The Persuaders is very good. What I think is most significant about it is that it makes the strong link between product advertising and political advertising.

Here's a link to the PBS Frontline section on The Persuaders:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ws/persuaders/

Persuaders was well done.

I worked for Saatchi and Saatchi in the mid90s when the turmoil of that company was just starting to peak. Maurice Saatchi was suing to remove the name from the company since he was ousted by the board. They had lost a key account the Florida Orange Growers Association which they had forever. I did not know they had lost the J&J account recently.

Watching this reminded me of my childhood when I first read Ogilvy On Advertising by David Ogilvy and how much I really wanted to be a part of that industry. I remember being so excited when I got to do some consultant work at Ogilvy & Mather. I even was more excited when I got hired at Saatchi and Saatchi. I was disgusted and burnt out after 4 months. The industry is too cutthroat for me.

While I watched Persuaders I couldn't help but remember the Tom Hanks movie Nothing In Common where he plays and ad exec building a brand for a airline and he makes a emotional connection in his pitch. Something somewhat unheard of during the mid80s.

Thanks for the link art.

I sent an e-mail to CNN and NBC in question about the information in your post. However, your post is wrong. They assured me you were lying.

...

In any event, the Frontline show is worth watching. It will be available online on Friday. The other features on that page (linked in post #401 above) provide additional info on the source material. The work of Dr. Clotaire Rapaille is incisive and has the ring of authenticity. Not his conclusions, necessarily but his methodology and approach to the subject of what drives our consumption.

Stompy,

You mentioned that you watch Adult Swim. Adult Swim is one of the most ad-saturated commericial blocks on TV. Most of the ads are for other Adult Swim or CN shows and that is how they have built Adult Swim into such a rating giant. They have formed a clique-culture around watching their blocks with the 'cue-card' style riffs between commericals and each show. They have found a unique way to make each watcher feel like they are being directly communicated to and it has worked as their ratings have nearly tripled since they switched to that style of pitching.

It is not that someone is forcing you to buy their item or to make a purchase that you don't need; it is more that everywhere we go, we are inescapably surrounded by media. Constant exposure to this stimuli yields a familiarity to the product or idea thus making a purchase or decision less foreign. Just being aware of the use of that media and that there is a specific purpose to it, is a big step in the right direction. You can form your own ideas about tinfoil hats and conspiracies.

Cool, I'll check this out when I get some more time later.

Yeah, it's pretty successful. That whole thing stemmed from the fact that cable providers didn't want MTV, so they came up with the whole "I want my MTV!" campaign. Successful and widely recognized, yes, but how's that negative?

There's definitely a lot of products that have their catch phrases and jingles that stay in our head, but I don't think it's something I'd call manipulation.

I can't recall a single ad on Adult Swim that wasn't for some kind of anime movie (way out of my league of interest) or their own shows (like you said), but the "cue-card" in-betweens is really just a bunch of random quips that they come up with that are unusual, yet hilarious.

If they're advertising themselves, then what is the viewer being bombarded with? I know a lot of people used to just watch Family Guy, but then they'd show ads for Aqua Teen. If it wasn't for those ads, a lot of people probably wouldn't have had the chance to know about other quality (but off-the-wall) entertainment! Personally, I just to just watch ATHF and Family Guy, but then I'd see ads for Sea Lab. I'll watch it occasionally, but it's not like I'm being bombarded with anything other than "watch our shows". I do enjoy the shows.

But don't you think their ratings increase because of quality shows that people enjoy watching as opposed to the "user friendly" in-betweens that they're presented with?

Product familiarity... I don't see how or why it's so negative. It's just the result of advertising. I'm assuming you're talking about "fun" characters like Tony the Tiger, or the Trix Rabbit.

A kid watches cartoons on TV in the morning, but those stations get funded by advertising space. Ok, so Kelloggs or whoever comes in and advertises Trix. A "fun" little cartoon with a rabbit scampering about and catch phrases "Silly Rabbit, Trix are for kids!" So now they know about Trix.

I dunno, maybe someone could provide some insight as to something I'm overlooking because I don't particularly see how it's something to be worried about.

For me the most important question to ask myself is "how much of my identity has been shaped by media?"

In other words, how much of who and what I think I am has been assimilated from television, movies, popular music, other forms of entertainment and infotainment, and advertising. How much of the texts of these things fills my mind and motivates my thoughts, words, and behavior? How much of what I see when I look in the mirror is a reflection of the images, suggestions, hints, clues, and cues projected by media regarding what is cool, hip, badass, masculine, sexual, attractive, smart, acceptable, etc.?

I'm of the opinion that if I do this scrupulously, I find that I am more a collection of mediated suggestions, impressions, concepts, and images than an actual integral and integrated personality.

The only reasons I have found that prevent me from arriving at these conclusions are based on vanity, denial, wishful thinking, and a deluded sense of integrity.

adult swim is doing the same kind of brand building that MTV did in it's early days. Shameless self promotion of building an identity to itself. Cable companies weren't denying MTV space, they just didn't have the capacity at the time. Some channels even split their days such as Nickelodeon in the day, A&E at night, when A&E got their own channel, that left Nick with a hole in the evening, thus Nick At Nite was born.

While you think that a jingle sitting in your head isn't manipulation, if it helps lean you in a particular direction when you are looking on the aisle for something and the jingle hits your head because of recognition, it's done it's job.

as far as marketing to kids, recently Nickelodeon and ABC both had to pay large fines for having too many commercials in a 1 hour time frame along with showing same product during a show, ex. Power Rangers show cannot have power rangers toys commercials.

*locks herself in white padded room*..sigh..i'm safe here....:)

An issue for consideration is the fictional division of the population along simple-to-define factional lines that are used to create audiences that function also as political constituencies.

The hypothesis is that we evidence fationalization and division as a result of narrowcasting and demographic marketing. And as always the media do not reflect who we are but create who we are.

The following article can be seen in this light:

* * *

Media landscape pits Red vs. Blue

Sun Nov 14, 4:22 AM ET
from, Variety

Peter Bart, STAFF

(Variety) — Book publishers are supposed to be retards when it comes to marketing, but they seem to have all this Blue State-vs.-Red State stuff figured out. There are two utterly divergent constituencies for books, so they've mobilized Ann Coulter and Newt Gingrich to adorn one bestseller list and Bill Clinton (news - web sites) and the anti-Bush polemicists for the other. The strategy is working so well that surely the film and TV mavens can't be far behind.

Mel Gibson (news) showed everyone how to muscle the Red States, and Mormon filmmakers for years have prospered within their mini-industry. So now that the Red States have their own president, why not give them their movies and TV shows, too?

The hot-button campaign issues may even provide storylines. Wouldn't they flock to a "Gay Married With Children" -- a series about a gay married couple who hate one another? How about "Desperate Anti-Abortion Housewives?" And since "Troy" worked, why not try "Goy," with Brad Pitt taking on the Crusades?

There's one entertainment sector that's surreptitiously shared by both Red and Blue sectors, however: Market expansion of porn in the old Bible Belt, in fact, exceeds that of the coasts, and one of its major purveyors, Adam & Eve, is even nestled in North Carolina.

The only distinction between Red and Blue is this: While porn-watchers on the East and West Coasts have switched to DVDs, the heartland still covets its VHS format. That distinction, perhaps, defines the truly rigid conservative.

* * *

Their ratings went up because the number of people watching the shows increased. The question is: WHY did they increase? You stated aboce that seeing Sea Lab commercials helped you decide to watch it occasionally so that advertising worked (at least occasionally) with you.

Product familiarity isn't by itself a negative thing; it is a result of a potentially negative effect of advertising. The whole purpose of advertising is to create or increase the consumption of a product or to set apart a product from the competition. The validity and accuracy of the ads have become a moot point.

Here is a little example: Let's say I know nothing about Green Beans. I need to pick some up for a special meal and I go to the grocers shelf and find 10 different brands of green beans. Since I know nothing about them, I start looking to see which package 'catches my eye' and I rule out half of the choices because they don't 'look' good to me. I check the remaining cans and decide to go with Green Giant because they are the only brand that I have ever heard of. Sitting on that same shelf was a plain beige can of Laura Lynn green beans that were 75 cents cheaper and were made by Green Giant for Ingles Grocery stores. In the end, I overpaid for the exact same can of beans because I 'bought into' their effective advertising. Green Giant won my purchase because they exposed me to the "Ho-Ho-Ho, Green Giant" jingle as a kid and I remember them because of it. Maybe 20 have passed since I heard that jingle and it is still in my head. How effective was that ad?

Green Giant didn't create my desire for their product in the same way that the advertising you mentioned for Trix cereal does. Trix ads are aimed squarely at little kids and create an artificial demand that has nothing to do with quality of product. This type of advertising uses positive influence and state of mind to create a consumer for it's product.

Advertising is embedded in our culture and we are exposed to it at every turn. We are constantly bombarded with messages designed to intrigue, delight, and pique our curiosity but most are devoid of any validity. We are constantly fed incorrect information by Media and are denied other information by the same. in other words, our knowledge and opinions are formed in many cased by artificial information purchased by manufacturors.

The most decided arguement has been summed up by Art in recent posts. How do we independently define who we are when most of the information we use as reference and grounding is bought by someone? In other words; How much of ME is really ME?

to art...

i have read 5pages of this thread and intend to read the rest...

wow what an insight..

although i have always thought consiuosly about ads and advertising..

i have never really thought about it like this thread pointed out..

today i had an awfull long drive and i discussed this with my drving buddies.

and my imidieate reaction was i dunna know this sounds kinda cheasy.. i read the first 3 pages and looked at the examples. and deccied either one of 2 things..

i am immune or i have brain washed...

i still havent quite decided but im not really leaning one way or the other.

i never saw the words in the 1st 3 pics.. even after it was pointed out quite plainly.

i expect sex or dreary to be in my face so to speak all the time.. but is that becasue i have been force fed theese things..

but after my drive this morning i had a chance to think things thru...

and damnit i have alott of stuf that happens to " sounds good" while im inadvertantly living..


so this is my chance to say what a great thread.. its been around along time...

thank you for opening my eyes a little more...

i do wonder what steps can i take..

from today's NYTimes.com
link

I was thinking about this as I was playing Need For Speed: Underground 2. As I drive around the city I see lots of Best Buys....

The lines between simple commercialism and the interaction of entertainment and technology are constantly being blurred more and more each day. Witness many car commercials that put the vehicle in a precarious situation, then entice the viewers to go to something like 'seewhathappens.com' to view the end. Ah, yes, the car survived the roll down the cliff-how clever.
The more I watch tv, the less I watch tv. I have always hated commercials and getting me to run to my computer to see even more of them has, in my case, backfired
for the conglomerates.( I assume the car survived the roll-otherwise what would be the point?)
It seems to be a tug-of-war. As consumers get a bit more savvy, conglomerates need more creative ways of reaching them in the belief that, what we didn't fall for last week, we may, if it's tweaked enough, fall for it now.

From today's bylines...a year 2004 recap.

"...media firms' standing with the public sank to new lows."

That does sound encouraging. However, as we seem to have a fascination and obsession with things we hate and we don't hate something unless it has an unyielding grip on us, I'd say this newfound revulsion toward the power of media upon our lives indicates media continues to increase its power over us and there's not a thing we can do about it - except the small things we do to make us feel as if we are "fighting back" and "gaining back some territory." I don't see real progress being made at all in getting our minds back.

I've really just started to deeply think about this subject, and I've little profundity under my belt so feedback of any sort would be nice, but I'm thinking of the media as it is implemented today as a weak experiment in creating an intellectual super structure. It seems as though, human nature has willed this beast of society into existence and is becoming more receptive to certain aspects of it whilst becoming aggresively opposed certain aspects, changing it into something more suitable to itself whilst changing to accomodate it.

OK, ARTelevision, you have piqued my interest.

Now, I've just started reading this thread, so I'm posting my obervations "now" at post #32 to keep myself honest. I realize that the discussion may have spiralled far away from where I am now.

First picture, four flowers, a bird (pidgeon-like), and a fly.

Second picture, gin ad. And they are totally related... ok, I'm guessing that there is some kind of sex reference here, but I'm not seeing any connection. It's always about the sex, right?

Onward with the thread!

OK up to post #55 - Unless Dr. Frankenstein is her PCP, that's not her arm.

Commentary Thus Far

Yes, media does, can, and will attempt to influence us any way they can. To buy products, promote lifestyles, and manipulate our political choices. Yet, mass media is how we obtain our information and the ability to sift through such information for they key parts is vital. This is particularly important in my line of work.

I am a clinical pharmacist. My job is tendering my learned opinion on drug therapy. Not only what works, but what works best considering the patient's current health, concurrent medications, habits, and finances. Patients, physicians, and family of patients look to me to know what I'm talking about. Every time there is a new commercial on a drug the questions I field about that drug and that class of drugs increases tremendously. Fortunatly, I usually know of these drugs before the public does and have a judgement already made. How I make that judgement, however, is ultimatly based on the companies that manufacture the medications. There is a mountain of data generated on safety and effectiveness on drugs that is submitted to the FDA. What is sent to the FDA, I, as a health care practitioner, have access to. (Y'all have access to it as well, but I've been trained to know where to look and what it means. This makes the search a lot less time consuming for me.) Still, as we see from the Vioxx / COX-2 debacle, the companies that generate the information, or pay to have it done, resist the dissemination of the negative information.

On another point, the when the media designs an advertisement, they make certain assumptions about how we think and how we process information. These assumptions don't always hold true. My son is autistic. He processes information differently than other children, and certain senses have unusual sensitivities. His frame of mind may be quite different from typical people. As my wife and I had our son tested when we noticed some strange behaviors, the therapists started asking some interesting questions. These involved certain habits of his and what we might expect as he grow older. I discovered with some alarm that the behaviors that she was mentioning are behaviors and coping mechanisms that I have. After some further research it turns out that I may be autistic too, but I have learned adaptive coping mechaisms to deal with the stress.

I have a lot of trouble following a point. If you point your finger at something, I try to get you to describe what it is that you are pointing at, because I can't visualize the line that leaves your finger to the object in question. I tend to focus on the hand, and I recognize it as a symbol of direction, but that's about it. When I saw the bank advertisement I came away with a vastly different interpretation. At first it looked like a picutre of a young man, college age, studying hard. There was a distorted picture in the back, but it wasn't relevant to the focus of the picture since it was out of focus. If it was relevant, it would be in focus, right? I came away with the initial impression of once the man graduates he will have a use for the banking service.

