WeAllDie1Day

Can you remember the most recent time seeing something on tv, or say in an magazine advertisement or any type of ad has influenced you to do something in particular? Not necessarily purchasing the said item, but perhaps affecting a decision you made.

I remember personally, everytime I turned on the TV or opened a magazine, I saw an Axe ad. Eventually, I gave up and went out and actually bought one...didn't smell all that bad, but I stupid that some ads made me purchase the product.

So what I'm basically trying to ask, is how influential are advertisements on you?

__________________
"My power is discombobulatingly devastating I could feel is muscle tissues collapse under my force. It's ludicrous these mortals even attempt to enter my realm."

"Lennox Lewis, I'm coming for you man. My style is impetuous. My defense is impregnable, and I'm just ferocious. I want your heart. I want to eat his children. Praise be to Allah!"

-Priceless quotes by Mike Tyson

roboshark

I can't remember a single ad that's influenced me "consciously" to go out and buy the product. But maybe the idea is that they get to you subconsiously...

Seriously though, in spite of all the Axe ads I've been bombarded with recently, last time when I bought some deodorant, it wasn't Axe. I bought some brand that's never on TV. How's that for failure to reach your target audience...

Actually, some ads are annoying. They make me not wanna buy the product. I guess that's "influencing" too in a way..

__________________
I want no escape.

Latch

I have no sense of style. None. Absolutely zip.. on my own I come up with the worst combinations of clothes/whatever.

Which is why I tend to trust things that say "everyone else does it this way/uses this". It's stupid that I follow that trick, because it could be an outright lie.. but I can't help it.. I'd rather take my chances than come off looking like too much of an idiot

Also, if I am at the store and I see a bunch of brands for the same product, I tend to grab the one that had the best ad on TV.

Gortexfogg

The influence of ads on me has added all their jingles to my sing repertoire. I don't really fall into the trap of most ads. I usually just buy whatever is best for me, cheapest, or what brand my parents always bought.

Jesus Pimp

Ikea catalogues influence me a lot.

__________________
Never date anyone who doesn't make your dick hard.

Nefir

I like to believe (and I hope that I'm right) that I am quite good at identifying and analyzing advertisements, and how they may try to play on your insecurities. I think I'm pretty damn hard to sway with just an ad, but sometimes ads have the opposite effect on me - I start resenting the product, and if I ever need something like it, I look elsewhere.

So I guess there IS an effect. Not the intended effect, but an effect.

Its always a pain for me to buy expensive things, especially electronics, because I always end up looking for MANY multiple opinions and reviews before shelling out the dough. The computer geeks here will understand

__________________
You do not use a Macintosh, instead you use a Tandy
Kompressor break your glowstick, Kompressor eat your candy
Kompressor open jaws, Kompressor release ants
Kompressor watch you scream, Because Kompressor does not dance

anitra

i really enjoy a good ad. i don't necessarily buy something because of an ad but i like the artistry of a clever ad. i like watching the international award show for advertising.

i am influenced by packaging though. i'm drawn to the box. i'm even drawn to the cover of books. if i like the cover i generally like the book. but i'll say i'm pretty picky about the books i read.

__________________
i'm a monkey just swingin through the trees

roachboy

advertising as such does not really concern me. what does concern me is the conservative blurring of advertising and information. take a look at this site for an example, on a single issue:

http://www.exxonsecrets.org/

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Cynthetiq

this is a subject that we have a lot of discussion on.. very in depth discussion over the past year or so...

Mass Media Mind Control

true. there's plenty of news that isn't truly news but more like "corporate press releases"

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

cartmen34

My wife and I were actually discussing this last night over dinner. A fairly new car company sponsors a block of syndicated sitcoms that we like to watch while eating dinner. So every 5 minutes or so we'll hear "This comedy brought to you by...." Then, literally, every other commercial is an ad for this particular car company.

Anyway, we got to talking about it and we both came to the conclusion that those repeated ads did nothing for us. They did not make us interested in the cars advertised, nor did they make us take any interest in the car company whatsoever.

So, to answer your question...no, ads have no effect on me. I buy products that I need or want, not because the glowing box says to buy something, but because I've decided I like and/or need the product.

Now media mind control is a whole other subject... //turns into a tv zombie..."Must buy stuff...must buy stuff!"

