I have several conflicting opinions on what should be and most definetely should not be used in advertisments. First of all, let's adress the Lipitor advertisments that feature Dr. Robert Jarvik as their "celebirty endorser". On behalf of the producers, they can use whoever and do whatever they want in order to market their product. That's how you play the economy. That's business; period. Here, in this example, the public must take responsiblity of making sure they don't just request a certain prescription from their doctor just because a) they saw an ad on television, 2) some famous guy (who's not even a licensed doctor) uses it and is promoting, and 3) the Pfizer company is telling you to buy it. Now, THAT is stupid. All that I see being done here is a company straightfowardly marketing a product in attempting to make a profit, which they have every right to do. Helping people become healthier is just a bonus. It is up to one's doctor to help their patient make the best decision possible for their health, whether is involves Lipitor or not.
However, in the case of the Abercrombie and Fitch ads, there should be a couple producers out there taking some responsibility...or at least get a few punches in the head for morality and smart decision making. To display obscene photographs, aka half naked young men and a mostly naked woman, in a public mall is very irresponsible. Yes, sex may sell, but it must be for the right consumers. Stores like Abercrombie and Fitch attract customers who are young in age and should not be exposed to this type of advertisment yet. What is annoying is that people complain how the new generation is more promiscuous and lack proper etiquette, well then how are they supposed to follow good example when there are none? Advertisment anywhere has the power to make people get an idea of a twisted reality. People, usually don't strip down in random meadows without the influences of alcohol at least, so what kind of "real" concept is this? Furthermore, shouldn't Abercrombie and Fitch be attempting to sell clothes?!?!!??! How are they doing this, when their ads show people half naked? They are setting social standards, not marketing goods and this is completely unacceptable.
Welcome
About Me
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I like your insight that A&F is doing more than selling clothes - they are setting examples. The fact that advertising is selling an image as well as a product is one of the truths that individuals less media literate than yourself fail to grasp. Obviously the ad wouldn't work in A&F's favor if the people in the photo were in their 60s and were plumb and soft.
Good job.
Mr. Shannon
Of course plump is the correct spelling.
Mr. Shannon
Post a Comment