a viable source of economic attention. Consider the industrial revolution; women were nothing doing in finance and the cultivation of an industrial and financially fluent reality.

Modern day sees the necessity of women being apart of every aspect of our economic reach. Palin may or may not see the White House (I have no preference) but she is an example of a female in the upper echelon of percieved status quo.

But for an advertising answer...from the same link posted above...

Women make 80% of all consumer goods decisions, and are fast becoming the most important target audience on earth. By 2025, women will be richer than men and own 60% of the UK's personal wealth, according to female-oriented site Baglady. In the US, the female economy - worth $5tn (£2.6tn) - now makes up more than half the US GDP. Internationally, women contribute more than 40% of the developed world's GDP, says brand consultant Tom Peters.

Simply...women make and spend money...more than they have ever in the past.

Originally posted by sc2099
and I totally agree. How can we win this fight when we don't even understand the tactics they're using against us or our own weakness?

That is what makes the internet so important.

One thing I did not state about the advertising examples I gave above is that everyone is trying to gain the attention of our minds. Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Nabisco, etc can't all win. Their weakness is their competition...as well as the now burdgening communication medium that is the internet.

In order to win the fight, you need only want to be inquisitive. We need to question why we behave and purchase the way we do. We need to ask questions to ourselves about ourselves.

And never rely on a pharmaceutical advertisment to tell us that we may have problems.

[Simply...women make and spend money...more than they have ever in the past. ]

Good post
Hey I resent that remark lol ..But it could be because you men wont do the shopping for the house so we have to and then while there ..you know we need a few more things lol .

Originally posted by Simplynoone
[Simply...women make and spend money...more than they have ever in the past. ]

Good post
Hey I resent that remark lol ..But it could be because you men wont do the shopping for the house so we have to and then while there ..you know we need a few more things lol .

I think you may misunderstand. It's not about the personal interaction between a male and a female.

It's about the concerted effort of the media to influence and even disrupt the interaction of the male and female.

Which isn't necessarily a negative thing, but consider the amount of attention they are placing into sociological reaction/interaction and then tell me it's all about 'You forgot the Sesame Oil, Honey!"

Seriously, I am not discussing petulant relations between the sexes...as Big Advertising doesn't really care who you/I are/am.

They want to know how to influence us all.

I was kidding .
Sorry I didnt mean to derail your post and I know you didnt mean it that way.

I thought this post was good .

reply to post by Simplynoone


No worries...

This is just a subject that I take seriously, I of course didn't intend to jump all over your post..

I have nothing to add to what you wrote. Good job. However, this is what spontaneously comes to mind on the subject...


There´s also a benefit to all this though, as cold-blooded as it may sound: By studying the advertising industries methods, who are desperate for attention, we ourselves can learn a thing or two about behaviour and techniques that might be advantageous for us in daily life...say to get a job or be flirtatious, or convince people of something.

The only thing I am missing with some of these hardcore-advertisers is a sense of conscience.

I once recall posting something here a long time ago, of which I later found it was false information. People had congratulated me on the info, and swallowed it unquestioningly. I was filled with a sense of shame and a promise to myself to double-check my sources before ever posting anything again.

Why is this sense of responsibility lacking in some of these advertisers? What kind of mentality is it that takes any random product and tries to force-brainwash it into our minds?

Why on earth would I want to take - say a certain toothpaste brand - and use latest neuroscience technologies to forever implant the desperate need for that toothpaste into peoples souls? Why? Well, money obviously. But why work for a boss who demands that of me?

I´d come home from my PR-job feeling awful.

Originally posted by MemoryShock
Seriously, I am not discussing petulant relations between the sexes...as Big Advertising doesn't really care who you/I are/am.

They want to know how to influence us all.

I thought everyone knew that the whole idea of advertising was to influence behavior, specifically consumer behavior, i.e., buying habits.

Would industry sink billions into advertising, if there were not at least the reasonable expectation that people were being influenced at least to consider a given product?

Almost all Americans have a television in their homes that are beaming out consumer messages almost all the time. Films are full of product placements.

I'm not arguing with the premise here, but doesn't it really go without saying that business is all about selling products and that advertising is meant to get you to buy those products?