__________________
"The problem with quick and dirty, as some people have said, is that the dirty remains long after the quick has been forgotten" - Steve McConnell

kurty[B]

I try and avoid buying products i see from advertisements... Word of mouth works well with me, if someone I know really well tells me that something is just SO AWESOME and great, or this restaraunt they went to was great, then yeah I'm going to check it out, if it's just a passerby, or someone I barely know (or some of the marketing majors I know) I'm generally pretty skeptical, and hesitant to believe them.

Now, packaging... I'm a sucker for packaging, if I don't already have a specific product I like, and I need or feel like buying a certain thing, then yes, I might stick with what might be in my head already from an advertisement, or I might grab what just happens to catch my eye the best on the rack (assuming there isn't a much cheaper alternative sitting right next to it).

As far as the clothes adverts in mags, I avoid those, I might glance and see what looks good style wise, but by the time I go clothes shopping that completely leaves me, and I just take a friend with me to say "yah, or nah", course clothes shopping is a rather rare occasion for me.

as far as expensive things like electronics... research, research, research... when it comes to stereo equipment, I have my own little niche home stereo and car stereo stores in town I appreciate, honest, they'll give me good opinions on the equipment they have, and always work deals for me (it's down to I only talk to certain reps, if they aren't at the store, I look around and leave). As far as computers/parts, again, research, research, research, go to a LAN party, and hit up some friends, and the latest stuff they're using, and see what the frame rates they're getting with for example Doom 3.

But yeah, word of mouth is what I tend to listen to.

Redjake

advertising has no effect on me whatsoever. I hate commercials on TV, commercials on radio, and printed ads. I guess that's why they have no effect on me

except maybe movie trailers (if that counts)

__________________
Off the record, on the q.t., and very hush-hush.

ARTelevision

I am of the opinion that we are unable and unwilling to coherently and accurately answer questions regarding the effect our media environment has on us, as we are completely immersed in it and our conceptions of having the superhuman ability to ignore it are simply denial and wishful thinking. The illusion of freedom is not freedom.

__________________
create evolution

Cynthetiq

actually... sometimes it's about just positioning the company and brand and not about selling a product.

why do you think everyone knows,"I want my MTV!"?

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Tinker

For me advertising has taken a whole new meaning.. I work in advertising designing magazine ads, trade ads etc etc... and I have to say honestly my goal has been to make an ad that is appealing to the eye... I am so ultra aware of ads more now than ever only because I am constantly looking at what people are doing... But honestly it has not been what the ad is for but what does it look like....
I never see the product anymore, I see what font they used, color.. placement...
I cant even watch a tv show without shouting out the name of the font they used for the credits.. but thats just me

__________________
"The man who alters his way of thinking to suit others is a fool."
Marquis de SADE

ubertuber

I'm with Art - I think the influence of media on our world-views is so pervasive that you couldn't even answer the question. Just because you can't see something doesn't mean it isn't there. It's like saying "I can't see my contact lenses" and believing that this means they aren't present. Actually, media influence is worse, since none of us can remember our world-views before media shaped them... As for myself, I know that I am particularly vulnerable to products that are prominently displayed in stores I like. I go to Barnes and Noble all the time, and if I see a book displayed in the front of the store enough, I will almost always start to think that I should read it.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

ironman

I do like to think that media has no influence on me, but then, i go to the supermarket and buy a lot of products based mainly on their packages and the idea that they LOOK like a good product.
I became aware of this media influence not long ago after i got married. I had seen that movie My Big Fat Greek Wedding like a year before, and then, on my first shopping experience with my wife, i choose WINDEX as our official window cleaner. I had never seen an advertising of Windex in my life, but the simple idiotic fact that the bride´s father used it for everything, made me buy the bottle. I didn`t make the choice consciously and it wasn´t but untill a week later that i saw the maid using the Windex, that i asked myself why the hell had i bought the friggin bottle, and came to realize that i had been caught.

