• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Advertising

How would we know what our choices are without marketing? Everything is advertisement. What's that logo on your shoes? It's advertising. How about the ingredient listing on a package of food? You better believe it's advertising, because it can influence your decision on whether to buy a box of Cocoa Puffs or a box of Muesli flakes. If you have a product that depends on applications, it makes sense to target people who could make use of it. If you have a product that depends on tastes, it makes sense to use a scatter-shot method and try to hook as many people as possible. This is why Coca Cola is marketed to every man, woman and child whereas you've probably never even heard of Russell brake system Speed Bleeders unless you have a passion for cars.

The stereotypical 15-30 second video clip or radio jingle that seemingly everyone equates advertising with is really just scratching the surface of a complex system that integrates with the universal human experience. Sometimes, we just need to know what's out there.
 
^i don't agree.

the only acceptable advertising (imo) should be that which is attached to something which needs an additional source of revenue to maintain cheap and good quality operation. things such as sports, film, tv, magazines, newspapers, radio, video games, websites etc. .. it's a blight on the human experience, but sometimes it should be tolerated for the greater good. imagine how much the above leisure activities would cost without it, or how shit it would be quality wise.

ads where it doesn't supplement other activity, such as billboards and signs, are completely self serving. we pollute ourselves by allowing such noise.
 
L2R said:
^i don't agree.

the only acceptable advertising (imo) should be that which is attached to something which needs an additional source of revenue to maintain cheap and good quality operation. things such as sports, film, tv, magazines, newspapers, radio, video games, websites etc. .. it's a blight on the human experience, but sometimes it should be tolerated for the greater good. imagine how much the above leisure activities would cost without it, or how shit it would be quality wise.

ads where it doesn't supplement other activity, such as billboards and signs, are completely self serving. we pollute ourselves by allowing such noise.
Click to expand...

With what in particular do you disagree? Excuse my confusion but you are a self-professed Nike brand loyalist so I don't understand how you consider sources of culture to be a blight when you advertise on your feet every time you step out the house.

I agree that a well-made product speaks for itself. As consumers, I think it's safe to say we all have some sense of loyalty to brands that have made products we consider valuable to us. But how do you explain the loyalty to products that don't make much sense to endorse? Have you ever seen a Starbucks ad? I don't recall, personally, and yet the green siren woman is so ubiquitous that my cousin living in a country that doesn't even have a shop starts getting weak in the knees when he sees the logo hanging from a building.

Just because you don't see Starbucks on TV doesn't mean they don't blow through millions on marketing annually, it just means they do so in such a subversive manner that it gets in your head without you even realizing you're being advertised at. Why draw a distinction between OBVIOUS advertising and subversive advertising when the latter can exert an even more powerful influence on consumers?
 
i was disagreeing with giving advertisers cart blanche to spoil everything with ads, the only exception is when it helps prop up arts, sports and the like. i wouldn't criticise people for wearing brand labels, not just because it would be hypocritical of me and my hopeless addiction, but out of respect for personal choice.

unless you wear thongs (flip flops) with long pants, in which case you're an inhumane monster.
 
What is advertising other than someone telling you something exists. It amazes me how many times a week a client will tell me "I didn't know you could do that" or "I always wanted to know how much that would cost". Personally I am a hard sell, I will often be cynical of any "bargain" because I was always bought up with the notion if something is too good to be true then it probably is.

To be honest I wish advertising was more personal. People worry bout companies such as google mining information but if that means the only ads I see are specific to my needs I would be happy. Ad breaks during the football were telling me about the best deals at my loacl bottle shop or the nursery has a special on seasonal plants this month are better than holidays in Tasmania or tampons.
 
must admit, i wouldn't have had any chance at cost price radiohead tickets if it wasn't for the ads on facebook.
 
