Advertising is...

Shocked and Appalled

One of the reasons Marilyn Manson was so successful was not only for his appearance or theatricality, but for his physical transformation from ordinary to excessive. He found a niche where he could disseminate his mythos and manifest a cult following of shock-rock worshippers. Shock-vertising employs a similar strategy by using graphic images to sell a product or describe a societal problem or need. This is effective because it compels the viewer to further investigate the ad to discover its message, while leaving an impression that persists after its initial consideration. However, the primary significance of using this method of advertising is that few people are doing this so it
stands out.

Manson emerged in the early 90's when the Punk and Metal scenes were already in full-force, if not on the downturn, but he was able to push the theatrical aspect of these genres in a more eccentric way and he even created rumours about himself to perpetuate the image. Ad campaigns parallel this "affront" to humanity by linking the grotesque with the consumer's desire for things. This gothic principal has had recurrences throughout history in mediums such as painting, architecture, music, literature, and subsequently marketing as well. We as humans are the only species on the planet that will over-indulge and it has taken a dramatic toll on our environment. Our insatiable appetite for materials and experiences has grown to a massive summit from which there is no sign of the earth below, with technology reinforcing such "heavenly" temptations.

Of course, no matter how effective shock-vertising is, it does have a time and place and should be used sparingly. If every ad we saw in our daily lives was some shocking image, eventually we would adapt and even these ads would be ignored, becoming a blur of blood and guts. Also, policy-makers do not take too kindly to graphic depictions and will more than likely point fingers when children commit acts of violence, just as they did with Manson after Columbine. As it is now, abjection is a very attractive marketing tool as it reminds us of our own bodies in their fragility and ephemerality, while our minds become dependant on immediacy and transience. Time will reveal the future recessive affects.

Brand Loyalty

Infidelity is unanimously agreed to be morally wrong by the majority of people, but can such a violation be attributed to brand loyalty? Can someone strictly be a Mac or a PC, or only drink Coke over Pepsi while using their Nikon DSLR to photograph fragments of a shattered Canon Rebel? The short answer is "NO!" for the simple fact that each of these brands offer similar norms and expectations, with a unique approach rivalling its competition. One can easily choose one brand over another based on personal preferences but they're choice may be irreversible down the road.

The USP for a brand determines its identity, but being unfaithful to a brand is more of a hindrance than it is a violation. For example, if I am a PC user and I decide to move to Mac, I now have to repurchase all of the accessories and adapters for Mac exclusive products. This can be a heavy commitment to make, especially with Camera equipment, where lenses cost upwards of thousands of dollars. With this in mind, we can assume that although we have the freedom to choose to switch brands, it would cost an arm and a leg to do so and hence is not worth doing as the various prominent brands offer practically the same product, with small variations.

It comes down to personal preference when choosing brands, however, it also comes down to availability. If I am an avid Coca Cola drinker and I got to a restaurant that only serves Pepsi, I might be inclined to go for the alternative because my immediate association with soft drinks is their overall characteristics, a  dark sugary drink with bite. Cheating on food products is more often committed because they do not require too much investment and one's mood or social atmosphere can alter their buying psychology. I may want to buy Absolut vodka when going to a party, but I might revert to Smirnoff if I want to enjoy a domestic screwdriver. The image that each purveyor creates for its user can be a significant buying motive, and can easily sway our choices.

In conclusion, brand infidelity is possible to the cultists dismay, however some companies purposely make their brand exclusive and fly their banner in the form of a USP, locking customers into a commitment that makes cheating on the brand unfavourable. Exclusivity is the chastity belt for brands allowing them to sink their claws into the consumer.