__________________
If I agreed with you we´d both be wrong

roachboy

advertising is about the structuring of demand via the structuring of desire.

the fact that is is ubiquitous does not mean that we are terminally screwed, nor does it mean that there is no possibility of getting at least some handle on its effects--but if you set for yourself a goal of full transparency, then you are going to fail. in this, advertising is not any different from many other sets of rules that taken together define what a functional subject is.

recognizing that there is a problem with the manipulation of your frame of reference leads you to having to think, to undertake thinking as a project (not as a series of discrete steps that will lead you to a definite result, as if thinking was a recipe)....

for example, that you internalize social rules, that they disappear as rules, is not surprising--on this, wittgenstein's philosophical investigations is a great help.
it also makes some sense to read some texts from the threshold of the television age, written from a critical viewpoint--strange as it seems, i like j.g. ballard's atrocity exhibition and to a lesser extent burrough's ticket that exploded as examples--i use them when i teach often. neither offers a complete description of the situation in which we find ourselves: rather they make explicit some of bigger effects from viewpoints that still see them as effects (as something alien, as something being imposed)---for ballard, the problem with advertising culture (well one of them) is the colonization of your dreams, the looping-into-itself (as reprocessed through advertising) of your ability to fantasize, to imagine something other than what is.
one way you can read atrocity exhibition is as a charting of the effects of this looping-back into what is of your ability to fantasize run through a particular vision of what that means--capitalism as fixated on sex and death, for example...interesting stuff.

but if this problem--advertising--really bothers you, the least you can do is unplug your television--or at least loose your cable service, throw away your antenna. do something other than watch tv. use it to watch films or something. if you want to see something particular, you can always make arrangements to do it, but get the television out of the center of your life.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

bigoldalphamale

i disagree with those who contend that mass advertising is so pervasive that we could never quantify how it affects us and that no one is immune to its power. i have studied business at the undergraduate and graduate levels, with a plethora of marketing classes peppered throughout. i know the frameworks, theories, and models of almost every type of marketing in use today at every level of the supply chain. working as a young executive in corporate america, i also work directly with marketing teams as all of thier funding comes accross my desk for approval. i see the projects, the initiatives, the metrics used to track their effectiveness. i am intrinsically involved in the decision to continue funding certain marketing campaigns and scrapping others. involved in decisions to spend funds to penetrate brand communities. you name it. i have seen it all.

with my upper level business education and real world experience in corporations at the executive level...i can say that for myself, and others like me, that mass marketing in any medium doesnt have the same effect on me as it does on its intended, unsuspecting targets. FYI: more money is spent on 'mind games' in places further up in the supply chain. money spent on 'tricking' or 'hypnotising' consumers (end users) is marginal compared to the marketing dollars spent in other areas of the supply chain.

in short...i think with the proper training, education, and an inside knowledge of the industry, advertising doesnt affect me at all. in general, the more educated you are, the less likely these things are going to have the desired effect.

ARTelevision

You are far more optimistic than I, roachboy. This is one of the reasons I value your comments. Same for bigoldalphamale. Your opinions are valued.

Alas, I am of the impoverished opinion that we are like the imprisoned man. We are able to be very aware of our imprisonment and able to describe it in great detail - yet we are totally incapable of doing anything effective about it.

I know, given the nature of humanity to require solutions to problems once they are discovered as problems and to believe firmly in their resolvability - especially as they pertain to human "freedom" - this can never be a popular opinion or an acceptable state of affairs. It's too bad that wishing doesn't make things so.

__________________
create evolution

World's King

__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown

Church

Well since I am taking Advertising, I know all the tricks and tactics that they use. So instead of saying, "Wow, I really want to buy that", I look at it more like, "Wow, that's a nice trick/tactic, etc.", and completely miss the product. lol

__________________
Through counter-intelligence, it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble makers, and neutralize them.

powerclown

What TOK said...
If advertising is subconsciously causing me to buy things, thats ok with me...new stuff is cool!

ARTelevision

More significant than instilling desire for fulfillment based on acquisition of branded objects and products is the fact that advertising shapes our self images and our view of the world: what is real, what is important, and so forth.

__________________
create evolution

WeAllDie1Day

I don't personally think advertisement completely shapes our self images. THeir are so many influences on our self image if you think about it...what the opposite sex finds attractive, how people dress in popular culture and movie stars, the influence of our peers.

__________________
"My power is discombobulatingly devastating I could feel is muscle tissues collapse under my force. It's ludicrous these mortals even attempt to enter my realm."

"Lennox Lewis, I'm coming for you man. My style is impetuous. My defense is impregnable, and I'm just ferocious. I want your heart. I want to eat his children. Praise be to Allah!"

