Why is advertising Terrible?
- Thread starter shirkbot
- Start date
I just wish advertisements actually spoke about their products. I see an Intel ad, they have a new processor! Okay, people are... dancing around, they wear bright colors... the end. Right. What does it do better than previous or competing processors? What kind of specs can I expect... anything? No? Just dancing and smiling? I literally feel stupider than before watching the ad, and know nothing about their product.
As someone who works in advertising, i find it fascinating.
There are basically 4 types of brand strategies; emotional, mind share, viral, and cultural branding.
Only cultural taps into "myth markets", which is the story the world and consumers are experiencing at that time, through world events, wars, economic crisis, etc. which makes it the most successful strategy to use.
Myth markets succeed by providing mechanisms for working out ideological conflict through narratives set in populist worlds. Thus when America?s high-wage industrial base was being scuttled with the first waves of outsourcing in the 1970s, Budweiser?s extolling of the virtues of the traditional artisan served up a shot of old-fashioned respect with every brewski to embattled blue-collar men.
When outsourcing began to make its way up the corporate ladder into the white-collar world two decades later, the genuinely amateurish pitches of Snapple bestowed a nonconformist badge of honor for slackers to carry with them all the way to their McJobs.
The thing i find most interesting is watching companies who DON'T do this pour millions of dollars into a broken strategy, and then you end up with failures like the Xbone.
There are basically 4 types of brand strategies; emotional, mind share, viral, and cultural branding.
Only cultural taps into "myth markets", which is the story the world and consumers are experiencing at that time, through world events, wars, economic crisis, etc. which makes it the most successful strategy to use.
Myth markets succeed by providing mechanisms for working out ideological conflict through narratives set in populist worlds. Thus when America?s high-wage industrial base was being scuttled with the first waves of outsourcing in the 1970s, Budweiser?s extolling of the virtues of the traditional artisan served up a shot of old-fashioned respect with every brewski to embattled blue-collar men.
When outsourcing began to make its way up the corporate ladder into the white-collar world two decades later, the genuinely amateurish pitches of Snapple bestowed a nonconformist badge of honor for slackers to carry with them all the way to their McJobs.
The thing i find most interesting is watching companies who DON'T do this pour millions of dollars into a broken strategy, and then you end up with failures like the Xbone.
Bwha ha ha, nice.OmniscientOstrich said:
But when I talked about the power of marketing, ofcourse I didn't mean that every company has the money, knowhow or even the will to do it. I was mostly talking about corporate giants. Think Apple and Coca-cola. Do those two really make products that are clearly superior to their competition? Not really, atleast not in a way that would justify the giant market shares they hold.
Ok as much as I would love to join in the chorus of advertising is bad (and yes, yes it is and well beyond comprehension) People need to objectively understand what the problem actually is. Marketing and advertising on its own are simply economic tools. Tools are a fundamental of our species. However you would not give a 500lb silverback gorilla with a nasty disposition an axe and expect good things to happen or a recovering alcoholic a gallon of wild turkey and expect them to resist.
On the one hand it is hard to dismiss marketing and advertising because we all want to first put ourselves in the situation. We think "Well if I ran a business, advertising would likely make the difference between letting people know what I am selling so they can come buy it and going bankrupt." Because of this it is far too easy for people to be dismissive of the evils of advertising. The literalist mind figures that if there is a rational/logical point that "breaks" the argument right at the very beginning, that renders every other consequential argument nullified. Yet to do so is to purposely ignore the inevitable and methodical march of attrition to the locust like engulfing state that unchecked marketing will always strive to attain.
So the problem is not advertising. The problem is that human kind cannot be trusted to use advertising in extensively regulated and limiting yet respectful, practical, humane ways. So while it would seem almost cruel to prevent small struggling businesses from trying to generate interest in order to survive, It is far far more cruel to infinitely more people to allow it to do what it inevitably must do and create a world of junkies chasing a dragon they know they can never catch
Edit: And I neglected that once the swarm balloons up to these levels, that people allow things to happen they should never allow and by their own voluntary compliance the choices that those who are manipulated by marketing make in turn adversely effect everyone even if they never saw the first advert. This is why the economy is on such fragile ground right now. In western free market capitalist societies we have to manufacture scarcity in order to keep the economic machine going. This is where marketing comes in because it is a vital piece in convincing people to continue buying and paying for things when any form of substantive need has long since been met and filled.
Edit 2: Long and short of it. There is absolutely no rational justification that can provide credence to the existence of a profession that its own economy in the trillions is greater than the largest bulk of existing nations combined when that profession produces nothing and does nothing to benefit the species. That isnt terrible. That is an atrocity that can only be described as a crime against humanity, if it were not that we do it to ourselves willingly.
On the one hand it is hard to dismiss marketing and advertising because we all want to first put ourselves in the situation. We think "Well if I ran a business, advertising would likely make the difference between letting people know what I am selling so they can come buy it and going bankrupt." Because of this it is far too easy for people to be dismissive of the evils of advertising. The literalist mind figures that if there is a rational/logical point that "breaks" the argument right at the very beginning, that renders every other consequential argument nullified. Yet to do so is to purposely ignore the inevitable and methodical march of attrition to the locust like engulfing state that unchecked marketing will always strive to attain.