Rolling in the Aisles

Marketing is a delicate balance of risk vs. reward and knowing when to exploit certain avenues. Humour is one such strategy that is regularly used to humanize a brand and open the consumer to considering a purchase. However, as humour is subjective, there is a risk that the audience may be offended and that single bad experience can ruin years of positive campaigning. This is lethal to a company's reputation and can take years to recover, if at all, like we have seen previously in the Mic Mac Mall case study. Certain brands can make use of humour more effectively but the target audience is the main consideration as to when it should be employed.
A company selling life insurance may consider a more tactful approach as their target audience is most likely forty and over, and the purchaser wants to feel that their affairs are tended under the responsible ministration of a reputable business. On the other hand, Burger King can get away with something like this and live to sell another Whopper which leads me to my next point about the stability of a company designating its ability to risk humourous advertising. A fast-food franchise or a clothing company has a lot of room for playful jest because at the end of the day people need their products. As products climb up the hierarchy of needs pyramid, the more precarious their position becomes and the more they risk an embargo if the ad goes south.
Video advertisements are more often received as moral offenders and here is an example of an ad that is detrimental to the company's worth as a viable product. If gifting flowers gives the impression that your significant other is an ugly hag, how is hand-delivering them going to change their sentimental value?
Racism is another realm of humour best left to Russell Peters and not in advertising. This advertisement not only uses Ashton Kutcher in the archaic 'brown-face' makeup from yore, but the message for the product, Popchips, is completely lost in its desperate effort to incite laughter.
Advertising also needs to consider whom they mock and how it may perceived as a stab rather than a light-hearted 'poke'. This campaign against smoking by the Lung Cancer Alliance was not contextualized enough to link the billboard to the message of anti-smoking and the demographics that were depicted took great offence to the declaration of apparent murderous intent.
In summation, humour is a legitimate form of marketing when used in context and can lead to a humanization of the brand, but as companies that sell self-actualizing qualities that are less imperative to human survival tempt fate with potentially damaging ads, they run the risk of crumbling the foundation they worked so hard to assemble. As time heals all wounds, so does bankruptcy cure bad jokes.

The Kids Aren't All Right

Einstein's fear of "technology...surpass[ing] our human interaction" will soon become reality as our trajectory toward an advanced civilization reaches its pinnacle. At this current rate of evolution, we will be feasting on Soylent Green and living in old subway tunnels dreaming of the colourful 'old days' when food came on a paper placemat soaked in enough trans-fats to slick back our hair. Maybe we will reuse that grease to fill the vats where our brains sit and ferment while we plug into our own virtual paradise.
Food advertising spends millions of dollars marketing their product to the masses, but it is having a detrimental effect on children the most. Today's youth consumes an average of 44.5 hours of  electronic media per week and the modern day babysitter consists of an LCD and digital cable. Food marketing is not only creating an epidemic but also a deficit as governments try to create programs to fight obesity and provide healthcare to the many people who are fighting things like cancer, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. During a child's developing years, their exposure to food advertising can directly influence their product preferences later in life, and there is nothing more appealing than a happy meal...it even comes with a toy! So how can we put parental controls on marketing? Well, it has already started happening with revolutionary new forms of media consumption, such as Netflix, that do not contain any public advertising. This rising trend in individualism and customization of one's own experience to suit their interests is a refreshing step towards rehabilitation and I think that this is one way children can be re-directed from persuasive subliminal messaging while still enjoying their favourite programs. Whats even more appealing is that there are no commercial breaks, so the viewing experience is unabated and more enjoyable. Of course the alternative of limiting a child's television consumption to a few hours a day followed by outdoor activity works too, but no one likes a dictator. Like in congress, solutions arrive with baby steps. You wouldn't want to pull a hammy now would you?

