Criticisms and Defences of Adverstising Based on Social Communication in Advertising, by Leiss, Kline and Jhally

Economic challenges It might be useful to consider economic questions separately from social concerns. How might advertising be both criticised and defended from an economic perspective?

In addition, consider these two questions: What is the basic liberal justification of the free market? Why might it be suggested that advertising undermines the democratic nature of a true free market? What assumption is behind this accusation?

If the justification of the free market, particularly in a time when we are ever more aware of the environmental impact of our consumer societies, is that it satisfies and responds to the needs of consumers, advertising could be argued to pose a problem. For if advertising is artificially increasing the consumers “needs”, then it poses a problem for the whole basis of economic philosophy.

Social challenges As well as considering the economic question, many have suggested advertising causes social harm. Make a list of all the ways in which advertising might cause social harm. How might advertisers respond to such criticism? Make another list of possible defences of advertising.

Social criticisms of advertising, based on Leiss et al

False Symbolism Since the 1920s, adverts have ceased to just focus on products Goods are sold not as themselves, but as symbols of social status Adverts have come to “[define] consumers as an integral part of the social meaning of goods” (p23) Leads to an irrational use of goods: goods consumed not for their usefulness but for what status they confer on the owner

Magic in the marketplace Modern adverts promise that products will do something special A magic cure for modern anxieties Although a modern phenomenon, in this respect it serves a similar purpose to primitive mythology

False needs Projection of the insignificant as important Human energy and desire is thus directed towards goals that will not ultimately bring satisfaction Genuine human needs and sources of fulfilment (food, shelter, love, art, knowledge) are downplayed: humans are distracted from what could satisfy them

Propaganda of commodities Ultimate goal of advertising, according to this view, is not to sell a product, but to convince us that it is only through consumption that we can achieve happiness In the Marxist tradition, this is seen as an “opium of the masses” that distracts the proletariat from the task of overthrowing the capitalist system cf. The disastrous consequences of Nestlé's marketing of milk formula in Africa in the 70s

Advertising as Social Control and Ideology Again from a Marxist view, advertising shifts focus away from the meaningful questions of production and instead offers the illusion of control through consumption Advertising arguable perpetrates the inequalities and exploitative relationships of the status quo (advertising as socialisation) The result is a focus on material satisfaction and a neglect of the community and public sphere

Defences of advertising, based on Leiss et al

The myth of manipulation Most criticisms of advertising rest on the assumption that advertising influences, even manipulates, us Little evidence of this actually being the case It seems that while adverts can accelerate market trends, they have little power to create new markets if there is no demand Most companies advertise in competition for market share

Advertising as information Advertising considered essential to a functioning market economy Consumers in modern society are separated from the source of the goods they consume, and must therefore obtain information from somewhere Advertising performs the vital function of distributing information

Advertising as persuasion and symbolism This approach recognises that the primary goal of advertising is to persuade, not inform But this persuasion is necessary in a market economy that is structured around the goal of total employment Rational consumers can deal with conflicting sources of persuasion: persuasion is part of the democratic process (think of the law courts) In the busy modern world, humans desire the persuasiveness of advertising (and symbolism of art) to help us make quick choices

Further oral activity: instructions 12 of you will take part in a panel discussion. You'll all be assigned, with a partner, to put forward a specific criticism or defence. Topic: More Harm Than Good: Would society be better off without advertising? 1. Individual preparation (HMWK) You should research for material to support your arguments, which could either be examples of adverts, or research into the effects of advertising. Use the ideas from this lesson to help you. 2. The discussion (the FOA: next lesson) I'll chair the discussion, and each pair should decide which of you will make the initial presentation of your argument, and which will respond to questions from opponents.

Further oral activity: Details Remember to consult the marking criteria for information on how you will be assessed in this task. 1. Preparation Your mark for the A and B criteria will largely be determined by the preparation you do. How well have you understood the topic? Have you found good texts (adverts) to illustrate your points? For criterion B you'll need to focus on the language of your advertisement. (And remember you'll need to fill in a reflective statement after the task, so consider what your aims are for the task as you prepare for it.) 2. The task During the task, one of each pair should present your initial arguments, and the other should respond to the initial questions. IN ADDITION, you should each present one advert, at some point, to illustrate your arguments

References Leiss, W.; Kline, S. & Jhally, S (1997) Social Communication in Advertising. New York: Routledge