Comments on: Advertising as Mirror not Catalyst

by: Ankh

Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Your “Avoid the product” strategy isn’t a good one for the simple reason that it will take months/years for a company to discover from the general public what the reason for the lowered sales were and that period is always lesser than the duration of the ad-campaign.
There has to be a quicker way of letting Maruti know that their ad is creating negative waves, and that medium is the media.

by: Yazad

Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Ankh, your third way is the media putting pressure on the company’s reputation. This works only if the company fears that bad press will lead to lower sales (not always the case!) Thus it is really an extension of my second point. The bottom line is revenue — however it is attacked.

by: Vijay Venkatesh

Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Well, I think the reason why people have problems with ads/movies/serials/whatever which present women in provocative clothing to sell the product think that the women in said ads/movies/serials/whatever represent the entirety of womankind.

What I think needs to be pointed out is that the woman in the said ads/movies/serials/whatever choose out of their own free will to play that role according to the script.

So, I wonder from where the question arises that this said ads/movies/serials/whatever is offensive to womenkind since it portrays her as submissive and the male as agressive.

Or for that matter why the same hell is not being raised when men act as rapists (if the same reasoning is used, then all men are rapists), or wear micro-mini thongs in said ads/movies/serials/whatever.

by: Anand

Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Television advertisments are not purely ‘commercials’. They also happen to be media texts: social communication that sells not just the product, but also lifestyles and value systems. Therefore to look at this from a purely economic standpoint is not looking at the whole picture.

by: ankit

Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

I dont quite agree with the comment “advertising does not seek to change society, it just holds up a mirror”. Sure, all advertising folks would like you to believe that. But in this MTV world that we live in, that isnt true. Advertisements have a huge impact on the society, and in my opinion change the society both directly and indirectly. Directly by making the society think of a certain product/service as desirable; and indirectly by promoting movies/magazines/tv serials, and having them impact the society.

This is generally not all that bad. What is bad is when advertisments try to go “against” the society in an attempt to change it. And in such cases the people need to voice their concerns against it. I am not advocating banning/regulation. What I have tin mind is that if enough people express their dislike to a certain ad, the company would be forced to reconsider. This would work better than not buying the product.

That said, I havent seen the ad, and dont know how good/bad it really is.

by: Alka

Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

I agree with all the suggestions you have made except this one - stop buying the product. Every company don’t make estimates weekly. Even if they DO, it would be difficult to single out the “factor” responsible for drop in sales. The bottom line is not the revenue ‘always’, sometime its Reputation too! And why limit freedom of expression to boycott only? We can choose other means too. I remember a cooking oil ad. It is really good cooking oil. But its ad was in bad taste. People voiced their concern and the ad was withdrawn. We always don�t have to adopt drastic measures.

by: Yazad

Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Alka, even public opinion takes time to build up. By and large, companies are afraid of their reputation going down only becuase it impacts profits.

Ankit, commercial advertising does not attempt to change society (unlike “social” advertising like anti-smoking campaigns). Jivha and others have criticised the Maruti ad saying that it reinforces the old male / female biases and stereotypes. It’s the inability of the ad fraternity to change its “macho” image that’s the core issue here.

Anand, advertising is part of the communications we see it society. It may play some part in value formation when selling a certain lifestyle. I think its importance is much less than what is touted. On the other hand, the economics is most important, much more than the “social messages” if any. The company behind the ad doesn’t care if certain lifestyles are promoted or not as long as the product sells.

Vijay, I agree with you that one woman in one ad is not representative of all womankind. But then, just because one woman decides to play a certain role does not in itself make that role inoffensive for all women.

by: Vijay Venkatesh

Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

But then, just because one woman decides to play a certain role does not in itself make that role inoffensive for all women.

Yes; exactly my point.

by: Vijay Venkatesh

Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Oops, I missed the inoffensive bit in your quote.

Why should it be offensive to all women if a women chose to play that role? Are women not capable to choose what they do with themselves?

I have seen the first ad where a Goth chick wearing a brown corset is chased by a red Zen which culminates in her being cornered and then she recognises the “agressor”, relaxes and gets into the car. The ad is dealing with a complex sexual role and has nothing to do with enforcing macho stereotypes.

Cars, ships, etc have traditionally represented the female sex.

I also think it depends on what the person seeing the ad thinks about how the media imagery affects the viewer. If, for example, someone thinks that “TV corrupts the youth”, then imagery like that ad would seem to be offensive.

The ad, infact, asserts the female.

by: ankit

Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Yazad, why do you say that commercial advertising does not attempt to change the society? Isnt that what a large part of advertising is all about? Creating a market for a product that would otherwise not sell. Is this not changing the society? Saying advertising does not change the way people think/act is like saying that movies and television have no impact on people!