Advertising may be a conspiracy, but it's hardly a secret and it's hardly new. Everything from a NASCAR race to a painted barn on the side of a highway is meant to influence human behavior.


[edit on 2008/9/6 by GradyPhilpott]

Reply to Grady:

Yes, but once we become aware of it, its no longer as effective...which is why advertisers go looking for new methods we dont know about yet. Check out MemoryShocks look at the marrgiage between neuroscience and advertising.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I'm not arguing with the premise here, but doesn't it really go without saying that business is all about selling products and that advertising is meant to get you to buy those products?

Indeed, it does go without saying to state that companies want to make money and therefore will spend money on Advertising.

The point of this thread isto illustrate just how advanced theeir techniques are and how little chance an uninformed individual has to actually have free will where consumer habits are concerned.

I recommend going back and looking at some of the issues presented...we're talking subliminal possibilities (I provided proof of subliminals as well) and other very subtle means to gain the attention of people.

Seriously...if they can do this on a generalized scale, what happens when society shrinks even further and the individual is interacted with on a one to one basis. By stimulating specific physiological reactions, the uninformed/uneducated individual may have capacity to resist.

The internet advertising is starting to look like the greatest advertising playground as this 'one on one' interaction is already starting to take hold...

We are out gunned when it comes to 'psychological warfare'...that is what I am illustrating...

When John Watson had an affair with one of his young assistants, he lost his standing in the academic community as a psychologist and turned to Madison Avenue to make a living.

He is not only the father of modern behaviorism, but also the father of the scientific use of psychology to sell products.

en.wikipedia.org...

As much as industry and science might try to influence us without our realizing it, there is a strong cognitive component in selling that cannot be ignored and we can control to some extent how much we are influenced by these forces.

Still, we are often convinced that we will be better served by a $40,000 Acura than we would be by a $20,000 Honda or a $7000 Rolex instead of a $30 Timex.

In my opinion, the best way to avoid undue influence is to cut off the flow of passive information and let those cognitive juices flow, so that if we do decide that the Rolex is better than the Timex, we know that it was a rational decision in which all factors were weighed, rather than an emotional or reactive one.

Nonetheless, when the time comes for me to buy, as I will soon, a new laptop, I will turn in no small measure to manufacturer advertising to make a decision on which one I will buy. I will try not to be influenced by such claptrap as the Apple commercials with the cool guy and the frumpy one and instead rely on data, not only from manufacturers, but also third parties.

Commerce is a large part of our lives and the more we know about this stuff the better.

Good series, MemoryShock.



[edit on 2008/9/6 by GradyPhilpott]

I pretty much agree. If we can take a time-out in the moment of knee-jerk-reaction, we can become immune to most of it.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Reply to Grady:

Yes, but once we become aware of it, its no longer as effective...which is why advertisers go looking for new methods we dont know about yet. Check out MemoryShocks look at the marrgiage between neuroscience and advertising.

I have to disagree. Some people know they are being pandered/lied to but they just want the happiness that the product is offering so badly that they don't care if it's a lie. Contradictory I know, but it's true.

For example, in my thread on beauty, it was talked about how some women want to feel beautiful so badly that they will spend endless amounts of money on drawers full of products that they think will help them achieve this. They know advertising is nothing but telling them what they want to hear so they will buy the product, yet they still buy it. The message still hits home even though they know it is slanted at best and completely false at worst.

It's not as if advertising only effects dummies. Smart people fall for it too. They hear the words and see the pictures...realize it's BS...then buy the product anyway to get that satisfaction. Authentic neuroscience and emotional advertising make the suggestions of advertisements so hard to discern from your acutal ration-based thoughts about a product that it might be impossible.

Even though I probably risk my job when I do it, I try and remind every customer at Wal-Mart about this subject that brings uop the question "which is the better brand?"

Well sir/maddam, considering most consumer electronics products of similar function are now assembled in the same factories overseas, the question of brand integrity is based more on how much money that company spends to convince you it is better, and that is typically reflected in the higher priced product.

The phillips may or may not be better than the RCA, but the most logical reason it costs more is that they spend more to convince you they are better, while not necessarily true.

trust me I have this conversation several times a week at Wal-Mart, sometimes in Spanish. In the end I usually end up selling the cheaper product.

