http://mediainfluences08.blogspot.com/search?

q=Ideology+and+Advertising+
Prof. Lisa Burns' "Media Influence" Spring 2008 class at Quinnipiac University.

Monday, March 17, 2008

Ideology and Advertising
Posted on behalf of Carissa Alfino: Chapter 27 in the McQuail Reader states that Advertisements are one of the most important cultural factors moulding and reflecting our life today. They are ubiquitous, an inevitable part of everyones lives: even if you do not read a newspaper or watch television, the images posted over our urban surroundings are inescapable(299). In the same chapter, McQuail also states that advertising has two functions. The first is obvious-to sell us something. But the second function is more complex, as it projects advertising as a creator of structures of meaning. In other words, the goals of advertising are more complex than the average person realizes. In order to make a direct connection between advertising and ideology, I would like to give you a description of the true meaning of ideology. Ideology is defined as The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or culture (Dictionary.com). With this being said, the connection between advertising and ideology becomes clear and so does the deeper meaning of advertising. When a product is advertised it is projected onto the public in a way that will have meaning to consumers. When consumers purchase a particular product, elements such as social status, class, and culture are represented through their purchase. People identify their lifestyles by the products which they consume. Chapter 27 of the McQuail reader helps to explain this phenomenon. An attempt to differentiate amongst both people and products is part of the desire to classify, order, and understand the world, including ones own identity(300). With that being said, do you guys associate your class or social status according to the products that you purchase? And if you do, do you think that purchasing products of a lesser value than youre used to will actually lower your social status? When contemplating these questions, keep in mind what McQuail says in chapter 27. We are made to feel that we can rise and fall in society through what we are able to buy, and this obscures the actual class basis that still underlies social position. The fundamental differences in our society are still class differences, but use of manufactured goods as a means of creating classes or groups forms an overlay on them (300). To reinforce this idea, I found an article online entitled Advertising as Ideology: Black Women, Fat Men and the Pepsi Generation (http://www.nearfm.ie/plm11.htm). The article explains how ads sell you a lifestyle associated with the product you are purchasing. They gave Pepsi advertisements as an example. Pepsi is the signified, while the antics of the Pepsi Generation are the signifiers. People are encouraged to purchase the right product and assume (or hope) that these products will signify a certain social class, status or lifestyle. The article also gives an explanation as to why products are associated with lifestyles and class structures. In order to make a connection, it is important to observe all aspects of an ad, especially the people in it promoting the products. The article states that most ads have the same general make up. They consist of young, thin, Caucasian, and good looking men and women. Do you think the people who are promoting products in advertisements affect the product that you buy? For example, if you are white, thin, and good looking, would you purchase a product being promoted by someone who is Hispanic and overweight?

We often buy products which are promoted by people who seem to be in the same social class as us, and if we do not we are only looking to purchase products which are of a higher quality than we can afford because as McQuail stated in the reader, we feel that we succeed or fold in society based on what we are able to buy. The same goes for our news consumption. This relates directly to framing and agenda setting. According to McQuails Mass Communication Theory There is a general tendency to look for well-known people, especially leading politicians and celebrities, around which to construct news. The more prominent the person involved in any sphere, the more attention and privileged access as a source can be expected. News is often reports of what prominent people say about events rather than reports of the events themselves (312). I know that as Communications students, this notion may not apply because we are very critical of the media, but Im sure that you can see how people may believe what they hear in the news if it comes from someone with a high social status. Can you think of any instances in which you felt this way? Posted by Dr. Burns at 12:47 PM 6 comments: Jessica Meotti said... I think for most people in America image is everything. How you are perceived in what you own, how you look, and act is very important to your place in society. Looking on how social groups and different classes are formed, the basis for most of these groups is money and what this money buys you. For instance, a person who shops primarily at Wal-Mart is usually in a different social class than someone who shops regularly at Neiman Marcus. This is because of the status that they receive because of the high cost of the products that they are purchasing. Someone who shops at Wal-Mart could be a millionaire, but you would never know it because the products that they are buying do not reflect this. Materialism is a major factor in forming social groups. McQuail states in Ch. 27 of the reader, in false categories, invoked by advertising, to obscure the real structure of society by replacing class with the distinctions made by the consumption of particular goods. Thus instead of being identified by what they produce, people are made to identify themselves with what they consume. (300). I think this also explains the recent explosion in popularity of designer handbags like Coach, Kate Spade, and Louis Vuitton to name a few. Women, who normally wouldnt be able to afford these types of bags on a regular basis, save and save just to have one. They do this because of the status that having these bags bring to them, showing society around them that they are higher class because they can afford such designer products. I also think that this desire is driven by the increase of exposure to celebrity life. Women emulate the stars that they see on a regular basis in tabloids; influencing their buying patterns and how they perceive the products that they are striving to buy. Also, more and more celebrity endorsements in advertisements can be seen today. Perfume ads is a product categories that I can think of that heavily features celebrities using their product. Its not the product itself necessarily that is being sold, but the lifestyle that is attached to the perfume or whatever. These ads never talk about the scent itself, but mostly on the celebrity; the thought that you could be this celebrity or have this lifestyle if you wear this particular perfume. I think that this example of celebrity endorsements influence on buying habits leads right into how the news can be affected by the type of person delivering it. I think that in general if a news story features a doctor or a prominent and respected figure backing up the information in the story, a viewer is much more likely to trust the information that the news cast is giving. This shows how sometimes unethical it could be to feature respected people in advertisements or news stories because they have a strong hold over the opinions and actions of the people watching them. March 17, 2008 at 9:47 PM JFarrow said... This comment has been removed by the author. March 18, 2008 at 2:30 AM JFarrow said...