After some reflection, I found the ad disturbing, almost threatening. The distorted picture of the girl wasn't sexual, it was malformed, spectral. The image wasn't a wispy image of a reward, but the dire image of the consequences of failure.

Now, I'm not saying that I have alien thought patterns and am thus immune to media swaying. But I have found that I interpret symbols somewhat differently than others. Also, I pick up on details that most people seem to miss, and miss other things that most people find obvious. So, maybe, if you are looking for an astute advisor or news filter, you find someone who thinks a little differently than others.

OK, next comment will be on a new post.

Thanks for the insightful post and the personal perspective, Baron Opal. Yes, it's a lengthy thread and covers much the topic in some depth.

I do agree that much perception is subjective. But mass media, by definition, is concerned with the statistically and demographically targeted group - as specified by the most sophisticated research it can muster. The fact that we are susceptible to suggestion, social beings, existing in peer-pressure cultures renders us vulnerable to the most successful tool for human manipulation in the history of mankind. That's why I think delving into the subject(s) at hand has value for us all.

From http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/index.cfm I found the last paragraph I incuded to be the most telling.

Media and Girls
"They have ads of how you should dress and what you should look like and this and that, and then they say, 'but respect people for what they choose to be like.' Okay, so which do we do first?"

Kelsey, 16, quoted in Girl Talk


The statistics are startling. The average North American girl will watch 5,000 hours of television, including 80,000 ads, before she starts kindergarten. In the United States, Saturday morning cartoons alone come with 33 commercials per hour. Commercials aimed at kids spend 55 per cent of their time showing boys building, fixing toys, or fighting. They show girls, on the other hand, spending 77 per cent of their time laughing, talking, or observing others. And while boys in commercials are shown out of the house 85 per cent of the time, more than half of the commercials featuring girls place them in the home.

You've Come A Long Way, Baby?

The mass media, especially children's television, provide more positive role models for girls than ever before. Kids shows such as Timothy Goes to School, Canadian Geographic for Kids, and The Magic School Bus feature strong female characters who interact with their male counterparts on an equal footing.

There are strong role models for teens as well. A Children Now study of the media favoured by teenage girls discovered that a similar proportion of male and female characters on TV and in the movies rely on themselves to achieve their goals and solve their own problems. (The one discrepancy was in the movies, where 49 per cent of male characters solve their own problems, compared to only 35 per cent of their female counterparts.) Television shows like Buffy, the Vampire Slayer and computer games such as Tomb Raider and Perfect Dark, star girls who are physically assertive and in control. And of course, Lisa has been acknowledged as the brains of the Simpson family since the start.

Then there's Teen Vogue, which gushes that 'finding yourself and what makes you feel happy and healthy [is] always in fashion', but also runs ads for breast enhancement tablets. For $229.95, you too can grow bigger boobs, 'feel more beautiful and sexier than ever' and have 'more self esteem, more confidence.'
(Source: Janelle Brown, Salon, 2001)
However, the messages media send to young girls are mixed. On the small screen, male characters continue to outnumber females by a ratio of 2 or 3 to 1, and 90 per cent of the actors starring in American children's programming are male.


Magazines are the only medium where girls are over-represented. However,almost 70 per cent of the editorial content in teen mags focuses on beauty and fashion, and only 12 per cent talks about school or careers.

Media, Self-Esteem and Girls' Identities

Research indicates that these mixed messages make it difficult for girls to negotiate the transition to adulthood. In its 1998 study Focus on Youth, the Canadian Council on Social Development reports that while the number of boys who say they "have confidence in themselves" remains relatively stable through adolescence, the numbers for girls drop steadily from 72 per cent in Grade Six students to only 55 per cent in Grade Ten.

Carol Gilligan was the first to highlight this unsettling trend in her landmark 1988 study. Gilligan suggests it happens because of the widening gap between girls' self-images and society's messages about what girls should be like.

Children Now points out that girls are surrounded by images of female beauty that are unrealistic and unattainable. And yet two out of three girls who participated in their national media survey said they "wanted to look like a character on TV." One out of three said they had "changed something about their appearance to resemble that character."

In 2002, researchers at Flinders University in South Australia studied 400 teenagers regarding how they relate to advertising. They found that girls who watched TV commercials featuring underweight models lost self-confidence and became more dissatisfied with their own bodies. Girls who spent the most time and effort on their appearance suffered the greatest loss in confidence.

nice addition ng...

we really don't have a clue do we?

My Gawg! but you read fast!!
I had been reviewing this thread and noticing Art's remarks about growing up with notions about having to match or emulate what was put before him via media and his subsequent rebellion and researched media influence on young girls-being the parent of one and one who was greatly influenced and, being who I was or am, coming up so greatly short of what was shown.
While I know both genders are heavily influenced by commercial perceptions, I think young girls have a harder time dealing with their shortcomings as they pertain to these false ideals. The 'love me because I'm beautiful' syndrome can and does have fatal consequences.

Yes. What immediately comes to mind is how the old saw of "parental influence" is thoroughly subverted by media-induced "values."

As if being a good parent could somehow sway a child away from the persistent, pernicious, and powerful-beyond-reckoning domination of media-programmed self-image perception.

and the marketing of snacks to kids vis a vie characters...

I do know that Clifford the Big Red Dog isn't allowed to be on surgary snacks. So he's on some natural fruit gum thing, onion soup, Kix cereal, and that's about it.

All the others market everything from cookies to candy and make tidy profits...

"...banned television advertising to children."
"School-based marketing has been banned..."
"...television commercials for candy and fast foods are banned, wrappers must carry warnings that fast food should be eaten in moderation and that sugary foods cause tooth decay."

That's how we get some control back over the debilitating effects of media. Censorship? Words mean what we want them to mean. I like to think of it as a simple exercise in POWER. No one has the "right" to create a toxic environment - including a "toxic food environment."

Thanks Cynthetiq - good to see some concrete solutions.

sometimes the deals themselves become news and some of the more conscious people will at least see it coming...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What would you prefer? Welcome to capitalism.

A capitalist context has been acknowledged in this thread since its inception. That is not at issue here. The various methods in which culture at large and advertising impact populations are being examined. Many posts here illuminate these topics. Many others contain cogent comments, which have carried the discussion forward. It's a lengthy thread which has, for the most part, not been taken lightly. Many thanks to those good members who have contributed significantly toward its continuing development.

Re: Cyn's latest post: I remember as a kid watching cop shows produced by "Quinn Martin Productions" and every one featured Fords and Lincolns to the point of making it seem that no other car maker existed. The shows were, of course 'brought to you by your local Lincoln-Mercury dealer'. So, this is certainly nothing new at all. I think what IS new is the consciousness of both the public and media since back then, as I don't recall any news announcements pertaining to these placements. It was just a matter of course accepted when noticed.

I think there is also the developement of the entire concept of product placement and it's inherent value to consider. ngdawg mentioned a good older example of 'sponsorship' which I think was probably the predecessor to today's product placement agreements.

Seeing Coke cans, or Reese's Pieces in films isn't new, but the motivations behind the placements are much more organized. Many older product placements were done because a director/actor simply liked a prduct or, in some cases, it was probably what was on hand for the set props.

Today's product placement agreements not only lock-in the products, they lock-out others. In many cases, (like the Volkswagons mentioned before) the manufacturor wants to up the associative stock of their product by attaching it to the popular, oft-mimicked, hollywood scene. Why would anyone would invest 200 million into this type of agreement if there weren't concrete evidence of the associative effects that media has on our buying habits?

I seem to remember that BMW motorcycle sales nearly tripled for a time after their R1200C Cruiser was featured on the then-current Bond Film. BMW has been making motorcycles since the 1930's and a single prominent product placement in a popular movie had a huge impact on their sales. Kind of powerful...isn't it?

Powerful, yes, in that it is 'mind-control' through suggestion. Example, try not to eat your favorite food. But the more you think about not having it, the more you want it-you're actually putting the vision of that food deeper into your subconscious by constantly telling yourself you shouldn't have it. We as individuals are bombarded with over 5,000 ads a day, thanks to product placement alone. This includes styrofoam cups from convenience stores, those flash ads on top of your favorite sites, t-shirts, everthing. A small child may not be able to read, but show the MacDonald's arches, and they'll identify them. No one is immune to this power of suggestion and the more we consciously try to ignore any single part of it, the more sucked in we seem to get. Our choices must be all-encompassing and deliberate, a very hard task to master.

I am officially addicted to this thread...ARTelevision, great work.
I now do realise that I'm always living scenarios in my head...
Maybe drugs is a way to escape that?? Don't we think differently when on drugs?
i dont know... All of this scares me and fascinates me at the same time....
I want to get away from all this

Thanks...

In my quite extensive past experience, drugs magnify the fictional scenarios. If there's a real way out of all this, I'd think it would have appeared in these pages by now. My own "solution" is simply to work on being aware of the fictions we live...

Thanks to roachboy for recently reminding me of the work of Guy Debord...

Within the following words a bit of a manifesto can be intuited. It is a manifesto of individual self-actualization, I think - an ideal perhaps - but of interest in terms of pointing a finger toward the moon. Remember to not look at the finger...

..............

B U R E A U O F P U B L I C S E C R E T S

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Critique of Separation
(film soundtrack)

We don’t know what to say. Sequences of words are repeated; gestures are recognized. Outside us. Of course some methods are mastered, some results are verified. Often it’s amusing. But so many things we wanted have not been attained, or only partially and not like we imagined. What communication have we desired, or experienced, or only simulated? What real project has been lost?

The cinematic spectacle has its rules, its reliable methods for producing satisfactory products. But the reality that must be taken as a point of departure is dissatisfaction. The function of the cinema, whether dramatic or documentary, is to present a false and isolated coherence as a substitute for a communication and activity that are absent. To demystify documentary cinema it is necessary to dissolve its “subject matter.”

A well-established rule is that any statement in a film that is not illustrated by images must be repeated or else the spectators will miss it. That may be true. But this same type of miscommunication constantly occurs in everyday encounters. Something must be specified but there’s not enough time, and you are not sure you have been understood. Before you have said or done what was necessary, the other person has already gone. Across the street. Overseas. Too late for any rectification.

After all the empty time, all the lost moments, there remain these endlessly traversed postcard landscapes; this distance organized between each and everyone. Childhood? Why, it’s right here — we have never emerged from it.

Our era accumulates powers and imagines itself as rational. But no one recognizes these powers as their own. Nowhere is there any entry to adulthood. The only thing that happens is that this long restlessness sometimes eventually evolves into a routinized sleep. Because no one ceases to be kept under guardianship. The point is not to recognize that some people live more or less poorly than others, but that we all live in ways that are out of our control.

At the same time, it is a world that has taught us how things change. Nothing stays the same. The world changes more rapidly every day; and I have no doubt that those who day after day produce it against themselves can appropriate it for themselves.

The only adventure, we said, is to contest the totality, whose center is this way of living, where we can test our strength but never use it. No adventure is directly created for us. The adventures that are presented to us form part of the mass of legends transmitted by the cinema or in other ways; part of the whole spectacular sham of history.

Until the environment is collectively dominated, there will be no real individuals — only specters haunting the objects anarchically presented to them by others. In chance situations we meet separated people moving randomly. Their divergent emotions neutralize each other and reinforce their solid environment of boredom. As long as we are unable to make our own history, to freely create situations, our striving toward unity will give rise to other separations. The quest for a unified activity leads to the formation of new specializations.

And only a few encounters were like signals emanating from a more intense life, a life that has not really been found.

What cannot be forgotten reappears in dreams. At the end of this type of dream, half asleep, the events are still for a brief moment taken as real. Then the reactions they give rise to become clearer, more distinct, more reasonable; like on so many mornings the memory of what you drank the night before. Then comes the awareness that it’s all false, that “it was only a dream,” that the new realities were illusory and you can’t get back into them. Nothing you can hold on to. These dreams are flashes from the unresolved past, flashes that illuminate moments previously lived in confusion and doubt. They provide a blunt revelation of our unfulfilled needs.

Here we see daylight, and perspectives that now no longer have any meaning. The sectors of a city are to some extent decipherable. But the personal meaning they have had for us is incommunicable, as is the secrecy of private life in general, regarding which we possess nothing but pitiful documents.

Official news is elsewhere. Society broadcasts to itself its own image of its own history, a history reduced to a superficial and static pageant of its rulers — the persons who embody the apparent inevitability of whatever happens. The world of the rulers is the world of the spectacle. The cinema suits them well. Regardless of its subject matter, the cinema presents heroes and exemplary conduct modeled on the same old pattern as the rulers.

This dominant equilibrium is brought back into question each time unknown people try to live differently. But it was always far away. We learn of it through the papers and newscasts. We remain outside it, relating to it as just another spectacle. We are separated from it by our own nonintervention. And end up being rather disappointed in ourselves. At what moment was choice postponed? When did we miss our chance? We haven’t found the arms we needed. We’ve let things slip away.

I have let time slip away. I have lost what I should have defended.

This general critique of separation obviously contains, and conceals, some particular memories. A less recognized pain, a less explicable feeling of shame. Just what separation was it? How quickly we have lived! It is to this point in our haphazard story that we now return.

Everything involving the sphere of loss — that is, what I have lost of myself, the time that has gone; and disappearance, flight; and the general evanescence of things, and even what in the prevalent and therefore most vulgar social sense of time is called wasted time — all this finds in that strangely apt old military term, lost children, its intersection with the sphere of discovery, of the exploration of unknown terrains, and with all the forms of quest, adventure, avant-garde. This is the crossroads where we have found ourselves and lost our way.

It must be admitted that none of this is very clear. It is a completely typical drunken monologue, with its incomprehensible allusions and tiresome delivery. With its vain phrases that do not await response and its overbearing explanations. And its silences.