Now considering I work @ wal-mart, this could actually be a direct tactic to make you buy an inferior product that will fail on you and henceforth you will come in to replace such product. Does this tickle your mind?

Well consider that the higher rate of failure of cheaper products may not necessarily b a result of bad manufacturing process. It may very well be that since the product is significantly cheaper, much more of that product is produced abd sold. Therefore since there are a higher volume of that product in circulation, there will be more failures in total, but not necessarily per lot.

Funny thing is many times when I reccomend the cheaper brand, the customer feels inclined and does end up purchasing at least the next product up the line.

Is any of this relevant to the topic? I hope so.

reply to post by sc2099


*sigh*...victims of the cosmetics industry...a whole sub topic I could rant on about for hours...which is why I wont

Great post! tons of info!

i don't remember seeing it anywhere in the OP(I need to go and read the first part I'll edit if i find it).

I recall reading something a few years ago about Coke playing around with a kind of subliminal messaging technique....

They started by setting the vending machines to make a certain very high or very low noise right out side of the human range of hear to go off when ever you bought a soda.

The second part after however long they exposed the people to this they started to play this sound when ever some walked by the machine to see if it would make the average person that had already heard the sound a few times more likely to stop and get a drink.

i don't know if this ever worked out or if they had or are even doing it. I've never heard anything else on after originally seeing it.

Am I just crazy and make this up in my head or has someone else heard of this?

Peace

Justice

Let me just say... Derren Brown ...... check out some of his stuff and you'll see exactly how it's done.

I spent some time with the Derren Brown youtubes...interesting material. I am, of course, interested in the possibility of scripted material, especially since some of his highlighted material almost screams, "WTF?!?"...but he may just be legit....



For reference, after a few of his videos and then viewing the one I am posting here, I was able to determine the chamber the bullet was placed in. There is an irregularity in the 'witnesses' "calm and even" countdown that gives it away...

I had to replay it to be certain...but ladies and gentlemen...if this guy is for real, then the industry is surely even beyond our means and this topic and variations thereof are the most important in our experience..

[edit on 17-9-2008 by MemoryShock]

Fascinating post and I've only begun reading it. I hope I'm not too off-topic here, but the general subject matter and your early mention of Coca-Cola in the post led me to think this might be a good place to share something I've been reading over the past few weeks.

This is a series of articles about branding, specifically using Coke as an example. It doesn't illuminate the actual techniques of mind control too well, but I think it helps to show the effectiveness of these techniques.

[edit to add: sorry, I guess you have to log in to this site to access the articles. It's free and not a bad idea if you like to keep up with what's going on in the advertising world. I've added enough excerpts to give you the gist, but let me know if anyone wants me to re-post more. U2U would be best.]

For Coke, Brand Love is Blind

There's More to Coke's Brand than Taste

Branding by Word of Mouth

I found the first two most interesting.

If Pepsi was chosen by the majority of people in a blind taste test, why did Coke have the lion's share of the cola market? It didn't make sense. If Pepsi tasted better, why wasn't it the market leader?

Fortunately, Read wasn't just any cola consumer idly pondering the mysteries of brown sugared water. He had at his disposal a rather innovative methodology to explore his "why" question. Dr. Read Montague was the director of Baylor University's Neuroimaging Lab and he just happened to have a spare multi-million dollar MRI machine kicking around. MRI machines allow us to see which parts of the brain "light up" when we undertake certain activities.

The strongest brands evoke a visceral response, beyond the reach of reason, coloring our entire engagement and relationship with them. It doesn't matter if these brands are better than their competitors. The important thing is that we believe they are better, and these beliefs are reinforced by emotional cues.

In one group, they provided two sips, one of Pepsi, the other also of Pepsi, but in an anonymous presentation with participants being told that the second sip could be either Coke or Pepsi. In the second group, the same thing was done, but this time it was Coke that was both the identified and anonymous drink. Then participants were asked to state their preference. In the Pepsi group, about half the group chose Pepsi and there was no strong preference over the anonymous drink (also Pepsi). But in the Coke group, the respondents overwhelmingly chose Coke over the mystery cola (also Coke).

[edit on 18-9-2008 by shipovfools]