-Priceless quotes by Mike Tyson

ARTelevision

Yes those things are part of the same ad-culture we inhabit. Ads are one of the essential vehicles for these messages because they are programmed for conditioned responses. The entire culture, including the things you mention, is an evolving and dynamic gestalt in which ads play a major role in reinforcing an increasingly homogenized world view.

__________________
create evolution

Willy

Advertising effects me more than I like to admit. Now you only look at ads for things you are interested in buying. If you have a 2 year old Buick that you are happy with and planning to drive for another 5 years then no matter how many Toyota commercials you see you're not likely to go out and buy a Toyota. If you're looking for a car though, and safety is your top priority, then an ad that says Camry is the top rated car for safety is going to pique your interest.

My main weakness is food commercials that come on when I'm hungry. I remember being on my way out the door on my way to Wendy's before the commercial was even over once when I realized that I was under the influence of advertising and made a point to go somewhere else instead hehe. Same thing happened to me watching a kit kat commercial once. I watched the commercial and immediately had a strong urge to go out and get a Kit Kat...and that's not even my favorite candy bar. I'm sure this kind of thing has happened to me many more times when I didn't notice it.

ngdawg

There's a reason or two there are 'age demographics'. Advertisers know who is most influenced by what they are trying to sell. The older demographics are not as easily influenced-but still can be-as those in the, say, 18-39 group. An example: my daughter wants canvas Converse sneakers. Every few years, they become popular and they are again. All her friends have them. Her father has been wearing them all his life!!! Who's been influenced? To her, Dad is completely out of touch-yet he's dressing the way she and her friends do.
For me, research into the type of product I need to get is the way to go, but not always foolproof. It has to suit my needs, not be the biggest, shiniest and most popular. I read up on what's available and how it may work for me, using consumer books and reviews on the internet. Then I use it til it dies!
The only time I have seen name-brand vs no-brand and name wins is in food purchases. Store brands tend to be weak, flawed and not as good. But even then, there are exceptions.

powerclown

Who are you to say that it is 'more significant'?
That's a bit of an elitist attitude don't you think? Defining and condescendingly judging others' realities for them?

ngdawg

I think you're taking it in the wrong context. Advertising shows the best of whoever is using the product shown. Ever see a beerbellied old man downing a Budweiser in an ad? Of course not. Beautiful people drink it. Ads show their products in a world of perfect bodies, smiling faces and stylish clothes. Even those 'moms' dusting their livingrooms are perfect and happy. Corporate advertisers hold the gullible to an impossible standard they will try to emulate in frustration. It's not the product being sold in and of itself-it's what it can do for you to help you achieve that ultimate goal of perfection, ie: buy our shit and be loved by all and look good too.

Church

I agree with you ngdawg. A prime example of this type of advertising is those stupid 'male-enhancement' pills. They say NOTHING of the drug or what it -actually- does. All the ad says is it will make your dick bigger and your wife will want to fuck you more. Its a pretty shallow ad if you ask me, but people fall for it, and buy it. Quite sad actually...

__________________
Through counter-intelligence, it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble makers, and neutralize them.

powerclown

I agree with everything you said. I disagree with what others are incessantly yammering on about regarding advertising and the popular media: that people are just mindless consumerbots who are powerless to make enlightened and informed choices regarding their own lives. Of course advertising is a wasteland of bald-faced lies and manipulation, that's a given. What I'm saying is that average, reasonable, intelligent people are capable of making the right choices for themselves and their lifestyles that I believe ought not to be mocked and belittled by those who supposedly claim to know better.

ARTelevision

powerclown, I'll edit that now.

"More significant, in my opinion than instilling desire for fulfillment based on acquisition of branded objects and products is the fact that advertising shapes our self images and our view of the world: what is real, what is important, and so forth."

You may consider my positions elitist. You may even feel emboldened to state it as you did. The problem - besides one of tone - in your statement is that you chose a statement of mine that simply declares that I consider the shaping of world views to be more significant than selling products.

Your method of communicating in that post is duly noted.

__________________
create evolution

flamingpeach

I saw the commerical for those new skippy snack bars yesterday (with the rastafarian elephants) and went straight out and bought two boxes.

They were darn good, too!

__________________
I've eaten my veggies all my life so bring it on, I am educated and strong for the revolution.

WeAllDie1Day

I think it's a little farfetched that people believe by buying a product, it will somehow help you achieve that goal of perfection. This is my opinion personally...I don't see how, perhaps drinking beer or smoking cigarettes will somehow improve my sex appeal. Maybe the average intelligent person will agree with me.