Photoshop Fiascos: When Retouching Jumps the Shark

Advertising can be traced back as early as the ancient Egyptian period, but really got going in the 19th century. During that time many ads were done using paintings of figures to demonstrate an ideal quality for the product being sold. Presently, most advertising uses photographs to promote the product but the idealisation still remains. The argument that arises is whether or not marketing agencies should be held accountable for misrepresenting a model or retouching to the point of excess. Personally, I believe that if the purpose of ads is to encourage, persuade or manipulate its audience into taking a specific action, then the imagery should contain certain aesthetics that defy reality. If a car ad was seen in the paper with rust and cracked fenders, there is a good chance that they wont make the sale. However, when retouching is applied to the human figure, specifically for women, the advertisement is attempting to sell an ideal quality or esteem that is attainable through buying their product and, lets face it, the exaggeration is terribly obvious to the trained eye. However, to those who have not yet learned apparently 'fundamental truths', these depictions of beauty can be taken to extremes and come at great cost. The death rate of young girls with eating disorders aged 15-24 is around 20% in Ontario alone (stats). This is an unsettling truth and something that strikes close to home.

The ideal form has been socially placed using art since the Renaissance, where buxom beauties were tastefully painted in the nude without embarrassment or apprehension. Back then I suppose having enough food to be a healthy weight was a status symbol as it meant you were wealthy enough to eat. This 'ideal physique' fluctuates through time and Marilyn Monroe was a groundbreaking icon who didn't mind showing a little thigh. But it seems as time progressed, the ideal form has taken a reduction, most likely because the consumer had to spend their last pay-check on that new Aritzia jacket and has no money for supper. But all joking aside, like it or not, ads promote an identity that young people strive for and thus marketing agencies should take a little candor in how they deliver their messages and to whom they are directed. As communication becomes more accessible with improved technology the media can be viewed by just about anyone and their younger sibling, posing the problem of how to focus on a certain demographic when everyone is drinking from the same stream. This problem may also be a solution, as people are now given control over their own media consumption and can pursue their own interests. The information highway has no speed limit, at least in our country...so far, and I have been witness even now to the increasing intelligence of our youth. I only hope that such epidemics as eating disorders and ignorant bullying can be quelled by our present society so that future generations can prosper on a self-actualized pedestal of personal pride and self-worth. Without those pillories, we might yet have a chance. Take it away Sir Mix-A-Lot!

Mic Mac Paddy Wack

The first on the chopping block is the "Back to School" ad campaign for the Mic Mac Mall in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia.

This campaign was not received well in the town of its release, and I do see how it could be considered demeaning to young women, but in today's uptight, politically correct society we could use a little controversy. In the case of Mic Mac Mall, I do not think its entirely fair that they take the heat for the 'distasteful' use of humour as it was devised on the other side of the country (Vancouver) where competition is much higher, but as the gatekeepers, they are the first to be burned by the angry mob.

As far as the message goes, I think its target audience would get a good laugh and I think its cartoonish aesthetic attests to the humorous strategy that the campaign was intending. The slim model-like features of the characters in the ad do give me some hesitation as I think young women are too often barraged by 'idealistic' forms, but this is a minor detail that is slowly being resolved in many advertisements showcasing plus-sized models. 

Overall, I think the design of the campaign is playful and eye-catching and the clever use of puns assumes that an intelligent audience will look past the 'ditzy' facade and recognize the aim of the strategy to get shoppers into the store.

Symbology of a knave

The Jack of Spades is known for his education, training and love of his craft; his intentions right and honourable. He also has a darker side, cunningly shrouded in secrecy and irresponsibility (http://www.metasymbology.com/). This blog aims to reveal some of the traits within advertising that both awe and disgust us as we are assailed by the ever-present consumerism that we endure in a capitalist nation. I will be looking at hierarchy, symbolism, psychology and other selling topics while investigating the depths and heights to which some ads go to in order to fulfill their goal – convincing us of what we need to be happy. I will be playing the role of the Jack of Spades, in an attempt to divulge some of my own dormant wants and crystallized needs. I hope to bring this forum into a realm of discussion so that the voice of the masses can also be heard. We are all just cards in a deck waiting to be played to win the pot of everlasting bliss, and marketing be the chips... but you can't eat just one ;vp.