The poverty of means is intended to reveal the scandalous poverty of the subject matter.
The events that occur in our individual existence as it is now organized, the events that really concern us and require our participation, generally merit nothing more than our indifference as distant and bored spectators. In contrast, the situations presented in artistic works are often attractive, situations that would merit our active participation. This is a paradox to reverse, to put back on its feet. This is what must be realized in practice. As for this idiotic spectacle of the filtered and fragmented past, full of sound and fury, it is not a question now of transforming or “adapting” it into another neatly ordered spectacle that would play the game of neatly ordered comprehension and participation. No. A coherent artistic expression expresses nothing but the coherence of the past, nothing but passivity.

It is necessary to destroy memory in art. To undermine the conventions of its communication. To demoralize its fans. What a task! As in a blurry drunken vision, the memory and language of the film fade out simultaneously. At the extreme, miserable subjectivity is reversed into a certain sort of objectivity: a documentation of the conditions of noncommunication.

For example, I don’t talk about her. False face. False relation. A real person is separated from the interpreter of that person, if only by the time passed between the event and its evocation, by a distance that continually increases, a distance that is increasing at this very moment. Just as a conserved expression remains separate from those who hear it abstractly and without any power over it.

The spectacle as a whole is nothing other than this era, an era in which a certain youth has recognized itself. It is the gap between that image and its consequences; the gap between the visions, tastes, refusals and projects that previously characterized this youth and the way it has advanced into ordinary life.

We have invented nothing. We adapt ourselves, with a few variations, into the network of possible itineraries. We get used to it, it seems.

No one returns from an enterprise with the ardor they had upon setting out. Fair companions, adventure is dead.

Who will resist? It is necessary to go beyond this partial defeat. Of course. And how to do it?

This is a film that interrupts itself and does not come to an end.

All conclusions remain to be drawn; everything has to be recalculated.

The problem continues to be posed — in continually more complicated terms. We have to resort to other measures.

Just as there was no profound reason to begin this formless message, so there is none for concluding it.

I have scarcely begun to make you understand that I don’t intend to play the game.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/debord....separation.htm

A current myth is the notion that because people get their infotainment from the Internet (many sources) rather than major news channels/organs (few sources) we are somehow magically more well-informed. Clueless use of the Internet and blind faith in its sources do not constitute critical thinking. There is no substitute for discernment and critical thought.

Here's an article by Antone Gonsalves, the Editor of InternetWeek...from internetweek.com. I can tell you that my students are fairly clueless as to how to search and discern wheat from chaff when they're researching and referencing their writing by using online sources.

...................
"
Fooling Ourselves

Research from the Pew Internet & American Life Project...shows that many of us are not as smart as we think.

The non-profit group found that only 38 percent of search-engine
users are aware of the distinction between paid and unpaid results, and only 1 in 6 can always tell which results are paid and which are not.

On the other hand, 92 percent of searchers in the Pew survey said
they were at least confident about their search abilities, with more
than half saying they were "very confident."

That's quite a contrast. This is the equivalent of being unaware of
the distinction between a newspaper advertising and a news story, or between a TV news program and an infomercial.

While I don't believe the study shows the majority of us are stupid, it does point to careless use of the Internet as a source of
information, and I can't help but wonder if this is an indicator of a
bigger problem. As the issues facing our nation increase in
complexity, we need to learn to search out facts that will help us
make intelligent decisions in our own lives and in the voting booth.

If we base our decisions on carelessly gathered information, then
it's likely we'll suffer in our personal lives and as a free nation.
"
........................

very nice art...

yes while I can find things very quickly and accurrately, I have to keep my critical thinking hat on when researching on the internet.

Before you had a phyisical book to hold, that lead a little credibility to the writer in and of itself because years ago it was not easy to get a book published, fringe or even mainstream. Now it's not that simple, as sometimes research can be cicularly linked referencing each other. The AAA road rage and newsmedia self fueling stories of the 90's exposed that flaw and that was in traditional media outlets.

Critical thinking must always be at the ready.

Autorox on Spike TV

Last night they had an "awards" show for cars.

It was an MTV production flash with cars as the centerpiece and rock stars providing the soundtrack. A long 1.5 hour commercial on cars, music, fashion. If you can catch it I suggest just the first 15 minutes or just after the Yellow Corvette drives off the stage.

http://www.autorox.com/rsc/

from today's Variety:

Turner takes a stand
Maverick mogul blasts big business congloms

By ELIZABETH GUIDER

LAS VEGAS -- Alternately wisecracking and whimsical, Ted Turner took several pot shots at media consolidation but largely spared his old colleagues at AOL Time WarnerTime Warner during the opening keynote session at NATPE Tuesday morning.
The maverick mogulmogul told some 750 NATPE delegates that the concentration of media might in the hands of five congloms had made it well-nigh impossible to break into the business -- and, even more perniciously, made the news operations of such companies less critical of government.

But describing himself as "phased out" of the bizbiz, the CNN founder came across to the NATPE contingent as more resigned than riled up. Feisty he was not.

Given war and environmental degradation, he pointed out, there's a tremendous responsibility in running these operations.

"We need to be very well informed. We need less Hollywood news and a little more hard news," Turner said in an opening 10-minute address. That young people get much of their news from sources like Jon StewartJon Stewart on Comedy CentralComedy Central was, in his view, "frightening."

For Turner, the issue of media consolidation is in his "top five" list of global problems somewhere down from war, nuclear proliferation and environmental degradation.

Responding then to questions from former CNN news anchor Bernard Shaw, Turner reiterated that he was "against the formation of these giant companies," including in retrospect the merger between TW and AOL, which voting for was his "craziest" business mistake.

Asked by Shaw what he would do were he to find himself in a sauna with former AOL TW chairman Gerald Levin, (the architect of the merger), Turner declined the ball and quipped, "I forgave Russia for despotic communism, so I can forgive Jerry Levin." In fact, Turner said there was no point in rehashing the AOL fiasco in that he still sits on the board and has a responsibility "not to be too critical of my old company."

Coming across as more rueful than wrathful, the 66-year-old cable pioneer advised a couple of questioners from the audience to take their greatest risks while young, as, to his mind, there's nothing worse than an older guy who used to be rich. "That's why I started that restaurant business," he added, referring to his chain of grills, which specialize in bison burgers.

"It's not as exciting as the bombing of Baghdad, but people have to eat. They've got half the fat of beef burgers," he half-joked.

To another query from a young cable aspirant, Turner opined that consolidation had made it "virtually impossible" to start up a service -- "they own 90% of the business" -- so "I'd go into the restaurant biz -- or go work for a salary for those jerks."

Meanwhile, in kicking off the 42nd NATPE convention the org's prexyprexy-CEO Rick Feldman unveiled an initiative to help local stations deal with indecency issues.

Together with the Annenberg School at USC, NATPE will host a symposium this spring in Los Angeles to come up with solutions that will both safeguard consumers and allow creativity to flourish.

"The uncertainty over the regulatory landscape," Feldman told NATPE delegates, has led to "a chilling atmosphere."

He pointed to the latest incidence of censorship in which PBS excised a scene from HBO's movie "A Dirty War" because it showed a naked woman being de-contaminated of some chemical poison.

Feldman said incidents like that and the reluctance of some stations to broadcast "Saving Private Ryan""Saving Private Ryan" because they were concerned they might be fined - or even loose their broadcast licenses - needed to be addressed. "NATPE will help find some answers," he said.

"The guidelines have to be clearer and our own stance on these issues needs to be communicated to government and the FCC in particular," other NATPE reps added.

World’s Top Brands for 2004:

The first story here refers to Al Jazeera’s move into the World’s Top Brands for 2004. Brand recognition is sort of a popularity contest for memes. It matters not what the brand is all about – just that we know it and recognize it. The other news here is that Apple topped Google in it’s quest for our cranium space.

………….

Surprise contender in battle of the brands


Times Online 01/31/05

Apple and Google have battled it out with al-Jazeera, the controversial Arab television channel, in the branding stakes

Apple, the computer company, has toppled Google, the search engine, to be voted "the brand with the most global impact" in a poll run by Interbrand, the branding consultancy giant.

The real surprise, however, was the emergence of al-Jazeera, the controversial Arab television station in a top-five dominated by "shiny", fashion-conscious, western companies.

Apple aficionados are likely to regard the verdict, reached by readers of Interbrand's brandchannel.com website, as overdue. The company, recently described by one fan as having the "attitude of an artist and the eye of an anthropologist", has consistently won plaudits for its sleek, lovingly engineered products and now enjoys commercial success.

"It’s hard to imagine a brand having a shinier year than Apple," said Robin D.Rusch, the editor in chief of Brandchannel.

The phenomenal popularity of the iPod has transformed Apple’s fortunes. Over 10 million of the must have music players have been sold since the product's launch four years ago. Last year they helped achieve a 300 per cent increase in revenues for Apple – more than offsetting its shrinking share of the computer market.

The upstart Google, whose internet search engine inspires similar levels of loyalty, usurped Apple as the most admired brand in 2002, according to the poll. But this year the company, which makes 95 per cent of its revenue from paid-search advertising, could only manage second spot.

The shock result came among the runners up. Following the familiarly western Ikea and Stabucks – deemed the third and fourth most impactful brands of the last year respectively – came al-Jazeera, the controversial Qatar-based television station.

Al-Jazeera, which is funded by Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa, the leader of Qater who staged a coup against his father a decade ago, has become renowned for its decisions to air tapes that the western media have considered too bloody or violent to screen.

It has also frequently been the first channel to receive messages from figures on the run from western authorities. The channel last month played a tape purportedly from Osama bin Laden urging Iraqis to boycott the weekend’s parliamentary polls. United States forces bombed the channel’s Baghdad bureau earlier in the Iraq war.

The incendiary style of programming has displeased several disparate groups – the US Defence Department has labelled al-Jazeera "an unbalanced political entity" while many Shias regard the station as a Sunni mouthpiece – but it has changed the media landscape of Middle East.

In the nine years since al-Jazeera began broadcasting it has been joined by more than half a dozen Arab competitors, leading commentators to observe that having been unable to strangle the station, other Arab states have been forced to emulate it.

Compared with 2003, al-Jazeera climbed eight places to reach the fifth spot in the global survey.

Mr Rusch said: "Al-Jazeera presents an alternative point of view to those who until recently have had only CNN or the BBC to supply ‘world’ news views."

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/ar...464886,00.html

……………………………………………………………………………………………

The next story is a broader report of the contenders for the top spot in our minds and eyes. Let’s just take the time to reflect on these reports.
…………………………………………………………………………………………….


Readers Pick Apple in 2004
by - Robin D. Rusch
31-Jan-2005

Global: Apple bites big
After a two-year hiatus Apple has returned to win the 2004 Readers’ Choice Awards for the brand with the most global impact—a title held by Google since 2002.

It’s hard to imagine a brand having a shinier year than Apple. Notably punctuated with iMacs, iPods and iTunes, Apple’s 2004 presence was felt in the press, in ads and on the streets, with iPod coming to define the word “ubiquitous.” Coupled with strong revenue, Apple reported a net profit of US$ 295 million in the last quarter of 2004 alone and a 2004 overall net income growth of 300 percent. Yes, 300 percent.


At Apple’s core is great innovation, beautiful design and an ability to bring warmth and passion to those who may be completely incurious about technical gadgetry but need it nonetheless to survive in today’s world.

From U2 to “You too?,” the iPod alone sold 4.6 million units in the last quarter, practically doubling sales since its launch. (There are now about 10 million pod-addicts on the planet.) Meanwhile, iMac sales tripled as Apple’s overall computer sales rose by 26 percent over 2003 sales. Music division iTunes became the blueprint for Napster-alternative online music sales. And swanky retail outlets gave Apple enthusiasts a chance to worship or interact directly with the company as well as each other.

However, Apple’s cultural symbolism was not economically symbiotic. Its worldwide computer market share dropped to less than two percent in 2004 to a 1.87 percent share in Q3 of 2004 (down from 2.19% in Q3 2003). The 2004 world leader for market share was Dell at 18 percent, followed by HP at 16 percent and IBM with 6 percent. The small white hope is that iPod’s halo effect will bring more buyers to Apple’s other offerings, which go beyond consumer goods to include servers, WiFi, and software, and include the already-backordered new iPod Shuffle and a sub-US$ 500 Mac.

Not far behind Apple, and equally appealing to those navigating a potentially complicated technical landscape, is Google.

The world’s number one search engine, Google’s impact on our readers reflects the online public’s growing dependence on sorting through an incomprehensible amount of available information. On our screens, its minimalist design betrays its maximal capacity. But Google does more, including technology licensing and hardware, news aggregating and shopping (Froogle). According to the company, 95 percent of revenue comes from AdSense advertising.

Google lost little ground in being dumped as the search engine behind Yahoo early last year; it conducts more than 200 million searches a day and leads the world for search engine usage with 57 percent of the current market, followed by Yahoo at 21 percent and MSN at just 9 percent.

Largely based on functional attributes, which offer clarity in a complex field, Google is by no means invincible. It faces competition on many fronts including Yahoo’s Overture search engine and other solutions like Vivisimo’s Clusty, and MSN Desktop Search, all of which hope to build a better mousetrap.

From the public’s perspective, Google’s unique approach to life’s little issues was on display as it went public in 2004, seeking to do so largely on its own terms. The same strong arm can be felt in the pretzel twisting exercise webmasters are submitted to when trying to meet the company’s keyword ranking guidelines. However as long as the brand is on top, it gets to call the rules.

The upside to Google’s future? Only 12.7 percent of the world population has access to the Internet, leaving 5.6 billion potential future users.

From tech to retail, numbers three and four on the Global list are, respectively, Swedish furniture retailer IKEA and American coffee brand Starbucks. Surprisingly similar despite product differences, both benefit from having highly branded retail spaces that quickly generate publicity and awareness.

Both IKEA and Starbucks expanded in 2004. IKEA opened ten more stores in 2004 and has staked out 20 new locations for 2005.

Starbucks opened 1,344 new spaces in the first three quarters of 2004, to bring its global total to 8,569 in more than 30 countries. The hyper-caffeinated brand intends to expand to 15,000 US stores and 15,000 international stores. Although the expansion’s timeframe is unclear, consider that the retailer opened roughly 3.5 stores every day in 2004.

Starbucks is not without competition, particularly beyond US shores. Pretty much any venue brewing quality coffee and offering ambiance can rival the barista. However Starbucks benefits from high brand awareness, an efficiency of size and operating on the McDonald’s principle of “safety in the known.”

