It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The world is run by advertisement agencies!

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Have you ever read a book called "Space Merchants" or its sequel "The Merchants' War"?

If you haven't then you should; and if you have you will understand what I'm getting at when I say that this show is being run by advertisement agencies.

I've long held the belief that had Shakespeare been alive today, instead of writing "All the world is a stage, and all the men and women merely players..." he would have written: "All the world is an advertisement, and all the men and women merely consumers."

When was the last time you actually bought a product and not its packaging, advertising and hype? This goes for people, religion, politics, food, toys. If it's not advertised then people think it doesn't exist; if it's advertised, people want it; and when the advertiser tells people they don't need it, they don't buy it.

(I'll not spoil the books for you)

In the Space Merchants (written in the '50's), the world is dominated by advertisement agencies. Governments are sold to and bought by an electorate through advertisements. Real meat and vegetables are advertised as being unhealthy, unclean and poor substitutes for their synthetic replacements. Neuro-Linguistic Programming and other covert idea sowing techniques are used to implant ideas into people's minds. Any person (rich or poor) can be made a non-person in the twinkle of an eye. Sound close to somewhere you know?

In its sequel (written in the '80's), The Merchants' War, synthetic drugs are used to hook people onto products, the forms of advertisement are expanded so that product withdrawal starts even before the advertised product has ever been used!

Both are set in a future not too distant from now. You might argue we're already in the beginning of it. In them, it's treasonous to mock or talk against advertisers and consumerism plus those who oppose it are labeled "terrorists"

You're probably wondering, "What the hell is this guy going on about. How is this relevant to today?" Take a look at these threads:

Meat must be rationed to 4 portions per week

WARNING: Media NLP Danger! READ!

In our modern consumer world, when something is bad for business or progress, it is made to go away:

real animals take up too much land that needs be used for industry or housing, they taste better than their substitutes (so they don't/wont sell well) which they have a shorter shelf-life than. So now we're being told we need to ration our consumption of them. Next we will be told we don't want to eat real vegetables; or

a particular politician could damage business for whatever reason so he/she gets less media coverage.

I'm not looking for replies to this thread, I just want to "advertise" the two very important and extremely relevant to today books. Perhaps reading them you will be able to put today's world into perspective: Government works for business; business works for itself; and advertisement agencies (including news media) make and break businesses. Following that equation, who holds most power: Government, Business or their Advertisers?

Being honest, everything is an advertisement. Whether we advertise ourselves to a prospective girlfriend or boyfriend; or we "sell" ourselves to an employer.

Advertisement in itself isn't bad but at the moment we live in a world where our lives are dictated by media advertisement and endorsement (or not). It might not directly influence the eyes-wide-open members of ATS but be sure it influences those unenlightened and through the many it influences (society's majority) it tacitly dictates facets of our lives. Be it who our governments are/is, how we talk (think about buzz-words), who we date (ideas of desirable traits), what we eat (the available foods), the freedoms we have (what will people give up for security), how we feel (about ourselves, others, other nations) and the rest.

Please have a read of the Space Merchants and the Merchants' War (Google them for their synopses). You'll feel better and wiser for it.

I think it's time we push for responsible media advertisement and endorsement i.e fact not fiction, no opinion, true sincerity, no contrived (specially selected) statistics, no uninvolved product usage (e.g no music to sell a non-music product), no intentional mistakes (spelling, pronunciation, word usage etc), no false adjectives and adverbs. It may make advertisements boring but at least people wont be duped into wanting something they don't need, want nor like; and we might just be able to have happier, less frustrated, more genuine lives.

[edit on 30/9/08 by Rapacity] Edited to correct "wide-eyed" to "eyes-wide-open"

[edit on 30/9/08 by Rapacity]




posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rapacity
When was the last time you actually bought a product and not its packaging, advertising and hype? This goes for people, religion, politics, food, toys. If it's not advertised then people think it doesn't exist; if it's advertised, people want it; and when the advertiser tells people they don't need it, they don't buy it.


Just today. I bought a pack of smokes, not for the pretty camel on the front, but because I like the cigarettes inside.

Before that, groceries. Not because I like plastic milk containers, but because I like milk.



real animals take up too much land that needs be used for industry or housing, they taste better than their substitutes (so they don't/wont sell well) which they have a shorter shelf-life than. So now we're being told we need to ration our consumption of them.


Huh? What's your point here, because I'm not seeing it.



Following that equation, who holds most power: Government, Business or their Advertisers?


You left out an option: the people. Without people you wouldn't have any of the above, both because all of the above contain people, and all of the above are supported by people.

So you and I are in charge. How's personal responsibility sound for a change?



[edit on 30-9-2008 by thrashee]



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 02:02 PM
link   
I tend to buy generic plain-label foodstuffs, as an issue of cost, not because I'm being controlled by agencies. In fact, most people I know do it, family, friends, other college students.

When I do buy pricier food, it's not due to flashy advertising or manipulation, it's because some things tend to use better ingredients or taste better. Example: Buying a can of Progresso that's on sale over a Can of Generic Chicken Noodle Soup. One has vegetables in it, the other is mostly broth. not influenced by slick advertising.

I bought my PC because it can play newer games and runs well for it's price point, brand be damned.

I have a Playstation 3, but not because of Sony advertising, but because I was always impressed with the Playstation 1 and 2.

So I really don't get your point.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by thrashee
 


Thrashee, what I'm getting at is that there are many people who only ever buy in to whatever the advertisement media sells them. Whether that media be news based with an article about an apple bobbing competition held at a festival followed by a well placed advertisement selling apples (endorsement followed by endorsed product); or be it a group of people sponsored to walk about wearing trendy cloths whilst talking about a politician they really like.

I tend to make my decisions based on calculation. Seems you do the same. Many people don't. I'm a big believer of personal responsibility. I hold that when my actions negatively impact another's quality of life then permission must be sort before the action is committed or not. I wouldn't say overt advertisement allows for an individual to permit it because the subjected doesn't know it is being used.

When people do not know their decisions are being directed by others then they are no longer totally, solely in control of the decisions they make.

Manipulation is a form of aggression, a means to force an action or response. Isn't subliminal advertisement the same as manipulation?



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by SweetRevenge
When I do buy pricier food, it's not due to flashy advertising or manipulation, it's because some things tend to use better ingredients or taste better. Example: Buying a can of Progresso that's on sale over a Can of Generic Chicken Noodle Soup. One has vegetables in it, the other is mostly broth. not influenced by slick advertising.


There is a psychological notion that ties taste and branding together. It is called sensation transference. A good definition of this is:


..a human oddity first described by Louis Cheskin in the 1940s. Cheskin demonstrated that people will unconsciously associate imagery, sounds, tastes, aromas, and textures into their general impression of a product, even if such associations are unintended or inaccurate. These sensory inputs create a halo effect which actually modifies flavor perception..


Click the quoted text to be taken to a very good, entertaining example of sensation transference in action.

You'd be surprised how many people buy into the product instead of actually buying a product. I don't doubt that when restricted to a budget, decisions are based on cost. I know that from experience. But those little luxuries are often only enjoyed because of the illusion sold with them.

[edit on 30/9/08 by Rapacity]

[edit on 30/9/08 by Rapacity]



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join