I completely agree that the primary goal of advertisements is to sell a product, and to do that ads are constructed to sell an idea that is commonly linked to our cultural ideology. Ads are often designed to grab our attention with things that we value in our culture, like the exploitation of sex and money, even if the product being sold has nothing to do with either. It is a matter of brand recognition, and if you get people talking about your latest funny, sexy, or otherwise buzz-worthy advertisement it will be tied to your name and therefore create publicity that will ultimately sell. By looking at trends of popular advertising in our culture, we can see our cultural ideologies. I do not think that what I purchase determines my social status, and that I can lower o heighten my status depending on how expensive my jeans were, however I do at times purchase things that I really could do without and sometimes cant afford at the time because I just have to have it so to speak. I think this type of behavior (splurge shopping) is a direct result of how our culture creates certain ideologies by advertising products in ways that make us feel we have to have a product in order to be beautiful, skinny, sexy, rich, well-liked, successful, etc. All of these things are what we idealize in our culture so we buy them. Furthermore, I do think that the larger more noticeable manufactured goods that we own definitely demonstrate our social status, such as cars, houses, etc. I agree with McQuail when he talks in chapter 27 about manufactured goods being so influential that they almost create social groups, or at least have some control over the groups. This creates a problem because people are put under the impression, by our advertising industry, that if they go out and spend more and more on these things being advertised according to cultural ideology that they will automatically become more successful and of higher social status.. which just isnt the case. March 18, 2008 at 2:31 AM Alison Dolan said... This comment has been removed by the author. March 18, 2008 at 8:24 AM Logan said... Carissa I agree with most if not all the major points youre posting brings up. For instance, in your discussion on associating social class with material items, I do believe this to be true. Our society is ridiculously materialistic. People thrive on the latest trends in attempt to advance their personal image. As Jen said Americans are obsessed with their image. Case and point look at the population at Quinnipiac, how they dress, the cars they drive and those ridiculous purses that cost obscene amounts of money (no offense to anyone in our class, if you got them you got style and kudos to that, wow never used that word beforereminds me of those good old dace when mom would pack a few of those bars in my lunch box). Anywho, personal image is important to people. It allows them to either stick out amongst a group or categorize them into a specific group from which they desire to be a part of. All of us have a genuine need for social being, a common culture. The mass media provide this to some extent and can (potentially) fulfill a positive function in our lives (McQuail 301). So basically McQuail is saying through this need for social being we look towards the media to help us distinguish who and what we are. This can be seen in advertising, all aspects of TV and in film. The media provide examples using material items and lifestyles. They tell us who are attractive, whats attractive and etc It once again all relates to TV as a social teacher. I hope this makes sense I apologize I blame St. Patrick and his dayjoke I would never blame him for anything. March 18, 2008 at 2:36 PM Dan Huvane said... As McQuail states, "Advertisements are selling us something else besides consumer goods: in providing us with structure in which we, and those goods, are interchangeable, they are selling us ourselves." Americans identify themselves with particular products and brands because they reflect the lifestyles that they lead. So when a company has an existing product they also have a target market and for that product and through their advertisements they are attempting to create brand loyalty and hopefully attract new consumers. When I was in high school I felt that in order to fit in with the rest of the crowd I needed to dress a certain

way so I wouldn't be casted as an outsider. The cloths I bought were a reflection of the media that I consumed. In today's consumer society we are all walking advertisements whether or not we recognize it. For example, Abercrombie and Fitch is a company that understands this idea. There consumers buy there product and then walk around with either there shirts or hats that proudly display the company's name. When others who identify themselves with these products see that person walking by it reassures themselves about the image they portray. Those who shop at high-end stores tend to be from a distinct social class as compared to the consumers that can be found at Bob's or Kohls. What we buy is a reflection of ourselves and the lives that we lead. Consumers identify themselves with particular products because it makes them feel comfortable and allows them to fit into the crowd with whom they hand out with. On page 301 in McQuail states "One of the peculiar features of advertising is that we are drawn in to fill the gap, (where the speaker would be) so that we become both listener and speaker, subject and object." The saying that goes like "You are what you eat" is a good way to describe ads and they effect that they have on consumers. Your cultural background and where you strive to be one day is reflected in the products that you buy and the way in which you present yourself. - Dan Huvane March 19, 2008 at 8:50 AM Post a Comment Newer Post Older Post Home Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)