Rounding out the top five 2004 Global Brands is a surprise winner: the Arab-focused, 24-hour news source Al Jazeera. Based in Qatar and offering an alternative to BBC or CNN, Al Jazeera has over 35 million viewers (overwhelmingly Muslim) and 30 bureaus worldwide. As the issues of 2004 hovered heavily around the Middle East and Islamic populations, Al Jazeera’s relevancy soared.

Though suffering difficulties such as banned reporters, advertising boycotts, and charges of bias (arguably stemming from those who are themselves biased toward European and American interests), Al Jazeera is viewed as relatively independent within its region and is increasingly gaining mainstream credibility beyond its borders. The company itself claims to “cover all viewpoints with objectivity integrity and balance.”

Already offering news in English at www.English.AlJazeera.net, the media source is planning to offer an English channel satellite service in 2005.

Other brands in the top ten are previous year mainstays, with Germany’s car brand Mini and America’s Coca-Cola sliding from the top five in 2003 to sixth and seventh in 2004. The UK's Virgin entered into the top at eighth from last year's eleventh. Finland’s Nokia slipped from seventh to tenth.

Notable newcomer to the top ten is eBay (at ninth). The American online auctioneer claims 95 million registered users, and in 2004 expanded abroad to Asia, South America and Europe, allowing people all over the world to sell things they don't want and buy things they don't need.



US & Canada: Jobs well done

Apple is the winner in the 2004 Readers’ Choice Award for the US & Canada for the second straight year. Target falls to third as Google creeps up to place second.

The perpetual underdog, with less than two percent of the world market, Apple has what John Schwartz in the New York Times aptly described as the “attitude of an artist and the eye of an anthropologist” (16 January 2005). The company’s ability to delight the user in a bland land of equipment and software makes it easy to see why it impacts those of us who spend our days in the 21st century.

However, less savvy consumers contribute to the actual sales dominance of mainstream competitors, particularly in the computer division. Apple Computer ranks sixth in the US with just 3.33 percent of the market (Dell leads at 33%, followed by HP at 20% and Gateway at 5.23%).

Undaunted by the competition, Apple’s dizzying pace of inventing new toys looks set to continue in 2005. The Shuffle and Mac mini were both unveiled in January of 2005. (2,000 Shuffle units sold within four hours of revealing the iPoddler.)

Continuing to reflect global results, Google pulls up behind Apple at second place.

It’s no surprise that Google ranks so high in the lives of North Americans, as more and more households go online (roughly 68 percent of the North American population now has access to the Internet).

Google deserves credit for offering clarity where most other portals employ a jungle of links. Easy enough for a newbie to navigate, it still remains the engine of choice for techies. Consider this: 66 percent of Microsoft employees use Google while only 20 percent use their own MSN engine. (We’d speculate on what the remaining 14% are up to but we’re worried about mysterious DOS errors).

Overall in the US, Google holds 34 percent of the search engine market. Yahoo is close behind with 32 percent, MSN at 27 percent and AOL, the milk and cookies version of the Internet, drags in at nine percent.

Retailers Target and Starbucks are, respectively, third and fourth in the US & Canada, making tech and retail the categories to most impact our readers.

Although trailing Wal-Mart in actual sales, American department store Target gets points beyond just price (Wal-Mart’s primary offering). Target’s fourth year in the top five US & Canada Brands reflects the public’s love of the reasonably priced, upscale retailer.

Shopping for bathmats, a Target shopper feels smart, savvy and, dare we say, sexy. It appears that while we’re glad to get a year’s supply of toilet paper at Wal-Mart for a nickel, the experience doesn’t exactly linger beyond the checkout line. Perhaps this explains why Wal-Mart placed 18th to Target’s 2nd.

Despite offloading its underperforming divisions in 2004 (Marshall Field’s and Mervyn’s), Target is rumored to be looking to expand. Canadians may see their beloved Hudson’s Bay Company acquired by the retailer in 2005.

Though experimenting somewhat outside of its charter with breakfast and lunch options in select markets, and offering branded music compilations, it seems safe to assume that Starbucks’ impact on the daily need for caffeine isn’t waning. A relatively cheap treat, Starbucks is a good example of socialized luxury.

Reflecting an incredible rise in the US & Canada results is Pixar at fifth place, up from eighth in 2003 and 31st in 2002.

Still under the partnership thumb of its distributor Disney (and majority-owned by Apple’s CEO Steve Jobs), Pixar released just one feature-length film in 2004: The Incredibles. Competitor DreamWorks, which placed 40th, released four films in 2004, including Shark Tale and Shrek II. Placing 37th, Disney (a comprehensive conglomeration of entertainment businesses making it difficult to really compare with Pixar) made news most notably in 2004 by declining to release the documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 from Michael Moore.

We mention Moore because, though not listed on our survey, he received quite a few write in votes along with his nemesis George Bush. (At this point we should remind our readers that a brand’s overall “impact” could be positive or negative.)

Brand cults-of-personality who were listed did quite well in the US & Canada results. The follicly-adventurous real estate and reality TV developer Donald Trump came in seventh, just above imprisoned home-economics guru Martha Stewart (eighth) and daytime TV icon and Pontiac shill Oprah Winfrey (tenth).

Two Internet companies, Amazon.com and eBay placed sixth and ninth respectively. Both brands survived the dot-com bust and are thriving by heeding the qualities of successful offline brands: fulfilling a market need with reliable service.

Europe & Africa: IKEA inches up

Swedish retailer IKEA topped results in the Europe & Africa region in 2004. Although the Swedes may at times grow weary of the assemble-it-yourself furniture giant, the rest of Europe is still reveling in the opportunity to buy Scandinavian designs on a shoestring budget. Europe represents 81 percent of the furniture giant’s sales (North America is 16% and Asia just 3%).

As for interest in the brand, consider that IKEA’s is the world's most widely read catalog with145 million copies printed in 2004 (and not a single naked person).

IKEA has come a long way from selling pencils but its success is not assured. Fellow Scandinavian furniture retailer, ILVA has plans to expand beyond its borders, adding to IKEA’s competitor list. First stop: the UK in ‘05.

Speaking of the UK, Virgin splits Swedish retail brands IKEA and H&M (third), by finishing second in Europe & Africa.

Virgin has so many businesses that it’s not possible to parse through what impacts our readers specifically. But at this point, it must be possible to live a complete Virgin life from transportation to communication, entertainment, drinks, cosmetics, financial services, and so much more. Next stop space, literally.

Richard Branson continues to delight or disgust depending on one’s perspective, but we suspect the voters for Virgin in this ranking are definitely fans. Sir Richard’s tremendous talent for making us feel like winners just for choosing Virgin cannot be underestimated, even if his success at reality TV should have been.

Swedish clothing retailer H&M operates on IKEA’s philosophy by offering inexpensive yet stylish clothing for men and women. Priced below or at the same level as other popular high street retailers, H&M leverages the “get what you pay for” formula to the customer’s benefit by offering frocks so low-priced they’re practically disposable. Competitors like Spain’s Zara, which placed eighth here, typically price higher, making purchasing less of a lighthearted decision.

The company’s extraordinary expansion brings it to a total of over 1,000 stores worldwide. Ninety percent of H&M’s sales happen beyond its borders, with Germany (not Sweden) as H&M’s biggest market. In 2004, H&M acquired Germany’s Gap chain, simultaneously increasing retail locations and decreasing competition.

Sliding since 2001, but still within the top five, Finnish telecommunications brand Nokia comes in fourth in Europe & Africa. Still the world’s leading cellphone maker, nokiaholics are regularly treated to design and technology innovations from multimedia messaging to Java applications to EDGE or GPRS wireless web access.

But why is Nokia sliding from its number one placings in 2001 and 2002? Probably because by failing to add a toaster to recent models, Nokia has become its own worst enemy. Ratcheting up its innovation half-life to an unmaintainable degree, Nokia disappoints fans when it slips with inconsistent designs or simply slows down to mere human levels.

In its ninth year of broadcasting, Al Jazeera rounds out the top five in Europe and Africa, coming in ahead of competitor BBC (at ninth place).

Accused of bias (an argument we have not the tipple nor time to enter into here), Al Jazeera presents an alternative point of view to those who until recently had only CNN or BBC to supply "world" news views. Compared with 2003, Al Jazeera has climbed over eight other brands to place fifth in both 2004 Global and 2004 Europe & Africa results.



Asia-Pacific: Sony sees enemies at the gates

Consumer electronic brands lead in Asia-Pacific with Sony in first followed by Samsung and LG. The close results of these brands perfectly reflect the zeitgeist of the marketplace in which they compete.

As the Asia-Pacific brand with the most impact in 2004 (eleventh Globally), Sony is working harder than ever to innovate in each of its various and varied divisions.

Film, music, electronics, and semiconductors: Sony is involved in just about every aspect of entertainment from delivery systems to content. In 2004, its music division merged with BMG to form Sony BMG, second now only to Universal Music.

Still, as popular as Sony is in the consumer market, it’s obviously struggling. Strong competitor challenges from every part of its business as well as the public’s endless expectation of lower prices for digital equipment, have led to lower profits across the industry. Sony is countering with an investment in R&D, partnering with its own competition including NTT DoCoMo and Samsung, to develop new technology, and even taking the long-expected and advised step of withdrawing from areas where it’s weak. (In 2004, determining that the PDA market will eventually cede to cellphones, Sony withdew the Clié from the global market to sell only domestically. It will refocus its resources on smart cellphones instead.)

Part of Sony’s headache must include the strong showing of Korean chaebols Samsung (second) and LG (third).

Although Samsung’s businesses sprawls from semiconductors to oil and textiles, we assume the brand impact measured here is from its consumer electronics division Samsung Electronics.

Like Sony, Samsung now fights on many different fronts and ended 2004 by warning of lower profits than expected. But the Korean brand has been on a strong rise for the last couple years by turning its product from cheap to smart, investing in quality design and technology, and generally surprising consumers with competitively priced, quality products.

Samsung is also drawing praise in its appliance business. Now third in the global appliance sector (behind Whirlpool and Electrolux), Samsung unveiled smart products in 2004, such as the germ-free fridge.

Similar in scope to Sony and Samsung’s diverse businesses, LG places third among brands with the most impact. The Korean consumer electronics brand appears to be trying to beat Samsung at its own game by countering a traditionally poor image with a better quality product.

Last year kicked off with LG’s pledge to become one of the top three global electronics brands. As part of the strategy, it has set its hopes on the handset division where the theory is that loyalty to the brand’s phones will create a halo effect on other product. Sales rose from US$ 6.9 million in 2000 to US$ 44 million last year (beating Sony Ericsson and placing fifth in the world for handsets).

Back to Japan where Toyota places fourth. The automaker’s serious approach to perfection is reflected in sales and prominence in the industry worldwide. Toyota is the largest automaker in Japan and second worldwide only to General Motors. (GM has 15% of the world market; Toyota rose to 13% while Ford sunk to 11%.) While not the number one automaker, Toyota did turn the most profit in 2004: US$ 11.1 billion (to GM’s 4.04 billion and Ford’s 2.67 billion).

Toyota also received many write ins for its Scion line (a sub brand in the US), which seems to be gaining enormous interest beyond the brand’s traditional market.

Ranking fifth in Asia-Pacific is Australia’s Lonely Planet. No longer targeting the backpacker segment, the 31-year-old travel guidebook brand has grown more conservative with age. Its more mainstream approach to content has attracted a larger readership while also placing the once strongly differentiated brand squarely in the path of competitors.

The brand has made good use of the Internet with its travel forum Thorn Tree, and branched into other related guidebook areas such as restaurants and activities. But Lonely Planet’s challenges still lie at the core of its product’s expertise. The right (or wrong) guidebook has the potential to have a substantial impact on one’s life via that emotional connection brands are always looking so hard to establish. Feeling well led when encountering the unknown cannot be underestimated and can lead to lifelong brand loyalty. It is for this reason that Lonely Planet's overwhelming priority should be constant quality control of its content.

After weathering colossal threats to the travel industry in the last three years (SARs, recessions and September 11th), it will be interesting to see how Lonely Planet now handles the rewrite on Asian titles affected by the tsunami to compensate for resorts and “places to eat” that are no longer there.

Rounding out the top ten in the region are, respectively, Singapore Airlines and Qantas, the financial mammoth HSBC, Japanese automaker Honda, and nudie drinks, Australia’s answer to the well-publicized Innocent Drinks brand in the UK.

Latin America: Cemex cements top spot

At the top of the 2004 Latin America brand rankings is Mexican cement brand Cemex. The third largest cement company in the world, Cemex’s recent success can be traced in part to Mexico’s housing boom, as an increase in government mortgage loans has led to an increase in development. However the brand’s finishing is surprising when compared to other regions’ tech and retail favored results.

Nearly a hundred years old, Cemex reported that 2004 net income was more than double 2003’s net. Growing at a comparable rate is Cemex’s debt, now at US$ 5.6 billion, which the company claims is one percent less than the year before. At this rate, Cemex should be debt free just in time for Mexico to reclaim Texas and California.

Three beverage brands land in Latin American’s top five; Mexico’s Corona places second, Cuba/Bermuda’s Bacardi places third and Chile’s Concha y Toro is fifth (knocking off Café de Colombia), leaving bakery brand Bimbo (fourth) to soak in all the booze.

These rankings represent no change from the 2003 Readers’ Choice Award results for Central & Latin America.

Grupo Modelo’s Corona holds the majority of its home market in Mexico, and it does an effective job of selling an image of sun and sand to the rest of the world.

In 2004, Bacardi added to its stable of brands (which includes Dewar’s, Bombay and Martini), including the (estimated) US$ 2 billion purchase of the incredibly successful Grey Goose brand from Sidney Frank.

Chilean wine brand Viña Concha y Toro reflects the overall healthy Chilean wine industry. Chile’s wine market increased 26 percent between September 2003 and October 2004, and of that market, Concha y Toro holds more than 20 percent between its fifteen vineyards. Sales for 2004 were up 3.8 percent with more than half of the revenue coming from exports to nearly 100 countries. The brand follows the Chilean industry model of offering good quality wine at popular price points, but it receives a lot of attention, praise and awards from critical entities like Wine Spectator, Wine Enthusiast, Descorchados and Wines and Spirits.