The truth of the matter is, advertisement will never go away. Since very early in mankind history...humans have always tried to influence, and sway the mind of the consumers.

__________________
"My power is discombobulatingly devastating I could feel is muscle tissues collapse under my force. It's ludicrous these mortals even attempt to enter my realm."

"Lennox Lewis, I'm coming for you man. My style is impetuous. My defense is impregnable, and I'm just ferocious. I want your heart. I want to eat his children. Praise be to Allah!"

-Priceless quotes by Mike Tyson

Manic_Skafe

Although I agree with a lot that was said above, I speak for no one but myself.

The power behind advertisments is their ability to force a lot at a person in a short period of time and force their brains to process a lot of information on a subconcious level.

Sure a man might not believe that if he puts on Axe and boards an elevator with a woman she'll have sex the commerical subtly suggests it - couple the suggestion with a number of socially enduced rules and you've got an insatiable consumer who'll subconciously equate buying Axe and wearing it to coolness.

There probably won't be any sexual encounters on his next elevator ride but he'll definetly feel differently about himself - in which case, the ad is succesful.

Ads, word of mouth, and seeing something on someone else influence us in more way than we could determine. I don't turn off my television and live in solitude in pointless rebellion - I aknowledge the fact that I am the result of social circumstance and make what I view to be the best decisions.

__________________
"Porn is a zoo of exotic animals that becomes boring upon ownership." -Nersesian

Trisk

There's a lot of stuff here so it's kind of hard to reply to it all.

Let me start out by saying that no, I don't consider myself to be very influenced by the media. As others have said, knowing the advertising industry can make you almost immune to the effects of advertising. Most of the time when I'm watching/listening to television/radio I just think how rediculous it is and I can pinpoint certain things meant to trigger a reaction. But instead of being affected, I'm sitting there thinking about the thing that was supposed to affect me.
Furthurmore, I find most television today to be boring, stupid and annoying. I find most new musical artists to be kind of dull, untalented, and annoying as well (and don't even get me started on the people they hire to talk during the breaks in the music). As a result, I rarely even turn on the television or the radio...meaning I get fed substantially less ads than the average American.

Does that mean I never buy brand name products? Of course not! If I find the product to be good, I'll buy it. Sometimes a box or container will attract my attention - I won't deny that either. And sometimes if I see a commercial or ad that I think is really clever, funny, or attractive, I'll buy the product - not because of subliminal messages, but because I feel in a way like I'm rewarding the company for putting a smile on my face. Oh yeah, not to mention that for certain products, I simply don't know whether to trust the no-name brands over the ones I've known for my entire life. A good reccomendation from a friend can change my mind though.


HOWEVER, I'm not going to deny that for certain people, the media dictates what they buy and don't buy. Note that I say this only applies for certain people. The people, imo, influenced the most are those that sit in front of the television 24/7. Unfortunately, this makes up an alarmingly large portion of America today. I've seen children raised on television and not only are they almost brain-dead with no attention span for real human beings but most of them, when they turn 17 or 18 (and have to do things on their own) will buy only brand name items that they remember nice commercials for.

I find this to be sad and disgusting. But I'm not sure whether to call if mind control or what. Obviously, these things can be avoided. If parents learned to raise their kids themselves, the kids wouldn't grow up on television and ads. If people understood limits, they could turn off the television at some point and stop having ads fed to them.

I don't believe in this idea that people can't control themselves or change their lot in life. If people made an effort to change their lifestyles, they could have a direct impact on these things. Instead of saying "Well i can't help getting fat because the mcdonalds ads control my mind", people should get off their couch and go to the gym for 2 hours - thereby avoiding the ads AND fixing their problem all at once.
There are lots of things to do outside - even just taking a walk with your friends is better than the lifestyle that so many Americans lead today.

So basically what I'm saying is that the media is not really to blame - we are, for letting ourselves or our children get to the point where they can barely think outside of what the media tells them to think. But we can change this, if we make an effort to.