Busty St Clare said:
To be honest I wish advertising was more personal. People worry bout companies such as google mining information but if that means the only ads I see are specific to my needs I would be happy. Ad breaks during the football were telling me about the best deals at my loacl bottle shop or the nursery has a special on seasonal plants this month are better than holidays in Tasmania or tampons.
Click to expand...
You make a good point, but I don't think the local nursery has anywhere near enough spare monetary funds to spend it on advertising--I get what you're saying though. I still don't like data mining. I'd give up some information about me willingly to decide which ads I get shown, but data mining? Different story for a different thread. ;)

Just figured I'd chime in that I think you make a good point. /rambling
 
If the advertising was specific it shouldn't cost that much. The next step in internet television should be personalised advertising and the only way this is possible is to know your client. If that local nusery was only targeting the 300 gardeners in their 10km radius then it would be extremely cost effective. Not every television set would recieve the same ad, so in effect you are then able to sell air time to many more products for every 30 second space. The actual costs should be reduced if you are sharing this airtime with a handfull of other people/products. Better yet your product is more direct than now. Only the people who visit nurserys or perhaps attended the garden show would be aware and your success rate would be greater.

I don't want them knowing my bank account details but there is a good reason for them to know I drink beer, hate brussel sprouts and I enjoy Tarantino films. If they know this they will be able to target me with a movie that they think best matches my interests rather than anything with Nicolas cage in it at the same time telling me my favourite beer is on special at my local and I have 15minutes until the second half starts.
 
^advertisers won't particularly like that, though, since it reduces their ability to market to the unwitting.
 
Not at all. Its like doing a letter box drop advertising a dog service and instead of targeting every house you only have to put the letter in the houses with dogs. At the same time you drop a letter advertising dog allergy medications to the remaining houses. Advertisers have two revenue streams for the same amount of effort and their product should be more valuable. You just have a more efficient form of advertising which is able to generate more potential income than a blanket campaign where half your material is just thrown out. The real skill will come in reading the personal information and using this successfully. It is not as simple as knowing someones likes and dislikes, it is being able to interpret and identify new markets. Addictivepersona believes small business won't be able to afford advertising but reality is the returns would be more cost effective. A $500 investment is only worth the return in sales it generates and I believe this more targeted advertising would potentially generate more than the current crude shock and awe campaigns.
 
I don't think I like the idea of ads being more personal, because it makes a commodity out of our personal information and provides the incentive for advertisers to do unscrupulous shit in trying to obtain more information about us.

L2R said:
i was disagreeing with giving advertisers cart blanche to spoil everything with ads, the only exception is when it helps prop up arts, sports and the like. i wouldn't criticise people for wearing brand labels, not just because it would be hypocritical of me and my hopeless addiction, but out of respect for personal choice.

unless you wear thongs (flip flops) with long pants, in which case you're an inhumane monster.
Click to expand...

I never said anyone should be giving advertisers free reign over the world. I can't stand advertising either, to the extreme that I use adblocker and only watch TV second-hand. But the beast needs to feed, and John Q. Public is the BBQ chicken wings.
 
its the easiest way to make money from simply being popular. Have a hit website? slap some ads on there and cash in. Are you an up-and-coming athlete? Grab an endorsement. Everything is about exposure these days because information travels instantly.

This post brought to you by Snacky-Smores
 
fair points by all. nice job guys.

as for my personal info, i can honestly say i have zero qualms about anything about me being known. i don't really care for my own privacy at all in that sense.
 
There are some trade offs to personal information, I accept that, but as long as my private banking details etc are safe then I am really not that interesting a person to mine from. i have no desire to run for public office, but I am sure, to paraphrase George Clooney, I have been to too many parties and had sex or done drugs with too many models to even have a chance to get elected ;)

The trick to social media in particular is to allow enough bullshit to create an impossible alt. If someone wants to use my online personality to blackmail or defame me they are more than welcome to do so. My membership of lesbianbikers.net should keep me safe ;) Other than that why should I care if they know I was having yum cha in chinatown last Friday or that I prefer white win over red? If anything it just means the next time I am at that resturant I will have a better wine selction catered to my taste.
 
Busty im not certain youre approach would work irl. Advertisers make alot of cash from creating new customers. Targeting people with say a fancy for heineken is no good - what happens when those folks die or go teetotal? You need to target people outside your consumer base which means targeting everyone - in the case of alcohol you'll notice that 99.9% of advertising is done covertly. Were talking shows which feature pubs with beer taps displaying logos or any sitcom/drama which features drinking. Teens are the most vulnerable in that case being aspiring adults. Those shows groom youngsters essentially - priming them for a lifetime of drinking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top