Mexican brand Bimbo, the third largest bread maker in the world and market leader for flour-based products in the Americas, reported year-over-year increased sales of 7.7 percent in Mexico in 2004 (in the rest of Latin America sales were up 4.9 percent from 2003). Its US sales dip has been blamed, in part, on the lo-carb fad.

With no monumental news in 2004, it becomes difficult to know exactly why our voters rated this brand with such a high impact. Still, like the coffee (and arguably the alcohol) brands in the survey, bread is a daily part of most lives, and no one does bread quite like Bimbo.

Brands rounding out the top ten in Latin America include Brazilian flip-flop brand Havaianas, capturing voters’ fancy as a footwear trend, and finishing sixth. It was followed by Mexican airline Aeroméxico at seventh place.

Although Café de Colombia slipped to eighth (from fifth in 2003) this National Federation of Coffee Growers is still one to watch. Second behind Brazil as the world’s largest coffee producer, Colombia organizes its relatively small individual growers under the more powerful Café de Colombia brand (sub-brand and retail outlets include the Juan Valdez brand).

In addition to reaching more markets abroad, Café de Colombia hopes to brew domestic interest in its own product at home. Presently Colombians only drink 1.2 million of the 12 million sacks of coffee sold each year by the brand.

Rounding out the top ten for Latin America brands are Brazil’s largest industrial company, Petrobras (ninth) and the nation’s cosmetic brand Natura (tenth).



Methods to the Madness: What, who, when, how

The annual Readers’ Choice Awards are a chance to recognize the brands that have the most impact on our lives each year. Impact can be either positive or negative.

A total of 1,984 brandchannel readers from 75 countries voted online between November and December 2004.

A shortlist for each region is provided but readers are given a chance to write in brand(s) to compensate for omissions on the part of brandchannel.

The shortlist comprises brands that were highly visible that year. Write in votes carry equal weight to listed brands unless the brand is already listed in the shortlist, in which case we accept up to 10 write ins for one brand.

Voters are allowed to vote for up to five brands per region and complete the demographics section once. No section of the survey is mandatory, which explains the varying response rates by region. Respondents per region equal: 1,984 for Global, 935 for US & Canada, 858 for Europe & Africa, 655 for Asia-Pacific, and 408 for Latin America.

After submitting, voters receive a “cookie.” Unlike the treat that goes with milk, this cookie signals that the respondent has already voted in that region and cannot vote again.

Voting is open to anyone. Rankings are compiled purely on the basis of reader results. We do not influence the results through weighting, sampling or a flawed electoral college.

Our readers are interested in brands and branding. They are online and are therefore presumably familiar with technology. Of course, they are above average in intelligence, curiosity, good looks, taste, charm.

Sixty percent of voters identified themselves as men; the strongest group of voters fell in the age range of 26 to 35 years old.

Previous year results are equally fascinating: 2003, 2002 and 2001 or view charts of this year and previous year’s surveys.

Brandchannel will be conducting a similar survey for 2005.

Robin D. Rusch is Editor-in-Chief of brandchannel

http://www.brandchannel.com/start1.asp?fa_id=248

………………………………………………………………………

Cogent comments on just how much thinking room we have left to ourselves – considering the humongous impact these conceptualizations have upon our earthly existence - are always appreciated here.

Except for not recognizing some of the European product names, these surveys sound like lemmings took part. Makes one wonder....do we choose the likes of Target or Sony because of their market saturation or did they earn market saturation through our choices?

Well, as you know, I don't think we choose them. I think they are foisted upon us. We're talking about the most virulent and infectious memes on the planet here.

Update: Secret Sales Pitch
 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2.../sub_BandH.jpg


There’s a recent book that updates subliminal studies. It’s available from the site that’s watermarked on the image above.

It is an example from the book – it’s a new one for me and I thought I’d pass it on.
Here’s the author’s commentary with a close-up of the image below that.

“
August Bullock. From Highlights of The Secret Sales Pitch: An Overview of Subliminal Advertising.

This advertisement contains an optical illusion that will become dramatically obvious once it is pointed out to you.

The caption says “If you got crushed in the clinch with your soft pack, try our hard pack.” The play on the words “hard” and “soft” is difficult to overlook; the ad seems to be promising virility and potency to the prospective male purchaser of Benson & Hedges.

The picture portrays a young man and woman embracing each other. If you just glanced at the expression on the man’s face for a moment or two, you would probably assume that he is smug, as though he were thinking “If you smoked Benson &Hedges you too would have beautiful women chasing after you.” If you study the expression on his face, however, you will discover that it is somewhat ambiguous. He could be smug, but he also could be a bit nervous. It is possible that the aggressive advances of the lovely young woman are making him uncomfortable.

Some people have suggested the man shares a secret with male viewers that the woman doesn’t know about. I wondered what the man’s secret could be. I hung the ad on my wall for several weeks and looked at it every day, until one morning it suddenly jumped out at me.

Look at the man’s left hand, the lower hand in the photograph. It is resting gently against the lady’s backbone.

The lady’s backbone has been carefully airbrushed to resemble an erect, male phallus. It is six and a half inches long in the scale of the photograph. It is circumcised, and the tip of it is about to enter a cylindrical curl formed by the lady’s hair.


The longer you look at it, the more obvious it becomes. If you study the close up you will see that the man’s hand is clearly wrapped around a cylindrical object that can’t possibly be part of the woman’s anatomy.
On a conscious level the Benson & Hedges ad promises sexual excitement, but on an unconscious level it stimulates sexual anxiety. The reason for this is that anxiety is associated with maladaptive behaviors like smoking, drinking, and overeating. We all realize that people smoke more when they are nervous; therefore, if you make them nervous you induce them to smoke more. If they know you are trying to make them nervous, however, they will resent the ad and avoid the product. In order to be effective, the ad must present a dual message: one that is consciously understood and presents a socially acceptable theme, and another that resonates with powerful secret motivations the viewer remains unaware of.
“

Here’s the close-up

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...dH_closeup.jpg
…….

As far as examples of subliminal imagery in advertising go, this is a good one – a classic.
As always, draw your own conclusions.

good follow up...

I've been watching TV here and most hotels cater to German and Scandanavians.

there's a large amount of German tourism that there's several German TV channels. One noted thing.. before the advertisement section starts... it starts with a small bumper that reads, werbung, or advertisement/promotion. Almost like a wake up call to remind you that adverts will be foisted upon you.

Yeah - be sure not to get crushed in the clinch with your soft pack...but if does happen, not to worry, we can always try their hard pack...

heh heh

are you saying that even if we don't consciously distinguish a male penis at quick glance, it is what our subconcious perceives ?? That's pretty freaky.. Politicians could airbrush erect penises on their faces to make them look more masculine.
(just kidding). But it truly is frightening that most (and I mean 99%) of the people do not sense these strong messages.
Any way to train ourselves to not be fooled by these ads?

This thread - for me - is about raising the questions that are implict in my posts. IMO the best training is to train ourselves to think critically as regards media and to find out what may be going on in situations that are man-made for the purpose of influencing our behavior in some way.

I start out with the observation that - as social beings - we are highly susceptible to cultural influences. This makes me both curious, skeptical, and critical of media.

Pretty tough though. I mean, we can't always be on our guard..
Yesterday I watched TV for the first time in a looong while. But I wasn't in the mood to look critically at what they fed me and probably swallowed a huge heap of bs.
We might be able to discern some implicit messages in media..but its so overwhelming that we can't control the flow of info entering our brain. Its beyond us, IMO...I don't think people living in modern society can really keep a "clean mind" (if there is such a thing)...even if you do develop an awareness and a critical opinion for the influence these media have on people, you can't escape it. It's everywhere.

Biznatch- I may have posted this quite a while ago, but it pertains to the recent direction as shown in the cigarette ad.
(you may have already encountered this in some other conversations as well)
What do you see?
http://www.thecreaturecompany.com/im...dex%20logo.jpg

biznatch - I actually agree with you. I do the best I can - but my own view is that these forces happen to be far more powerful than an individual mind is capable of combating. This is a long thread - there's a lot of discussion and point/counterpoint to it. I'm glad you find it interesting.

ng, thanks. It is good to let a few posts go by before explaining things. More fun for all that way.

constant critical thinking is the only defense.

it isn't just at the time of viewing but also at the times of procuring and purchasing. I try to think about the WHY I want a particular product over another... good examples are detergents, all of them get your clothes clean, while some do contain phosphates which some people are allergic to, what's the illusion of difference? brighter? cleaner? whiter?

Consumer reports actually did a comparison of major detergents quite a while back(and probably did again since). The main difference between them all? Scent. Not one failed to clean clothes. In this category, Tide is probably the biggest seller-but go to a Sam's Club or Costco and look at the huge tubs-Tide is several dollars more for the same amount as one called Gain, so i bought that. Makes my laundry smell like burned wood, though, so now I have to put in fabric softner. Did I save any money? Maybe a little, factoring in the purchase of the softner.
I like to think I'm a savvy enough consumer in that I try to never buy any product simply because of its advertising factors. Cost is the biggest issue with me, coupled with ease of use or convenience to me. On the other hand, if a store brand of, say, vegetables comes with wasteful stems or bad pieces, and we know that national brand does not, that needs to be a factor as well. I think Art's recent truck purchase is an excellent example of consumer thinking-why a pretty Chevy(although his dealing is admirable) and not a plain Ford F150? When we bought our first PT, we had no idea what we were getting into-we loved the look,price was excellent and ordered it without seeing one for real, plus we did the 'build a car' online and made only one change when we went to the dealer-I refused to fall for the 'but you need these heated seats' type of pitch. While many were paying over 25 grand for theirs, mine came in at under 20 grand. Only in buying a second one, did we do it with personal knowledge of the car, not only by a heartfelt desire for it. The ideal consumer never uses his/her emotional reaction to a product, but it's a conscious battle to not give in to the 'gotta have that' mentality. The powers that be know this and they have every intention of winning-I have no intention of losing.

I do things for exclusively aesthetic reasons. That is my choice. Everything I have ever done is done for pure aesthetics. That's the reason why I do what I do.

Aesthetics is why we get what we get as well-I wouldn't get the latest and greatest based solely on its being the latest and greatest. It's why I wear what I wear, use what I use. Balance between desire and practicality should be foremost.Sometimes, only practicality wins out-wanting some gorgeous jacket isn't practical if it doesn't keep me warm. Had our PT's been 40 grand, we certainly would not have gotten them. (in fact, the spouse's has more on his and came in at $2,000 less than mine 2 years earlier).
Consumerism banks on desire alone-sometimes not having extra cash floating around to fulfill those desires is a good thing-practicality usually wins the round once desire and aesthetics comes to play.
Good case in point: http://www.underconsideration.com/sp...es/002166.html

Yes, of course. Good aesthetics involves good pragmatics IMO.
SO what's with the FedEx logo above?

OK...several things I have tried to see in the Fedex...I tried to look "unfocusly" at the picture, ...(if you know what I mean, not to look at the letters themselves..but rather the shape) and saw that the first F, the d and the final x formed Fox...(I dont think it means anything...or should I say a "trigger word" )...
Also Ex..x...X...everywhere...two S in "Express" ...well SEX basicly all around the damn letters...
and maybe the general shape of a gun formed by the whole thing...
in this kind of shape
****
**
Well reminds me of a gun [and that would be a trigger.(Shit! no pun intended. I swear!)]
Also...the arrow formed by "Ex" ?
I don't know...I have to admit it does puzzle me...
All these things I said above are really guesses that probably have nothing to do...
Well if you take the first "e" as an "o" and take the "d" after that as an "ol" you get something like Fool->x (which, granted, does not make any sense)
Waiiit a minute...why is the orange "Ex" formed of a lot of little "x" (plural..""x"s?)...is it pixellisation or on purpose?
Whatever. I give up. Give us some hints.

The arrow between the E and X is deliberate, denoting moving forward.

OK..but all the rest of the heap of confused thoughts I threw in that reply? are some close? Anyway, I guess most of BIG company logos are made to stay imprinted in the mind...So. yeah, moving on..what do you think about it Art?

HEHE-I think that logo is done just for the purpose of getting you to wonder what is going on with it once the idea that something is there is put into your head. Now, you are going to notice that arrow on every Fedex truck or package you see, when you never noticed it before. Funny how the the mind works, eh?

Thanks, ng.
biznatch, I think it's important to remind us that the creators of ads use techniques that operate below our particular thresholds of conscious awareness. Our projections become a part of the content we derive from our experience of the world.

This is an important point. The fact that we project the material of our own minds upon the "blank slate" of what we consider the "real world" to be, causes the contents of our minds to become an integral part of what we "read into" our experience of the world. For example, if our minds are filled with repressed sexuality - we see sex everywhere we look. It doesn't take much to manipulate brains like that by suggestive cues...

August Bullock, the author of The Secret Sales Pitch: An Overview of Subliminal Advertising was recently interviewed. The interview provides a good start toward thinking through many of the issues covered in the course of this thread.

Click the link below and scroll down to "The Secret Sales Pitch" to access a streaming audio version of the program.

Link to The Secret Sales Pitch audio file page

This stuff is crazy, its wierd how you dont notice some of the subliminal messages until you sit down and look at them for the third or fourth time, sounds like a good topic for a paper in a psychology class to me...

having just spent 2 weeks in Europe... watching British, Spanish, German TV... I can see that they are much more sensitive to advertising... Also, there just wasn't so much of it either at this point in time. While I didn't compare to see if a 30 min show was 22 minutes with 8 minutes of commercials, it was not in the same 7-8 minute bursts of show and then commercials.

German had the WERBUNG bumpers before the commercials and Spain had PUBLICIDAD.

Also the girls type phone chat stuff was topless nudity but only after 11pm.

This book documents the notion – blatantly obvious to me - that we are influenced by the media. Specifically, it describes the manner in which violent media messages propagate violent behavior and violent tendencies in populations exposed to these messages.

It is beginning to seem to me that our blinders toward the larger issues having to do with media manipulation are indeed a powerful form of denial. There seems no other explanation for the manner in which we submit to media and refuse to express alarm over its power to affect our thinking and behavior.

Anyone who observes young people can also observe the overwhelming power of pop-cultural suggestion acting throughout their lives. Likewise, anyone who observes people of any age – it seems to me - should be able to see the same thing. The fact that we tend to minimize this and also the strength with which we disavow its effect on us personally is always noteworthy. We have a great deal invested in our self-images – as impregnable and under our own control.