So the problem is not advertising. The problem is that human kind cannot be trusted to use advertising in extensively regulated and limiting yet respectful, practical, humane ways. So while it would seem almost cruel to prevent small struggling businesses from trying to generate interest in order to survive, It is far far more cruel to infinitely more people to allow it to do what it inevitably must do and create a world of junkies chasing a dragon they know they can never catch
Edit: And I neglected that once the swarm balloons up to these levels, that people allow things to happen they should never allow and by their own voluntary compliance the choices that those who are manipulated by marketing make in turn adversely effect everyone even if they never saw the first advert. This is why the economy is on such fragile ground right now. In western free market capitalist societies we have to manufacture scarcity in order to keep the economic machine going. This is where marketing comes in because it is a vital piece in convincing people to continue buying and paying for things when any form of substantive need has long since been met and filled.
Edit 2: Long and short of it. There is absolutely no rational justification that can provide credence to the existence of a profession that its own economy in the trillions is greater than the largest bulk of existing nations combined when that profession produces nothing and does nothing to benefit the species. That isnt terrible. That is an atrocity that can only be described as a crime against humanity, if it were not that we do it to ourselves willingly.
I work in broadcasting, make my money from ad revenue, produce and even do voice-over work on some commercials.
And If you think YOU hate commercials and ads... you would be surprised how much those of us in production HATE commercials. The only people who appreciate them are the suits in management and sales.
And If you think YOU hate commercials and ads... you would be surprised how much those of us in production HATE commercials. The only people who appreciate them are the suits in management and sales.
I maintain that the "controversial" Cheerios commercial was the perfect ad: Short, pushed forward a desirable trait of the product, had a cute punchline, and was pretty adorable overall.
That was an ad I actually liked.
The problem is, many ad designers are utter hacks with only a half-understanding of what they're marketing.
That was an ad I actually liked.
The problem is, many ad designers are utter hacks with only a half-understanding of what they're marketing.
Advertisement of games is especially terrible in the west more often than not, they follow the same formula as movie trailers often with the same string of scenes that convince us it is a blockbuster movie with action, romance, and a punchline every now and again.
Most advertising is just about getting the brand out.
A bad commercial can still be a success as long as it gets noticed.
Thing is, when you're standing in the store, you tend to go towards a brand you recognize, and won't consider "oh, right, they made an awful commercial so I won't support them."
A bad commercial can still be a success as long as it gets noticed.
Thing is, when you're standing in the store, you tend to go towards a brand you recognize, and won't consider "oh, right, they made an awful commercial so I won't support them."
This is the basis for my hatred of what may be the most evil ad of all time. It was a McDonalds ad consisting of Ronald McDonald dancing through a house singing a version of the song 'Da Do Ron Ron' The lyrics began 'isn't it great how we love our mums?' followed by a group of children singing 'we do Ron Ron Ron, we do Ron Ron'. And then the whole ad continued in that way - an entire song about how great mothers are, with *no mention* of McDonalds at all!saintdane05 said:
I thought it was utterly reprehensible - a blatantly cynical attempt to create a positive association between the emotion of loving one's parents and their restaurant. And that's what the worst ads do - they take something wonderful and pervert it to sell shit.
But that's not to say you can't make great ads too. Consider the classic 'Cog' ad for Honda. A brilliant combination of a marketing message with an enjoyable and satisfying watching experience that made you want to look at it again and share it with friends.
I fully agree with the notion that advertising on a console is asinine, after all you've basically already paid for the "Premium" service, doubly so if you have XBL. If they insist on doing something that blatantly annoying, at least they're making it discrete. I just wonder why that's the only direction most companies pursue. Advertising is, after all, a creative medium and we see creative ads from time to time. It's just way too seldom and no one ever seems to follow up on it.RJ 17 said:
As to your 3ed point, the Podcat actually touched on that a while back. As it happens, nobody has to click anything. Advertising for websites is sold purely on projected page views for the website itself, even if no one is clicking the ad.
I dunno if this qualifies as "non-academic," but I've studied some design so I know a thing or two about advertising and marketing. It amuses me to pick apart ads and try to figure out their demographic and the general concept. And I really love ad wars--when one company advertises some aspect of themselves, and another company makes an ad to serve as a rebuttal to their claims. On their own you don't see the pattern, but if you can catch both and put the pieces together it's rather amusing.shirkbot said:
I think making it more enjoyable would qualify as "discreet." The problem marketing in games often has is that it's shoved down your throat. Ads pop up in the middle of a game of Angry Birds, name brands are all over the place and being framed in cutscenes, foodstuffs are shamefully tacked onto posters and box art. But if these are made more enjoyable or interesting in some way, like the way some video ads now are polls or give you a choice of what you can watch, then that isn't so bad.