As for the media shaping our self image - I do agree with this in some part. On television and the radio, they show us ideal people. Skinny people with perfect families, people with great complexions, rich people, poor people, sluts, religious people and tons of other types. But with each type of person is a message. This person is perfect. This person is not. This is the ideal man. This is the ideal woman.
...and every few years, a new formula might pop up. For example, this year there is the whole "gay men are great" fad. Most straight men in sitcoms are wimpy, stupid guys, and most women are powerful, motivated and smart.
Whether or not we realize it, we get our ideas on what we should or shouldnt be from a lot of these sources.
Even with simple things like fashion. If you saw a man today in bellbottoms, you'd be like "dude what the hell are you doing". But 30 years ago, that was normal. Only in more subtle ways, how we should act changes with the years too.
People are affected by this. Someone who might be considered cool or hot in one generation might not be in the next. Most of the times, these things are triggered by the media - by what we see on television or in magazines or whatever...and later on, society follows and enforces it by judging those around them - shunning those who choose not to follow and embracing those who do.

But we can't blame everything on the media. There are lots of forces that go into the molding of a person and of society. The media is only one of them.

roachboy

it's interesting the effects of having so many threads that focus on similar issues--you find yourself thinking across them, posting one bit here, one there...its kinda like tv.
not sure how to address this: i remember a story i read somewhere about simone de beauvoir: she went to talk to the folk behind partisan review i think, back when it could have been confused with something interesting--at the start of the meeting, she asked if the nyc collective had read sartre, presumably because it formed a base for conversation---the new yorkers thought she was obnoxious for even considering that a possibility. so it goes.

i have been trying to say the same thing that trisk ended with---"the media" does not create the rule-sets through which people live as "normal" subjects--it reinforces some, formalizes some--and adverts of course try to play off some in order to sell you stuff. the problem are the rules themselves, which means that the problem is the culture generated by american-style capitalism. that should be the object of analysis. the mass media is simply an expression, a symptom.

to keep this shorter and avoid repeating too much, i'll just point to one problematic attitude:

passivity.
the happy acceptance of a total lack of political power.
you are free one day every four years.
no problem.
now whats' on comedy central? this guy simone is bumming me out, man....

the illusion that consumerism is a political act and that your level/intensity of comsumption indicates your degree of political freedom or autonomy.

if you think about it, this is insane.
so why think about it?

add these up: you have no political power--events that happen always happen outside your control and, thanks to how tv covers things, seemingly without cause.

scary.

better to stay home.

while you are cowering in your living room, you might consider compensating by buying a few things. dont worry, however--you can have beer delivered if there is a terror alert involved or something. no need to go outside.

you might, for example, buy some budweiser because it will make you more sexually attractive, because that is how it works in the adverts. bud is a good example, because you know that it cannot be sold on the basis of qualities particular to beer.

budwesier adverts might stage a particularly ridiculous convergence of illusions:
about itself
about sexuality
about the relations of external characteristics to inward ones
(pretty people must be smarter, no? doesnt it always work that way? in this, the best of all possible worlds, outer and inner are always perfectly aligned. does that not correpsond to your experience? have you not found that drinking crappy beer makes you smarter too? you can tell by hanging out in a tavern--everyone thinks they are smarter after a few beers--and if everyone thinks that, it must be true, no?), about

about the association of depressants with a more brightly colored and action-packed life
(hey why not--nothing makes you more chipper than a good depressant, no? by slowing yourself down, you speed everything else up. does that not correspond to your experience? isnt it great how advertising agency employees hired by budweiser know so so much about you? its a kind of intimacy, no? like having a close friend out there whose name you dont quite remember....)

however, adverts create none of dispositions, they just stage convergences.
to think that adverts create these dispositions is like blaming a red balloon for the color red.

the convergence above runs into other issues, some of which i'll mention:

--the fetishization of commodities.
this runs lots of different ways--what i have to say about this turned up in the thread about theft of the scream, actually
(cantor: look there...
congregation: sure thing, simone).

--reinforcement of the reactionary illusion that society is made up of a series of isolated individuals.

these link to what i take to be the worst feature of televisionland:
the systematic assault on the capacity of the citizenry, however construed, to formulate coherent judgements on political matters. now this is something i see tv as actively doing, but not in adverts. rather, like i sadi earlier in the thread, it happens through the breakingdown of any clear distinction between adverts and information.

the creation of junk science, for example, the blurring of thinktank press releases with information, these are but a small and fetid selection of the activities undertaken by the right media apparatus....for data, check out the disinfopedia site linked earlier in this thread.

for neoconservatives, there is nothing but commodities:

information is a commodity
opinion is another commodity---abstract objects to be molded and traded.
you are a commodity.
your dreams are a commodity.
your desires are commodities.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

ARTelevision

I feel that I must balance your insistence on these tendencies toward politicalization-for-self-interest notions being "conservative" tendencies or aspects of the use of media by the "right."