A reading of this particular work should help make the case – in at least one area of media influence.

…………………………………………………………………………………………

The Copycat Effect : How the Media and Popular Culture Trigger the Mayhem in Tomorrow's Headlines

by Loren Coleman

Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly

According to Coleman, the media's attitude is "death sells... if it bleeds, it leads." The author, who has written and lectured extensively on the impact of media, mounts a convincing case against newspapers, TV and books that sensationalize murders and suicides, thus encouraging others to imitate destructive crimes. He traces the problem's roots to Goethe's The Sorrows of Young Werther (1774), which spotlighted a fellow who shot himself over a failed romance and inspired many young men to do the same. The novel encouraged widespread use of the term "the Werther Effect" when referring to copycat catastrophes. Coleman addresses Marilyn Monroe's 1962 death, pointing out that thanks to extensive coverage of the star's passing, "the suicide rate in the United States increased briefly by 12%." Other subjects include the 2002 Washington-area snipers John Muhammad and John Lee Malvo, whose actions spawned numerous sniper killings; suicide clusters among fourth-century Greeks; cult leaders Charles Manson and David Koresh, who attained gruesome glamour through melodramatic press perusal; Jack the Ripper—who created copycat killers from the late 1800s into the 20th century—and today's suicide bombers. Although readers may feel there's little they can do to muzzle media destructiveness, Coleman presents his advice to with enough punch to intrigue the public and possibly exert a minor influence on the press.
...................

(from the Publisher)

VIOLENCE BEGETS VIOLENCE BEGETS VIOLENCE...

A disturbed student shoots up his classroom -- and suddenly a wave of mass murder is sweeping through our nation's schools. A young child is taken from her home -- and for months afterward child abductions are frantically reported on an almost daily basis. A surfer is attacked by a shark -- and the public spends an entire summer fearing an onslaught of the deadly underwater predators. Why do the terrible events we see in the media always seem to lead to more of the same?
Noted author and cultural behaviorist Loren Coleman explores how the media's over-saturated coverage of murders, suicides, and deadly tragedies makes an impact on our society. This is The Copycat Effect -- the phenomenon through which violent events spawn violence of the same type.
From recognizing the emerging patterns of the Copycat Effect, to how we can deal with and counteract its consequences as individuals and as a culture, Loren Coleman has uncovered a tragic flaw of the information age -- a flaw which must be corrected before the next ripples of violence spread.

Here's a link that relates to the previous entry:

http://www.copycateffect.com/

http://www.lorencoleman.com/copycate...t_montage2.jpg

The predilection we have for aping the appearance, content, and behaviors that are broadcast our way via cultural media is noteworthy and eminently discussable. Everything I learned as a youth about how to look, think, and behave I learned from mass media. I suspect that is simply the case with us all.

I've never heard of this propanda guideline.... but found this article this morning.

Yeah, every 12 year old kid might wanna talk and act like Keanu Reeves after the Matrix series came out...
The copycat effect on violence is more frightening than the celebrity imitations, though.
But these effects only do take place on few cases...I mean the guys who shoot up schools or snipe out civilians are still kind of crazy to begin with, right? I don't see myself blowing up in a crowd of people because the media overexposes terrorist suicide bombings..
Even if the media pushes them (the crazy people) to use that destructive potential in a certain way, what tells us they wouldn't have killed people in a different sick and original way if the media did not over expose this violence?
Or maybe what pushes them to violence is watching(or rather seeing) CNN for hours and seeing those images repeating themselves for hours through and let them take over their system...
Its true that media, with a lot of close up images and videos of scenes of violence makes these horrible acts seem normal....they become a part of everyday life.
I dunno, its all scary. Even the TV news isn't safe anymore...

Art... the copycat effect seems to contradict what most people are saying about videogames and kids (see the thread somewhere here on TFP)...

The link between violence and the violence we see on TV and video games, I would suggest, is not a one to one causal relationship but rather a big part of the problem. A Madge would say, "You're soaking in it."

It isn't just the violence, it is everything else, the ads, the news, etc. The general media cocophony from which we are supposed to derive meaning... A meaning that is often subtly imposed on our subconsciousness where it mashes up against other messages...

Yes. Personally, I hear the majority of individual consumers whose refutations of the copycat effect - and media influence in general - reflecting upon their own experience as strong assertions of denial. That is to be expected. We have our sense of inviolable integrity to protect.

Yes, Charlatan. We are soaking in it. We are immersed in it. We have become it and it has become us.

I'm attaching an ad here with no additional discussion just for the edification of those who've become somewhat sensitized to the many ways in which we're led by the noses via our powerful sex drives.

Sex drives us to take in all the visual innuendo we can. The union of showing us things and our need to read as much into them for the purpose of satisfying our endless prurience results in the confluence of media and perception - the final connection takes place in our minds. Being aware of it is not something that happens automatically.

Working through threads/discussions like this does, I think, give us some perspective on what may be going on here and elsewhere...

Wow that's a great picture Art. What I see from left to right:
Guy on the left in yellow swim trunks has girl in white bikini bent over, the guy on the raft appears to be giving oral the the girl directly in front of him. The guy in the middle seems to have his hand somewhere on the girl that's bending over, and way in the background I see a man behind a girl that's bent over on all fours.

At first all I saw was a lot of skin, but it didn't really take long to notice all the subliminal sex in this photo. By any chance do you have a larger version of this photo?

I don't spived2. But yeah. I also appreciate the yellow dong that extends between the girl's legs - sort of an extension of the guy in the yellow shorts behind her. (far left middle of the image). The girl getting paddled is another classic double entendre pose...

This thread is amazing. I have read up to post #80 and skipped around a few pages and it really has me thinking. One of my first thoughts is how, when I read this thread, I was sort of awakened, like the people in The Matrix. I then realized that I just referred the likeness of my thoughts to a commercial franchise. Thats kinda scary.

Sometimes it's just good enough to let Ad people speak for themselves. The combination of utter seriousness, big buck campaigns, and the stupid products at the heart of this sort of thing does speak volumes about the kind of world we inhabit.

................................................

www.clickz.com/news/article.php/3486781

Frito-Lay Urges "Millennials" to Seize the Moment
By Pamela Parker
March 2, 2005

In late January, billboards with the cryptic message "inNw?" began appearing across the country. Since then, the campaign expanded to TV, text messaging, and a Web site that reveals ... the mystery. The campaign's message: "If not now when?"

The mysterious effort is promoting a new Doritos flavor, Black Pepper Jack, to 16-24 year olds, a group PepsiCo's Frito-Lay division calls "Millennials."

"'If not now when?' is all about living life in the now and taking advantage of every single opportunity possible," said Lora DeVuono, advertising VP for Frito-Lay North America, in a statement. "This attitude is what is important to Millennials, and it's how they look at the Doritos brand."

The main agency behind the concept and the traditional advertising is BBDO New York. Tribal DDB Dallas created the Web site and online advertising. Hip Cricket, a Connecticut-based mobile marketing firm, designed the mobile marketing interaction. Spending on the effort wasn't disclosed.

The shorthand language of the campaign, including the central "inNw," is inspired by the way teens use text messaging and IM (define) to communicate. One billboard urges viewers to "Gt 2 Kno Jack," while the Web site urges people to "Speak UR Mind" and "Vote 4 UR Fave Music Videos." Text messages sent as part of the campaign tell people, "U culd win cul stuff frm Doritos, incl ipods, Digi Cams, DVDs + mor!"

"That's the language the Millennials speak these days, and that was a great fit for us to experiment with text messaging," Jared Dougherty, a spokesperson for Frito-Lay, told ClickZ News. Dougherty says it's the first time the company has tried text messaging in a campaign.

Text messages and billboards send users to the campaign's Web site, at innw.com. The site rewards people's curiosity by explaining that "inNw?" stands for "If not now when?"

"We were charged with taking that [concept] and making it come to life online," said Scott Johnson, executive creative director of Tribal DDB Worldwide. "We thought clearly the most important word in that phrase is 'now.' We wanted to design a site that really expressed 'now' in a completely different way."

To do that, Tribal DDB built a site whose main element is video of people walking by. As they stroll past, they seem to touch the screen, generating little icons with codes on them, such as "MYTUNE," "COWPOK," and "MATCHIT." Site visitors can drag those icons and enter the codes into the INNW? Instant Messenger alongside the video display. Different codes generate different rewards. Some link users to screensaver downloads, others to streaming audio, and still others to advergames.

"You have to act now if you want to take advantage of the code and unlock whatever is associated with that icon," said Johnson.

The video's background adds more immediacy: it's synched to the user's computer clock. A viewer checking out the site at twilight would see characters walking by at twilight.

"We're also planning on continually refreshing with new backgrounds and new people and new things you can unlock," said Johnson.

Online ads to drive users to the site include a sponsorship of Yahoo! Music's "Dig It or Dis It." The creative promotes a sweepstakes, the innw.com site, and the Black Pepper Jack Doritos.

The text messaging portion of the campaign began with the teaser billboards, which urged people to text "46691" on their mobile phones with the message "innw?" When they did, they received a reply from Doritos asking them to guess what "innw" meant. The intent was to get people to communicate with Doritos, but most messages simply encouraged users to visit the Web site. "Go 2 innw.com anytime 2 c whats goin on," read one message.

Though the campaign has been running since late January, Frito-Lay won't provide visitor numbers or provide any data that would measure success.

Dougherty would only say, "We're off to a great start."

..............................................................................

Remember we're talking about a piece of junk food here...

http://www.innw.com/

I saw this billboard here in Times Square and scratched my head...

I recognized the short numbers as SMS text stuff... but I wasn't sure who the ad targeted.

I was actually thinking that it was for W Hotels... Inn W is what I got out of it...

I think it's a pretty bad ad campaign myself. I fall into that age group and I know that no one that I talk to on IM EVER just cuts letters out to make words. It looks sloppy and almost seems offensive. And all that mystery over a new chip, whoop de do. They sound good, I'd probably try it if I saw it at the stores, but that's just the name of the chip that draws me in. Seems like they'll probably end up losing money over time.

Product placement article in NY Times.

Product placement is, by definition, marketing on the periphery of awareness - in so far as the main focus of attention is not on the product. It enter our consciousness via our peripheral vision.

There is very little difference - if any - between peripheral perception and subliminal suggestion.

So how does it work, exactly? In a movie, one would place, lets say, a coke bottle someplace where it wouldn't seem out of place, and our brain would register it ? But we'd want go out and buy Coke?

Here's an overview:

http://money.howstuffworks.com/product-placement.htm

..........................................
(see article above for photos)


How Product Placement Works

by Katherine Neer

The latest trend in advertising is to make it, well, less advertorial. The tendency is to move away from in-your-face ads, where the product is the star, to mini-movies or quasi-documentary vignettes that feature "real-life scenarios" with the product(s) hovering in the background. Some would argue it's a sort of "art imitating art imitating life" scenario -- where ads are imitating the practice of product placement.

Photo courtesy Amazon.com
The DeLorean played a prominent role
in the "Back to the Future" movies.

This may seem a bit confusing, but really, it's quite simple. The majority of us are getting tired of ads. Today's consumer is inundated with advertising eveywhere: television, radio, billboards, magazines, buses, newspapers, the Internet... And these are just the usual suspects. More and more ad-space is popping up every day. From people walking down the street wearing signs, to flyers on our cars and in our mailboxes, to ads on the ATM screen as we wait for it to dispense our cash -- we see ads all day, every day.

Even television networks that depend on advertising dollars to stay in business know that it can be useful to ditch the interruptions and present a show without ads from time to time. The ABC network did it for "Gideon's Crossing" in 2000 and for "Alias" in 2001. FOX did it for its hit series "24" in 2002.

Photo courtesy Isabella Vosmikova/FOX
Apple laptop computer on "24"

Wait a minute -- networks turning down cold, hard advertising cash? That doesn't sound quite right, does it? Of course they don't drop the advertising dollars all together. If you watched that "ad-free" version of "24" you know what we're talking about. Ford sponsored the show with two three-minute spots opening and closing the episode. And, Ford vehicles have been integrated into the show -- the main character, Jack Bauer, drives a Ford Expedition.

So, when is an ad not an ad? When it's a product placement. Once mainly found only on the big screen, product placement has been making quite a few appearances on television -- not to mention in video games and even books. In this article, we'll explain what product placement is and examine how it is used in movies, television shows and other media.

What is Product Placement?
Have you ever watched a television show or a movie and felt like you were watching a really long commercial? If so, then you've been the victim of bad product placement. There's certainly a line that can be crossed when presenting brand-name items as props within the context of a movie, television show, or music video. Clever marketing folks try never to cross that line. They want their products to be visible within a scene, but not the focus. The product needs to fit, almost seamlessly (almost being the key word here) into the shot and context of the scene.

When done correctly, product placement can add a sense of realism to a movie or television show that something like a can simply marked "soda" cannot.

Photo courtesy Isabella Vosmikova/FOX
Perhaps the producers of "24" did not find a phone company that wanted to sponsor this episode.

Product placement is something that dates back to at least the early 1950s when Gordon's Gin paid to have Katharine Hepburn's character in "The African Queen" toss loads of their product overboard. Since then, there have been countless placements in thousands of movies.

Think about it. You can probably remember quite a few examples. One of the most commonly discussed is the placement of Reese's Pieces in the movie "E.T." Originally intended for another product (they melt in your mouth, but not in your hand), this prime spot essentially catapulted these tiny peanut butter morsels into mainstream popularity. A slightly more recent and easily as effective example is the placement of Red Stripe, a Jamaican-brewed beer, in the movie "The Firm." According to BusinessWeek Online, Red Stripe sales saw an increase of more than 50% in the U.S. market in the first month of the movie's release.

Now that you have an idea of what product placement is, let's take a look at some of the basics involved in leveraging a product placement arrangement.

Product Placement Basics
A worldwide trend in advertising, product placement is a vehicle for everything from foodstuffs to electronics to automobiles. So, how does it work, exactly? It's actually pretty simple. Basically, there are three ways product placement can occur:

It simply happens.
It's arranged, and a certain amount of the product serves as compensation.
It's arranged, and there is financial compensation.
If the Shoe, Shirt, Car or Soda Fits...
Sometimes product placement just happens. A set dresser, producer, director, or even an actor might come across something he thinks will enhance the project. Usually this has to do with boosting the level of credibility or realism of the story being told. One example can be found in the surprising use of a can of RAID -- an ant killer made by the SC Johnson company -- in an episode of the popular HBO series "The Sopranos." The poisonous prop was used in a particularly violent fight scene in the show. According to an article in USA Today, Therese Van Ryne, a spokeswoman for SC Johnson, said the company was not approached about the use of their product and they would not have given it a thumbs-up.

For illustrative purposes throughout the rest of this article, we can create a less controversial scenario. Let's say the main character in a program or movie is an unmarried, successful, well-travelled architect in his thirties. From this description, it's easy to start thinking up things to enhance the feel of this character. Maybe he'd drive an SUV -- the four-wheel drive would come in handy when visiting building sites. He'd read particular magazines, drink certain wines, eat certain foods... In making the character's life seem real, products necessarily come into play.

Repo Man

Photo courtesy Amazon.com

In the 1984 cult classic "Repo Man," genericized foodstuffs and other consumables rule. With plain blue and white labels that simply read "Food," "Cigarettes," "Whiskey," and "Beer" appearing in most scenes, it's obvious that the producers had almost no luck with product placement deals.
The one uber-evident product that is placed in frame after frame are tree-shaped air fresheners. These fragrant props hang in just about every moving vehicle in the movie -- even the police motorcycle has one. According to The Internet Movie Database, the company that makes the air fresheners was one of the sponsors of the movie.

Let's Make a Deal
As we mentioned earlier, arranged product placement deals fall into two categories:

Trade-off of integration or placement for a supply of product
Financial compensation for placement or integration
The most common type of deal is a simple exchange of the product for the placement. Using our existing example, let's say the production team wants The Architect to display a quirky affinity for a particular type of beverage. This will come across rather strongly over the course of the program (because the character even collects the drink's labels) -- which means the chosen product could get a lot of air time. It turns out that someone on the crew knows someone who works for Honest Tea. The movie people approach the Honest Tea folks with a proposal and a deal is made; in exchange for the airtime, the cast and crew are provided with an ample supply of various Honest Tea drinks at work.

Sometimes, a gift of the product isn't an appropriate form of compensation, so money powers the deal.

It's a Miss!
Like lots of advertising methods, product placement can be hit or miss. One particular example of product placement gone awry is the Reebok/Jerry Maguire fiasco.
Reportedly, Reebok had a placement agreement to integrate one of its commercials at the end of the film "Jerry Maguire." The commercial didn't make it to production -- but something else regarding Reebok did. In a pivotal scene, Cuba Gooding Jr.'s character makes disparaging remarks about the company.

Imagine that the marketing team at Tag Heuer has heard about this project and feels that, given the starpower of the actor playing The Architect, this project would be a great vehicle for showcasing its product. Someone from Tag Heuer approaches the set dresser with a financially lucrative proposal. Eventually, they come to an agreement. Consider this scene: Our male character (The Architect) stands outside a movie theater waiting to meet a friend. The camera pans down to show a slight tap of the actor's foot. Next, it moves up and zooms in to show him checking his wristwatch for the time. After switching from the actor's face to the face of the wristwatch, the camera pauses just long enough for you to really see the wristwatch. He's wearing a link-style, stainless steel Tag Heuer luxury sports-watch. The camera pans out and swings around, introducing a beautiful woman into the scene... During the next hour of the program, the wristwatch casually appears in several scenes.

Both teams are happy -- the integration of the Tag Heuer product is a success. Remember, the advertised product's role is to be part of an ensemble cast rather than the (obvious) star. Tag Heuer manages to reap the benefits of conventional advertising without being overly obvious or intrusive to the audience/consumers.

Getting the Job Done
Before product placement really saw a surge in the mid 1980s, it was pretty much a DIY effort. Now there are specific corporate positions and entire agencies that can handle the job. Some larger corporations will dedicate personnel to scout out opportunities for product integration or placement within films, television shows and even games and music. This site provides suggestions on how to pick a product placement agency.

Product Placement in the Movies
The next time you watch a movie, try to keep an eye out for products or brand-names you recognize. It's highly likely that you'll see one of the major soft drink companies represented. Is it Coke? Pepsi? Snapple? Once you've spotted something, see how many other scenes include that product. You'll start to see a trend. "How," you'll wonder, "can the actor hold the Coke can just the right way every time so that the logo is perfectly visible?"

Take a minute to comb through your movie memories. You'll probably recall at least a few of these now-famous product placements:

Risky Business - Ray-Ban sunglasses
Back to the Future - Pepsi products
Demolition Man - Taco Bell (In the future, everything is Taco Bell...)
You've Got Mail - America On-Line (AOL), Apple, IBM and Starbucks
Austin Powers - Pepsi and Starbucks
Cast Away - FedEx and Wilson
Men in Black II - Ray-Ban sunglasses, Mercedes Benz, Sprint, Burger King
Product placement in movies is so ubiquitous that it's even become something to parody on the big screen. Two movies that do a good job of this are "Wayne's World" and "Josie and the Pussycats." In Wayne's World, the two main characters hawk a variety of stuff, including Nuprin, Pepsi, Pizza Hut and Reebok. The amusing part about this is that the product placement vignette takes place while the characters Wayne and Garth are lambasting the very thing they're doing. As Wayne says "Contract or no, I will not bow to any corporate sponsor," he is opening a Pizza Hut box and pulling out a slice of pizza. The camera lingers on the Pizza Hut logo and Wayne, holding the slice of pizza lovingly beside his face, smiles straight at the camera.

The movie "Josie and the Pussycats" takes the joke several steps further. A send-up on the music industry, "Josie and the Pussycats" manages to satirize name-brand integration throughout the film. To get an idea of just how saturated with brands, logos and products this movie is, here's a taste of what you can see in just the trailer alone (Keep in mind that the trailer is only two minutes and twenty-five seconds long!): America Online, American Express, Bebe, Billboard Magazine, Bugles, Campbell's Soup, Coke, Entertainment Weekly Magazine, Evian, Ford, Gatorade, Kodak, Krispy Kreme, McDonald's, Milky Way, Motorola, Pepperidge Farm Cookies, Pizza Hut, Pringles, Puma, Ray-Ban, Sega, Starbucks, Steve Madden, Target, and T.J. Maxx.

Cars in the Movies
Movie Car
Herbie, the Love Bug Volkswagen Beetle
RoboCop Ford Taurus
Back to the Future DeLorean
Smokey and the Bandit Pontiac Trans Am
The World Is Not Enough BMW Z8
Lara Croft: Tomb Raider Jeep Wrangler Rubicon

Photo courtesy DaimlerChrysler
According to a 2003 Chrysler press release, "The Jeep Wrangler Rubicon is the most capable Jeep ever built, so the heroic and extreme environment in which Lara Croft uses her custom Wrangler Rubicon in Tomb Raider is accurate... This is more than just a product placement. We have created a 360-degree integrated marketing campaign around the movie and the debut of the Wrangler Rubicon Tomb Raider model."

Product Placement in the Movies: Audi RSQ
In 2004, product placement reached a new level with Audi's involvement with the movie "I, ROBOT."

Photo courtesy Audi.com
Will Smith and the Audi RSQ

The Audi RSQ concept car plays a central role in the futuristic action film. So how is this different from the placement of the BMW Z8 in "The World is Not Enough" or the DeLorean in "Back to the Future"? Audi didn't just place the RSQ in the movie; Audi created the RSQ for the movie.

Photo courtesy Audi.com

The Audi automotive brand has been involved in movies before. Audis have been featured in such movies as "Ronin," "The Insider," and "Mission Impossible II." This time, though, it wasn't just a question of promoting the right car in the right movie. It was a full-blown custom job. And since this custom job was also a product-placement job, the car had to fit seamlessly into the movie world while still screaming "Audi."

Photos courtesy Audi.com

The RSQ is not just a movie car -- those have been done before, with movie designers creating a car and simply attaching the highest-bidding car logo to the hood. Audi put the same amount of thought and detail into designing the RSQ as they do into designing any other concept car. It has a fully developed interior and exterior.

Photo courtesy Audi.com

The carmaker worked with the director of the movie, Alex Proyas, and with set designers to achieve a concept that both Audi and the movie people were happy with -- Audi designers toured the movie sets and got their hands on the futuristic props used in the film. The result of the collaborative effort is the futuristic RSQ sports coupe, featuring, most notably, spherical wheels, mid-engine design, butterfly-action doors, a color-changing, luminescent paint job and a low, sleek profile.

Photo courtesy Audi.com

In the creative partnership between a carmaker and Hollywood, we may be looking at the future of this type of advertising -- name-brand products that are not simply chosen to fill a role that benefits both parties, but products that are created to fill that role.

Product Placement on Television
Back to Basics
Radio and television dramas known as soap operas acquired their moniker from the products advertised during their shows. In addition to the standard 30-second spots -- and now a word from our sponsor -- the products were often integrated into the story line.
One of today's most popular soap operas, "All My Children," recently managed to revisit its advertising roots. But, instead of soap, the folks at AMC opted for cosmetics. In a story-line that spanned several months, famous cosmetics company Revlon was front and center in Pine Valley's plotline.

Product placement is not quite as widespread in TV land as it is in the movies, but it is a rapidly growing industry. More commonly referred to as product integration in this medium, this process has to share its advertising space with traditional advertising, also known as the 30-second spot. Since the beginning of televised programming, advertisers have shelled out the big bucks to promote their products and brands. The 30-second spot has been the reigning champion for a very long time. Does that mean there can only be one winner in the television advertising arena? Not necessarily.

There's a big difference between product integration and a standard 30-second advertising spot. Yes, both are a means to a similar end, but that doesn't mean there's only room for one of these vehicles on the advertising block. In fact, the current trend is a combination of the two. This trend can in large part be attributed to many of today's reality-based television shows, which seem to be a perfect match for product integration. The very best example of this is the popular talent show "American Idol." Not only are segments of each episode sandwiched between ads for Coca-Cola, AT&T Wireless, Old Navy and Ford, but some of these companies' brands and products are evident (REALLY EVIDENT) in each episode. Here are some examples:

Coca-Cola - Each of the three judges sits behind large red cups emblazoned with the Coca-Cola logo.

Photo courtesy Ray Mickshaw/FOX
L-R: Judges Simon Cowell, Paula Abdul and Randy Jackson


In the "elimination episodes," contestants nervously await their turn in the Coca-Cola room, perched on a Coca-Cola sofa.

Photo courtesy Ray Mickshaw/FOX
Contestants in the Coca-Cola room, on the Coca-Cola couch


AT&T Wireless - Host Ryan Seacrest mentions AT&T wireless each time a contestant finishes his/her song. Fans can submit their vote as a text message if, and only if, they have AT&T wireless.
In a recent article for the New York Times, Bill Carter writes:

Searching for ways to thwart any trend toward skipping commercials on programs recorded on personal video recorders like TiVo, the networks are increasingly integrating their sponsors and their products into the shows themselves, rather than limiting their presence to commercials. Ford Motor and Coca-Cola, for example, are two of the advertisers that have paid millions of dollars to have their logos prominently displayed during episodes of "American Idol."
According to AdAge magazine, the phrase "millions of dollars" mentioned above actually refers to about $26 million per integration/sponsorship deal. Yes, that means that EACH of the companies -- AT&T Wireless, Coca-Cola, and Ford -- dished out 26 million dollars.
These companies do get a lot of bang for their bucks, though. In fact, after visiting the "American Idol" Web site, it makes you wonder if the product placement there is included in that bill. Now, you may be wondering "product placement on a Web site?" "Isn't that just an ad?" Well, no, not exactly. There are actual sections of the Web site that integrate the brand or sponsor's name entirely:

Coca-Cola Behind the Scenes
AT&T Wireless
Old Navy Fun and Games Section
Herbal Essences Music Section
Product placement isn't just for movies and television anymore. You'll find it in books, music videos, video games and on the Internet. Let's take a look at how product placement is being used in these other arenas.
Cars on TV
TV Show Car
Miami Vice Ferrari Testarossa
The Prisoner Lotus 8
Magnum P.I. Ferrari 308i
Starsky & Hutch Ford Grand Torino
Dukes of Hazzard Dodge Charger
Knight Rider Pontiac Trans Am
Charlie's Angels Ford Mustang Cobra
Hardcastle & McCormick DeLorean Coyote
24 Ford Expedition

Product Placement in Books
Acapella Advertising
The headlines might have read "Product placement takes Broadway by storm" when Baz Luhrmann (Strictly Ballroom, Romeo + Juliet, Moulin Rouge!) decided to perform a little product placement, Puccini style. Luhrmann surprised many in the theater community by displaying billboard-style ads for Montblanc pens and Piper-Heidsieck champagne in his stage production of "La Bohème."
To some, especially if you haven't seen it, product placement in a book or a video game is pretty difficult to imagine. Where exactly would they place the products? It turns out there's plenty of opportunity for this manner of advertising. Let's start with books.

Read All About It!
Imagine a well-known company commissioning an equally renowned author to write a book that prominently features its brand and products. Sound a bit far-fetched? It's not. The world-famous jewelry company, Bulgari, paid noted British author Fay Weldon to write a novel that would feature Bulgari products. The commissioned work was to be given as a present to an elite group of Bulgari clientele. Not only did Weldon agree to the deal, but she eventually took her work public. "The Bulgari Connection" has met with skepticism and praise from Weldon's colleagues and fans alike. Undoubtedly, Weldon has set a precedent that other authors and publishers will follow. For more information regarding Weldon's Bulgari book, see Salon.com: Your ad here.