I don't really know any statistics on this, but I will say this has always been something I wondered about. What are the returns on Internet ads? Especially like banner ads and such. I've never heard anybody say "I saw an ad online so I bought it." There are a few cases where a banner ad brought to my attention a company or product I might be interested in (like an anime box set or a clothing store), but I can't recall ever buying something that I discovered through randomly encountering a banner ad. Though I can say I have on many occasions accidentally clicked on or rolled over ads. Which sure, brings in ad revenue for the site that's hosting the ad, but an accidental rollover means nothing for the company selling a product if I'm not interested in the product.
And I wonder how much the credibility of the ad has to do with how often it's clicked. I know I would never touch those randomly generated Google ads, and somebody would have to pay me to touch those ones that say something like "Dentists hate her!" or "Fitness trainers hate him!" Those ads are WAAAAAAY to sketchy for me to even begin to consider.
Technically, all words and pictures and sounds are forms of manipulation. I am manipulating you right now by telling you this.OlasDAlmighty said:
1) Does anybody actually like advertising? Just generally and in a non-academic fashion.
To some extent. I can understand that people want their product to be known in some way to the people who need/want them.
Still, I don't particularly enjoy them since most of them are not for me or not for something I want, so they just waste my time.
But TV commercials and internet ads are meant to be a big net where only a tiny fraction of the people who see it will buy it.
2) Why is the focus almost always on making marketing more discreet, rather than on making it in some way enjoyable to endure?
Discreet? The only reason they are discreet to me is because I've been exposed to so many that many ads just come off as white noise to me.
3) Even if it is more discreet, are we reaching a point of diminishing returns from advertising as more and more people grow up in an environment that is absolutely saturated in them?
I can't claim everyone is super saturated in ads, but probably a lot of us here have. And as such I can see a lot of people become quite jaded towards ads and ads keep having to up the ante to grab a strand of our attention now.
But it is a big net. Only a fraction of the people who see the advertisement need to buy into it.
To some extent. I can understand that people want their product to be known in some way to the people who need/want them.
Still, I don't particularly enjoy them since most of them are not for me or not for something I want, so they just waste my time.
But TV commercials and internet ads are meant to be a big net where only a tiny fraction of the people who see it will buy it.
2) Why is the focus almost always on making marketing more discreet, rather than on making it in some way enjoyable to endure?
Discreet? The only reason they are discreet to me is because I've been exposed to so many that many ads just come off as white noise to me.
3) Even if it is more discreet, are we reaching a point of diminishing returns from advertising as more and more people grow up in an environment that is absolutely saturated in them?
I can't claim everyone is super saturated in ads, but probably a lot of us here have. And as such I can see a lot of people become quite jaded towards ads and ads keep having to up the ante to grab a strand of our attention now.
But it is a big net. Only a fraction of the people who see the advertisement need to buy into it.
Apple ads can be pretty pretentious, but at least they normally try to put forward some kind of unique selling point to convince you to buy it. I think in the case of Coca-Cola, it's kind of like the Cadbury's gorilla I mentioned earlier, they've been around long enough and are well established enough that at this stage they could put just about anything together for their current marketing campaigns and people would still buy it as long as you flash up the name. But I suppose that you could argue that it was because of all the marketing leading up to this point that they've become so ubiquitous; hell the only reason Santie Claus is adorned in red is because of Coke adverts. I guess the theory is that the real power in marketing is when you can get something to turn memetic and get people discussing it, keeping the name engraved in people's memories, but I would argue that just because people remember something, that doesn't mean they're going to buy it. Doesn't always leave a positive impression. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sV9NGJP73DE] Anyway, my contention isn't that I think people in marketing are stupid so much as that I think people in marketing think their audience is stupid. It's when they're trying so hard to create that meme effect that they forget to actually sell you on the product that marketing really annoys me and makes me think that I could do their job better than them.A Weakgeek said:
And I agree that there are some genuinely good commercials out there.shirkbot said:
I always look forward to the Garmin Christmas commercials because there's on in particular where a toothless homeless man living under an underpass starts chasing down a car making bizarre faces at the people inside for no reason.
As for why they do it: "free money". Why the hell not sell some ad space and get some more revenue coming in? The company that's running the ad is paying the company that's putting the ad up, so the latter literally gets paid no matter what happens. That's what they were saying on the Podcast. Escapist is getting paid by The Sub to keep that annoying little ad running down there, indeed it doesn't matter if no one on this site clicks it, the Escapist is still going to get paid for it...so why shouldn't they toss it up there? Like I mentioned in my OP, it helps pay the bills and keep the site free for everyone to enjoy, so that's all the more reason TO have it.
But with services that the consumer is actively paying for, there's no excuse: the company just wants more revenue streams. What I was getting at with my #3 answer was more that it costs the company that makes the ad money to actually MAKE the ad. Add to that the fact that they're paying other companies to actually run the ad on their sites and what-not, they need some kind of return on that investment. That's why I said "Someone's gotta be clicking on them". If it wasn't cost effective to make the ad and shop it out, then the ad wouldn't be made in the first place.
Edited to fix broken spoiler box.