Honestly, all partisans do the exact same things with their framing techniques. They would be remiss and allow the other side(s) an unacceptable advantage if they did not.

__________________
create evolution

roachboy

the left tradition that shapes signficant elements of what i do sets itself in opposition to the dominant ideology in general---the assumption is that modes of thinking/judging within that ideology are predicated on streaming folk in a particular, highly overdetermined direction, confusing movement within a restricted set of options with choice in any meaningful sense--to oppose this means to undertake both a critique (the negative part) and what amounts to a philosophical/political project directed at shifting relations to the signifiers that constitute the surface of the existing order (the positive part)..fact is that this left tradition is in flux, unsure of its conceptual framework and therefore unsure of how exactly to elaborate its positions (this is the vacuum created by what i refer to as the collapse of the marxist tradition)--this is the case regardless of whether particular organizations that try to operate in opposition (usually on the basis of very localized issues) acknowledge this vacuum or not---it follows then that there is no coherent presence within the existing order for anything like the position i am arguing from, and this for historical reasons (like i said above)--so it does not follow that "both sides" as you put it are engaged in parallel operations.

even so, there are significant differences between the neocons and other political movements: only the neocons have been in a financial position to construct a network of thinktanks (aei, brookings, heritage, rand, cato, etc etc.) modelled on the example of the hoover institution...

only the right has developed patterns of open-ended funding: big big donors give money to these institutions that is not earmarked toward particular issues/results----this gives right thinktanks far more latitude than those which work for progressive/left-ish causes. this open-ended financing has been critical---it is the condition of possibility for the development of their increasingly sophsiticated strategies for media penetration.

only the right has been in a position to exploit access to congress/congressional staffers and to tailor their press releases into labor saving devices for staffers that insert their logic implicitly into the sorting process (for example)--this route has given these institutions enormous cultural power within the general space of govt, enabling their frame of reference to increasingly become **the** frame of reference.

only the right has been in a position to systematically work its way into the opinion generating machinery that accompanies the 24-hour news stations.
partly because it is the right that has cultivated the reduction of political positions to sound-bytes--"progressive" folk have never managed this one well--their arguments work from the outside, they require space for explanation, for context--tv does not give this space.

only the right has undertaken operations like the funding "science" etc for political purposes, designed to make coherent political judgements impossible for the public. the assumption is that if there is not highly specialized training and alot of time for research available to members of the public, they will shift away from environmental issues to a kind of agnostic know-nothing position--which is fine for corporations, who can continue to do as they like in the meantime--the idea is that you shove information sorting functions back onto the public, knowing that this sorting function is pretty much impossible for most people.
this idea is antithetical to any left position out there. any left position i know about is centered on trying to inform judgement, make it more repvalent, more possible--this is about the opposite. and it does not work to revert to examples from the old days---we are not still trapped in the days shaped by stalinism.

only the right has colonized am radio--only the right has new "news" channels like fox and "news" outlets like the washington times--any argument that there is anything comparable for "the left" is simply bullshit--arguments floated to conceal what has been happening...there are press outlets that tilt slightly "left" or at least retain some independence in the states--but they do so outside the institutional networks that the right has constructed since the middle 1970s. the neocons love these relatively independent outlets because it allows them the space to construct their (totally disengenuous) martyr narrative (o boo hoo, we might have this institutional infrastructure, we might have this influence, we might have this huge amount of cash, we might have succeeded in imposing our idiotic frame of reference on national discourse, but the ny times is not with us, and barbra streisand is not with us, boo hoo, so they must be a mirror image of ourselves and see, we dont control absolutely everything, poor persecuted us....but that is not enough--these opposing voices must be silenced if possible, even as they operate to prop up the martyr story...)

if you havent done it, do some research on the matter--the above is a series of statements (among many more possible) of the assymetircal state of affairs that presently obtains in the states, and that is motoring a general march toward political self-immolation. i can point you at lots of sources on the matter, if you need them.

i can talk about many things and be relatively open--but this is simply one where the empirical situation belies any attempt to relativize things.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite