The Case for Advertising

We live in a world where we are constantly saturated by images. Filtering through them every day, people make the subconscious and conscious decision to listen to the messages these images are trying to convey. The definition of advertising has expanded over time, including various mediums such as video and audio. As the opportunity for media consumption grows, it becomes pertinent to question the efficacy and ethical nature of advertisements. What are advertisements actually trying to sell? A way of life? An idealized image of oneself? Or a product, a supposedly utilitarian message that invites the audience to consume whatever is being sold. The ability for advertisements to influence us has already been proven; companies are not just influencing people’s time but their money and livelihood as well. Advertisements have the power to change the way we see certain ‘things’. There is, however, a whole host of other non-tangible ‘things’ that advertisements sell. They are able to sell us an idea, a way of life, even a political belief. Do these intangibles detract from the message? Do they deceive the viewer? Research dictates that it’s possible for emotions outside of conscious thought to affect cognitive processes (Simon 1997). This paper will demonstrate that advertising is not ‘morally problematic’ by establishing the importance of a utilitarian ethical framework, and viewing and analyzing print advertisements through this framework.

Utilitarianism is the belief that people analyze and act on the belief that such actions will maximize their overall happiness. People rely on external elements of reason, political institutions and the shared wisdom of others to make decisions. Advertisements can be an extremely condensed form of this wisdom, portrayed in a manner to sell a product. Advertisements are essentially a display of a way of thinking, a way of living, a way of consuming. Consumption can be considered a political act. People living in a capitalistic society vote with their dollar.

It is important to recognize people have two ways of thinking, two epistemologies they revolve around. One way looks at empirical evidence while another way looks at the abstract. The older school of thought, instrumental empiricism, believes that theories, or in this case concepts presented through advertisements via various media, aren’t truths but tools to make predictions and changes. They are not concerned about the realness of assumptions made but more about abstractions presented and whether or not those intangibles can affect behavior in a predictable manner. Scientific realists, on the other hand, believe that abstract concepts exist, and the realness of assumption does matter. This second tactic of focusing on the abstract says that emotions play a key role in our choices, unseen moods and not empirical evidence (Riker 1997).

The utilitarian and abstract nature of ads comes in through the emotional benefit provided by the consumption of whatever is being sold, alongside the possibility of maximizing one's happiness. While it is possible that this model of thinking can be twisted so as to be ‘morally problematic’ however any useful tool is capable of evil if in the wrong hands.

We are politically sophisticated animals and our emotions dictate our actions. We must appeal to the emotions of the consumer by bringing a message of hope. So many say that passion displaces reason, but they are two sides of the same coin (Riker 1997). We have mirror neurons that light up when we mimic others mentally or emotionally. We can empathize. Research has shown that we can understand someone else’s mental state without them telling us anything and that the same parts of the brain light up when thinking about everyday politics. Because we vote with our dollar, consumption can be considered a political choice. A political action.

Even though we may be cognitive misers when it comes to our national politics, our hearts are in the right place and it is this intrinsic belief in the good of man that he leads with his heart and not his head that has saved humanity from itself. Advertisements' appeal to emotion can be viewed in the same utilitarian light. These first 5 ads that will be analyzed were taken from the website CreativeBloq.com. It listed some 20 print advertisements for 2013 that received awards or were honorably recognized.

The first ad that will be analyzed through this framework is one by Amnesty International, regarding the arms trade. The image is of a city landscape, but at the right-hand side of the image, there is a literal tidal wave of tanks, bullets, guns and other weapons. In the bottom right corner, it says “The arms trade is out of control”. The image of impending doom as a result of mass production of weapons shows that the arms trade is threatening to crash down on our cities. It is a utilitarian venture to halt the expanding arms trade, less overall death maximizes total happiness.

Then we have an ad from McDonald's in Shanghai, China. There is an image of a potato that had been carved to look like fries complete with the box holding it. Now many point to McDonald's like a great example of advertising that is ‘morally problematic’. They advertise fresh food, but their service the fast food the customer receives would suggest otherwise. Why include this ad? Because negativity is needed in order to highlight the positive.

The next ad makes a play on the iconic fries image from McDonald's. It is an ad for the Dallas Farmers Market. By relying on the marketing tactics of a giant corporation, with a message that has been blasted out for decades, all the ad had to do was evoke the image, play on the words and show an actual healthy alternative. Thus encouraging the consumer to eat healthily, despite the ‘morally problematic’ ads that one is faced with. The interplay between the two is necessary, unfortunately, or fortunately depending on one's view. The ads that are morally problematic only highlight the ones that are considered actually beneficially, ones that maximize total actual and potential happiness.

WorldForAll.org has an ad that encourages the adoption of a dog. It shows the silhouette of a man being pulled away from the edge of a building by a dog on a leash. The words on the ad say “Dogs cure depression. Adopt one.” This appears to be a mutually beneficial activity that is being advertised. If one continues non-human animals to fall under the framework of a utilitarian way of life, then this surely maximizes happiness on both ends. The dog gets a home and the human has help alleviating his or her depression.

The fifth ad from CreativeBloq.com is an ad for the Guardian. It shows a pie chart, cut into three pieces, with the words ‘The’, ‘Whole’ and ‘Picture’ attributed to each section of the pie chart. There is a G in the right-hand corner, the symbol of the Guardian Newspaper. This minimalist approach to the design accentuates the visual message being portrayed. One can argue that all forms of media have a bias, but it is in one's best interest to understand the world around them. By reading the Guardian, it advertises, it can get the whole picture. Again it’s careful to note that each paper has bias and limitations, so this ad must be taken within reason.

The final set of ads comes from the website FESPA.com which is a host website for a global federation of 37 national associations for different types of printing. FESPA was founded in 1962 and has an eye on the advertising community for a long time. The ad consists of a sewing machine on what appears to be a crumpled piece of cloth. The needle of the sewing machine, the point of the ad, is represented in a sentence which states that less than 5% of the world’s fashion industries market could fund a school for children of the world. It speaks to child labor in the industry, as well as social responsibility.

The next ad is a public service announcement from Opel, an automobile manufacturer. It shows text being garbled in a text message, stating that driving is worse when you are texting while driving. This is a demonstration of a business trying to promote the responsible use of their product. Again, the message is simple and clear, don’t text and drive.

Finally, an ad from VZ Wealth Management shows a monkey in a suit sitting at a desk looking at financial reports. The ad states in the bottom right-hand corner that many investors are driven by basic instincts. This means that they are looking out for themselves and not the consumer. VZ Wealth Management suggests it is in the consumers to be cautious of ALL financial investors; it is in their best interest.

These groups of ads, viewed through a utilitarian framework, admittedly have a social responsibility tilt. But that is the power of advertising, whether good or bad. To suggest advertising is ‘morally problematic’ suggests that words, pictures, and ideas are ‘problematic’. The advertising world has a bright future, and if businesses can learn to work with them properly, they can create messages that will change the world, for good.

Works Cited

"50 New Powerful Print Ads of 2013." 50 New Powerful Print Ads of 2013. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Mar. 2014. <http://www.fespa.com/news/blogs/the-innovator/50-powerful-print-ads-of- 2013-advertisement.html>.

"Creative Bloq." Print advertising: 95 brilliant examples. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2014. <http://www.creativebloq.com/inspiration/print-ads-1233780>.

Riker, John H. Ethics and the discovery of the unconscious. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997. Print.

Simon, Herbert A. Empirically grounded economic reason. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press Ltd, 1997. Print.