Advertising: Set Us Free!Essay Preview: Advertising: Set Us Free!Report this essayMarlene sits her size three seventeen year old body in front of her television. An ad promoting dietary pills pops up after her programming. She sees a woman with a firm stomach and a tight gluteus standing near a pool smiling and wearing a quite revealing bikini. Marlene walks to her mirror and wonders to herself why she doesnt look that way. Should she go on a diet? Many people are negatively affected by the advertising industry on a daily basis. The average person views about three thousand ads a day and about forty thousand ads a year from television, the Internet, magazines, and even in schools. Advertisers influence various consumer groups to purchase goods and services by as slipping in subliminal messages, taking advantage of ones hidden fears, and by getting the consumers attention in unusual ways.
When one goes into a movie theatre they hope to sit back and relax; enjoy their movie. The lights dim and the advertisements come on. An unexpected flash of coca cola and a bag of popcorn fly across the screen for a quick three seconds. All of a sudden, that person has a craving for the buttery popcorn and the refreshing cold soft drink. They get up, along with a few others to race to the snack bar. “Subliminal Seduction,” in Stay Free, by Carrie McLauren, Vance Packard refers to a New Jersey cinema that had ads like these, “(These) ads–exhortations to ÐEat Popcorn and ÐDrink Coca-Cola–were invisible to the naked eye but supposedly influenced viewers subconsciously.” (Vance Packard, Stay Free) As a result, “By the use of subliminal messages, movie theatres increase their popcorn sales by precisely 57.5 percent, and Coca-Cola sales by 18.1 percent” (McLauren). Not only are people given subliminal messages in movie theatre ads, they are also beginning to be embedded in television shows. In Lianna Georges article, “Is Kiefer Sutherland Trying to Sell You Something?” found in Macleans, she mentions how many corporations try to get deals with television shows to have their brands cited into the storylines. Ford signed a multi-million-dollar contract with the Fox hit series 24. Jack Bauer, the host, uses Fords automobiles to add action in his show. He can do anything he wants, as long as there isnt any, “bad guys driving Fords”(George, Macleans). Another example of embedment is how, “A recent episode of ABCs Desperate Housewives involved a lead character taking a job as a spokesmodel for Buick, a major show advertiser (George). Of course all this advertising is getting to consumers as the above mentioned companies are booming and making money from left to right. Subliminal messages are not only used to make the consumer buy their product, but also to alter the way vote. “A Republican TV ad targeting the Democrats came under fire for showing the word “RATS” for a split second,” Laura Ungar states in, “Can Subliminal Messages Determine the Way You Think, Shop,-Or Vote” (Oct.2000 News Journal). By that ad alone, somebody can acquire a negative feeling that may alter their future decision on what Presidential candidate they want to vote for. That isnt fair for either the consumer or the candidate. The Federal Communications Commission also provides the fact that they have caught radio stations that “Ðput short, barely audible phrases, also known as Ðphantom spots into broadcasts, faced in under musical recordings or dropped into pauses in quick, low voices” (Ungar). Many of these articles are deceptive to consumers and can cause them to have a second view on a subject. Taken as a whole, subliminal advertising is bad for consumers as it tricks their minds into purchasing, thinking, and judging, the products being brought forth to them.
Face it; many Americans are scared to death because of advertisers bringing up how something negative might happen if they dont use their product. John E. Calfee in, “Triumph of the Consumer: How Advertising Informs to Our Benefit” located in April 1998s Consumers Research, states, “Products and their problems bring into play one of the most important ways in which the competitive market induces sellers to serve the interests of buyers. No matter what the product, there are usually brands that are Ðless bad than the others” (Calfee, Consumers Research). Calfee also provides an example of how at first the tobacco industry said that cigarettes were safe. Camel used to say “Smoke our brand all you want.” Then in the early 1950s medical reports on smoking and lung cancer reached the public. “Small brands could not resist the temptation to use advertising to scare smokers into switching brands” (Calfee). They took advantage of the naДЇve consumers by saying how if they were to use their brand, they would not be affected in the nose, throat or accessory organs. Advertisers try to scare consumers into switching brands or going with their brand to, of course, make more money. “In 1991, when Americans were worried about insurance companies going broke, a few insurance firms advertised that they were more solvent than their competitors (Calfee). Consumers are
BIGGEST EXPENDITURES FOR DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER ADS(U.S. prescription drugs 1998)DRUG WHAT IT TREATS AD EXPENDITUREClaritin allergies $185.1 millionPropecia baldness 92.0 millionZyrtec allergies 75.6 millionZyban smoking 64.4 millionPravachol high cholesterol 59.7 millionAllegra allergies 52.5 millionPrilosec ulcers 49.7 millionZocor high cholesterol 44.5 millionEvista osteoporosis 42.3 millionProzac depression 41.1 milliondesperate and idiotic, when they fall for these kinds of hoaxes, they should know about theirsurroundings and be aware of comparative advertising. But because of the fear, they were connived into switching services. Medicine industries also scare consumers into buying their products.
Lifestyle
Dr. William H. H. Pousely in a statement:
“As an independent chemist, I’ve worked with numerous different suppliers, the largest of which is Bayer Proust. “If consumers do not feel certain about the level of their drug, they should visit a reputable supply dealer or one of the following three trusted suppliers:
Bayer Proust. FDA Approved, FDA-approved for the treatment of diabetes, cancer, and other inflammatory disorders.
Patented and patented.
U.S. Patent No. 3,5008,564.1 and U.S. Pat. No. 8,0009,037.
Patent No. 6,5008,533.
The FDA was the subject of a recent lawsuit by the consumer organization, Manufacturers United for Life, claiming that the drug company’s marketing for insulin, which is used to treat several types of diabetes, is making consumers believe that this is such a drug is a fake.
FDA claims the FDA created a fake name after consumers took it out of stores and read the manufacturer’s website (and then went to a website where the FDA approved it) and then received it legally, in a package containing ingredients identical to some generic versions of the drug.
The FDA said most of the generic version appeared to contain a chemical called beta-amylitol, which caused its labeling to change and its use banned.
“It had to be carefully vetted for safety to use as an insulin product,” FDA Acting Administrator David Lesh said in a press release.
On July 19, Dr. Pousely said in a statement:
“In light of today’s developments, we are looking for action and clarification of our legal position and our obligation to ensure the safety of all drugs manufactured as part of the U.S. Pharmacopoeia, as well as all our existing patents, patent applications, and legal practices.”
He said Bayer’s generic versions of the drug have sold for $75 to $300. In response to a reader question about the issue, Bayer’s CEO said he does not think the company is involved here.
Another question:
“Was this actually the fake FDA name for the drugs Bayer gave us? For more information: http://www.bayer.com/drugs/products/new-genuine-lactate-drugs-themed.”
As an FDA chemist, this “fake” labeling was not approved for the