It turns out that even a modest amount of investigation can unearth several other product-prominent published works. Actually, one of the largest genres to feature product placement is children's learning books. Here are just a few examples of what you can find at your local library or bookstore:

Skittles Riddles Math, by Barbara Barbieri McGrath, Roger Glass
The Cheerios Counting Book, by Rob Bolster
The Hershey's Milk Chocolate Bar Fractions Book, by Jerry Pallotta
The Hershey's Kisses Addition Book, by Jerry Pallotta, Rob Bolster
More M&M's Brand Chocolate Candies Math, by Barbara Barbieri
The M&M's Brand Counting Book, by Barbara Barbieri McGrath
The Crayon Counting Book, by Pam Munoz Ryan
Twizzlers Percentages Book by Jerry Pallotta, Rob Bolster
The Cheerios Christmas Play Book, by Lee Wade
Reese's Pieces: Count by Fives, by Jerry Pallotta, Rob Bolster
After reading these titles, you may be assuming that the companies are merely sponsoring the book and that the content is pretty standard fare -- possibly not even incorporating the product into the content of the book. Think again. In "The Oreo Cookie Counting Book," the back cover reads:

Children will love to count down as ten little OREOs are dunked, nibbled, and stacked one by one...until there are none!
A quick flip through the pages confirms that Oreo cookies are indeed featured prominently on every page!


Product Placement in Video games
As they continue to become more and more realistic, it's actually pretty easy to understand the advertising possibilities available within today's video games. The USA Today article What's in a name: Product placement in games states:

Play Crazy Taxi and a lot of your passengers will ask you to take them to Pizza Hut or KFC (both owned by Tricon Global). Dive into Die Hard: Nakatomi Plaza...and you'll see Zippo lighters and Motorola cell phones. UbiSoft's Surf Riders has G-Shock watches and banners for Mr. Zog's Sex Wax, a surfboard wax.
According to USA Today, product placements in video game software have been around since the 1980s. Back then, Sega was placing banners advertising Marlboro in its auto-racing arcade games. Apparently, Sega's still onboard with product placement. In Sega's Super Monkey Ball, the bananas sport Dole Food Company stickers. Surprisingly, this kind of product integration isn't about the cash. Just as product placement in movies promotes credibility and realism in the movie, it does the same thing in the video game -- making the "environment" of the game more lifelike.

Product Placement in Songs
On the Flip Side
In an interesting turn of events, music artists who have been promoting products on television are using those promotions to their own advantage.
According to AdAge.com, artists such as Dirty Vegas and Phil Collins are clueing consumers in on their product-endorsement pastimes by placing "as seen in TV commercial" stickers on their albums.

One of the earliest examples of product placement within a song can be found in Take Me Out to the Ball Game. Not only did it have its little toy surprise going for it, Cracker Jack also had a memorable mention in the chorus of this (now) immortalized melody. Written in 1908 by Jack Norworth and later scored by Albert Von Tilzer, the chorus goes like this (feel free to sing along...):

Take me out to the ball game,
Take me out with the crowd.
Buy me some peanuts and Cracker Jack,
I don't care if I never get back,
Let me root, root, root for the home team,
If they don't win it's a shame.
For it's one, two, three strikes, you're out,
At the old ball game.
Since then, many products have popped up in tunes around the world -- some have even garnered top billing, appearing in the title. Consider Run-DMC's track "My Adidas" from their multi-platinum album, Raising Hell. Long before Biggie Smalls and Jay-Z were giving props to Cristal champagne, Run-DMC was giving a lot of air time and screen time to the fashionable footwear. They weren't only singing about their Adidas; the tennis shoes were a prominent element in their dress.

While Adidas didn't commission Run DMC, and Norworth and Tilzer weren't paid to promote Cracker Jack, many of today's music professionals are striking deals and getting paid. According to AdAge: Marketers Explore Product Placements in Music:

In an attempt to further leverage its diverse artist roster, Island Def Jam Music Group [incidentally, Def Jam Music was founded by Russell Simmons, brother of Joseph Simmons -- Run of Run-DMC] is in formal talks with Hewlett-Packard Co. in an unprecedented paid product-placement deal.
AdAge also reports:

In almost all cases, a brand has found its way into a rap song because of artist preference or through an organic, creative predilection and not because of a record label dictate to appease an advertiser. For example, not until Busta Rhymes' recent single "Pass the Courvoisier Part Two" moved a healthy number of units was a promotional deal with Allied Domecq completed. This relationship has had a significant boost on sales of the Allied Domecq brand, according to the company.
As products are finding their way into movies, television, music, books and video games, it would seem like there's nowhere else to go. But with digital technology continuing to skyrocket in both form and function, there's a seemingly endless stream of new and innovative ways to put products in front of potential consumers. Whatever the future holds, there's no doubt you'll continue to see many of your favorite stars holding, handling and using products of all kinds on the big and small screens for years to come.

For more information on product placement and related topics, check out the links on the next page.



Lots More Information

Related HowStuffWorks Articles


How Ad Slogans Work
How Banner Ads Work
How Building a Business Identity Works
How Market Research Works
How Marketing Plans Work
How Web Advertising Works
How Television Works
How Movie Distribution Works
More Great Links



Product Placement News
Entertainment Resources & Marketing Association (E.R.M.A.)
Feature This!
Norm Marshall & Associates
Vista Group
AdAge.com
Starring Apple

© 1998 - 2005 HowStuffWorks, Inc.

simply put product placement raises awareness... thus when you are shopping for something to drink, when you see coca-cola again, you make recognition, which can make the difference to a few hundred people in actually purchasing the product.

to summarize Art last Howthingswork post, think of movie tie ins... Bond movies in particular had some really blatant and sweeping movie tie-ins along with product placement. Bond drives a BMW, wears a Tag Hauer watch, uses a Nokia phone to remote control the BMW...

the biggest coup of the product placement for Bond was the brand of alcohol he drank for his Martinis. I don't recall that brand for some reason... but I'm sure if I looked it up it would be easily recognized.

peripheral learning

Because there is resistance to terms such as "subliminal," "manipulation," and other words that seem to some to load the discussion, I'd suggest an intial study of the concepts of brain-based learning and especially "peripheral learning."

An understanding of all this is crucial, IMO, to this entire thread.

Here are some links to get you started.
I find just the section titles as listed below the first link to be quite illuminating. Statements such as "Learning Involves Both focused Attention and Peripheral Perception" go a long way toward giving us a clue as to what happens when humans and media meet.

........................................................................

http://www.unocoe.unomaha.edu/brainbased.htm


Principles of Brain-Based Learning
Developed by the Combined Elementary Task Forces of the Metropolitan Omaha Educational Consortium (MOEC), Omaha, NE: University of Nebraska at Omaha, 1999

Table of Contents

Introduction
The Brain is a Parallel Processor
Learning Engages the Entire Physiology
The Search for Meaning is Innate
The Search for Meaning Occurs Through "Patterning"
Emotions are Critical to Patterning
The Brain Processes Parts and Wholes Simultaneously
Learning Involves Both focused Attention and Peripheral Perception
Learning Always Involves Conscious and Unconscious Processes
We Have at Least Two Ways of Organizing Memory: A Spatial Memory System and a Set of Systems for Rote Learning
We Understand and Remember Best When Facts and Skills are Embedded in Natural, Spatial Memory
Complex Learning is Enhanced by Challenge and Inhibited by Threat
Every Brain is Uniquely Organized
Additional Resources on Brain Research and Learning
Websites
Classrooms and Schools Practicing Brain-Based Learning
Brain-Based Learning Committee

.....................................

Here's another fascinating way to state some of the items covered in this thread:


http://www.progressiveawareness.org/...Reference.html

......................


When I started this thread, I titled it suggestively because this is journalism.

Those of you who are interested in understanding the many ramifications of media and its effect on the human brain, human perception, and human behavior can find endless links via search engines on the subject of how we learn.

I just finished reading the whole thread (can't say there weren't any casualties among the details in the longer articles, but I did my best)... and all I can really say at the moment is that the wheels are turning.

I've been suspect of television, movie and print ads for a long time now, but the biggest surprise to me (by far) while reading through all of this was product placement in songs. To give just one example, it never occurred to me that I know the Cracker Jack brand because of "Take Me Out to the Ball Game," which I must have sang a thousand times in my early youth. That immediately triggered two other examples in my life:

(1) I also remember reading about Cracker Jack in an Archie comic a long, long time ago... I distinctly remember one of the Archie-Veronica-Betty love triangle stories involving a ring that was obtained as the prize in a box of Cracker Jack; and
(2) I know Colavita brand olive oil (random, random, random) because it's named at the beginning of a song by Phantom Planet (I forget exactly which song) and I choose it over the other similarly priced bottles of olive oil at my local store because I know the name so well from listening to the song a lot.

I made some mental notes on other posts several pages back that I'd like to comment on eventually, but I'm going to have to let my mind settle down a bit before I can add any more coherent commentary. Thanks for starting this great thread, Art!

Some paranoia for those New Yorkers out there... if you notice the ads on the subway cars for Courvoisier cognac... the bottle is suspiciously reminiscent of a vagina. I noticed it right away. The text accompanying the bottle is also fair condescending. Also the shampoo ads for Garnier Fructise... the woman pulling down on that long rope of hair.. that's a blowjob look if I ever saw one.

Oh, I also wanted to add that I read an article a little while back about another advertising technique, which shouldn't come as much of a surprise. It basicly stated that clothing companies targeted influencial individuals who were seen as popular in their circle of friends and were fairly active in the community - and dressed them up for free. They don't have to be celebrities or spokesmen, they just have to be popular. They give them thousands of dollars in merchandise.. and just tell them to run around with it.

The subjects say they get asked all the time "who" they are wearing and it just works to spread the word. Sounds effective.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/attachm...id=10103&stc=1

This ad is supposed to show sexual innuendo. There is nothing subliminal in it - if you see sexual acts, then you are seeing what you're supposed to. If you don't, then you've missed the point. The same with the Palmolive ads previously shown.

Ads are typically viewed for a few seconds. Most of the information in a visual image that is viewed for a few seconds is not consciously perceived.

It is exactly to combat this problem of 'glancing' that these ads were developed - you see something that grabs your attention, so you spend a bit longer looking at the ad to see what it was.

I personally know the creative who developed the 18-30 ad above (I work in advertising myself) and this was one of his prime objectives. Club 18-30 was to be positioned as a place you go to drink beer, carrouse and have sex. All the ads in the campaign play on this - some more explicitly through the use of suggestive copy and no visuals, and others like this.

As I said - if you didn't see any sexual activity in the ad, then you missed the point.

These are some of the other ads in the campaign:

http://www.healthworld.com/images/news/1831.jpg

http://flaphead.dns2go.com/blog/images/35/o_Ad31.jpg

http://flaphead.dns2go.com/blog/images/35/o_Ad121.jpg

http://www.club18-30.biz/marketing/print/lrg_01.jpg

http://www.club18-30.biz/marketing/print/lrg_02.jpg

The mass audience is not nearly so terribly intellectual, visually sophisticated, or unrepressed as those who create media. In an offhand way you're remaking the main arguments referred to in this thread. Thanks.

Except that Club 18-30 is actually selling sex, and not in a terribly subtle way. Or do you think that a headline reading, "Girls, can we interest you in a package holiday?" while showing a picture of someone's ample crotch is subtle and subliminal?

Something else to consider is that this campaign was not produced for the US market. Club 18-30 is a British company.

Yes. Sex is one the things being sold in most ads. The ads you posted are spot on the spectrum of sexually suggestive advertising and I am very appreciative you posted them here.

Well, I'd have to disagree completely. Sex is not something being sold in most ads. That's a sensationalist generalisation that's simply not true.

There is also a big difference between manipulating people's sexual urges to sell a completely unrelated product (i.e. the Air France commercial of about 15 years ago) and using sex to sell sex (i.e. Club 18-30).

Anyway, previously you said that most people wouldn't be able to cognitively perceive the sexually suggestive images in the ads, but now you're suggesting that they would. Are you making a point about the use of sexual subliminal perceptions or the explicit use of sexual imagery to sell a product?

My point is these perceptual and conceptual experiences are on a sliding scale - a spectrum of awareness between conscious and unconscious experience. It is not a black or white issue. Each person perceives different amounts of information through focused attention and peripheral awareness.

In that case, anything could be considered mind control, depending on the cognitive abilities of the recipient.

This is it exactly... there is what you see... simulated sex... and what your mind does with this information.

The conscious mind will probably chuckle. Subconscious mind will deal with it entirely differently.

The fact that your friend designed this creative to play with sexual images... in your face ones at that, is kind of besides the point. You cannot view these ads in isolation from the rest of the mediascape and the breadth of any particular individual's personal experiences. The connections and associations that the subconscious minds makes are beyond our conscious understanding...

The fact that our subconsious is being purposely manipulated is what is being argued in this thread...

In that case, no-one has any control over how anyone will react to any stimulus because you cannot predict how the sub-conscious mind will react to consciously analysed material and this thread is redundant.

The fact that the images are "in your face" is exactly the point. They are not designed to be skipped over by the conscious mind only to be randomly interpreted by the sub-conscious.

Yes. The reason these images are interesting - and they are interesting (and noteworthy) is because they exist on the lines that are being drawn in this thread. If there were no such things as thresholds of awareness and peripheral awareness, they would lose their reason for being.

If you could produce an ad that showed two people fucking they'd also lose their reason for being.

I think you're reading too much into this.

that is correct. most people do not ever use ANY critical thinking in their lives. They allow someone else to do it for them and then associate themselves with such personas, groups, tribes, sectors, etc.

could we be reading something into? that possibility has to exist, but the critical thinking, logic and reasoning has to also state that the possibility of this kind of manipulation also exists.

Questions about the human mind, perception, cognition, and awareness are the most complex questions we can ask. Personally, I've only begun reading into all this. I'll be continuing to read as much into these subjects as possible. I find them endlessly fascinating.

I felt like I had to sneak into my sister's make-up case and put foundation and powder on my little face at the tender age of 9. I don't even know what the heck I thought I was covering. Shaving my legs was another big issue that I felt strongly needed to be addressed before I even hit puberty, and it sure wasn't my friends or family putting that in my head. It was commercials and magazine ads for shaving cream that looked a lot like those palmolive ads.

.............

Another term used for this 10-teen age group is "tween" and the hyper sexual make-up industry isn't the only one targeting them. America's Beef Producers have a site called "zip4tweens" targeted at tween girls in an attempt to combat vegetarianism: www.cool-2b-real.com

The language on the site suggests that it's a place that discourages a negative self image:

But then the meat of the site (pun intended) is about encouraging beef consumption. It is, after all, "ZIP 4 tweens"...

In face of the much more powerful message of "you're not beautiful or sexy enough," I wonder how successful this site actually is.