[Tfug] Way OT: Advertising

[Bexley Hall]

Hi Joe,

> I have always considered advertising - for the most part - a type of
> pollution.  But my annoyance with it has had an interesting effect.
> There is or seems to be this idea that people are suggestible.  Hence
> with product placement, you see a bucket of KFC in a television show,
> you want to go out and get yourself some KFC.

Actually, I think that is essentially true for Most Folks.
The book referenced has some interesting insights into that
and related issues.  If you think about them as they are
presented, you can see how true most of his observations
*are* -- for most people.  He also cites some real examples
of cases where these behaviors have successfully been
exploited in the past.

[N.B. Some of his comments correlate with "strategies" I have
seen described for firms like WalMart]

> I don't miss product placement.  I am sensitized to it.  But I
> actively recoil from products used in product placement (I find this
> insidious and I hate it), and annoying commercials (90% of them).
> Between having cancelled cable television, and not having any of those
> converter boxes to receive digital signals, adblock in my browser, no
> subscriptions to ad-heavy magazines, and no radio, I probably
> encounter less advertising than average.

The operative word there is "than average".  You are still
*bombarded* with ads.  Vehicles that have been "wrapped", roadside
billboards, the checkout counter at the grocery store (even the
little "bar" used to separate your order on the conveyor belt
from those ahead/behind yours has ads on it), etc.

Plus, any "infected" people that you interact with routinely
add bias to that to which you are exposed.  I enjoy ridiculing
friends who are talk-radio junkies.  My comment:  "I don't like
PAYING someone to do my THINKING for me".  Almost invariably,
they fail to see the point:  "Do you think these folks work for
*free*?  Who do you think *pays* them?  Do you think those
people/firms would spend that kind of money if the folks who
LISTEN to these broadcasts (i.e., you) weren't putting that
money -- and more! -- back into their coffers??"

[ Jared jewelers ]

The book has some parallels with this line of sales approach.
And how the pre-seeded expectation colors your later view on
the sale (favorably).  There are also comments on how businesses
try to establish "relationships" with their customers and the
pros and cons of this.  As well as the psychology of auctions,
how buyers and sellers typically see items as having very
different values (the Duke example is particularly entertaining),
etc.

(sigh)  Re: my previous "infected" comment -- *I* am obviously
acting as an advert for this book (though because of my favorable
experience with it; OTOH, I can say nothing but *bad* things
about Sony products...)

> Now, I only go to a retail establishment when I need something 
> specific, or am actively

That may make you *more* vulnerable to advertising -- since you
will be more likely to pick something that you've already
"heard about" (conciously or subconciously) than something
"arbitrary".  E.g., do you purchase Coke/Pepsi or settle for
some "generic" soda?  Do you have a particular price in mind
before you buy it?  Or, do you just pay whatever the current
price happens to be because you "need [that]thing specific[ly]"?

> comparison shopping for something I know I need.  As
> for expensive items, I research those to death on the Internet 
> through product reviews and so on (I know I'm not the only one).

And you assume those product reviews are all unbiased?

> I hate ads which want me to, "Picture myself <with
> this product> and what a glorious life with <product> it will be."

Again, the book describes some of this phenomenon.  And how *easily*
you can be manipulated into this trap.  Reading some of the
experiments that the author conducted, it was quite entertaining to
see how much people can be "led".  And, how they will cling to
their (irrational) decisions later -- fabricating excuses to
rationalize why they were *good* choices (despite evidence to
the contrary).

But, it still doesn't address the basic issue: why the sheer volume
of ads instead of putting that money into improving your product
or lowering your price/cost.  Does Qwest need to put an ad in
*each* weeks newspaper *plus* mail directly to households?  Why
not just make their service a bit cheaper or better so word of
mouth does their advertising *for* them?  Ditto with Cox, Dish, etc.
It's as if they have all decided "we're no better than the other
guy and, rather than *trying* to be better (in SOME way), we'll just
try to inundate folks with our ads so they eventually "pick"
us over the competition (note I use the word "pick" instead
of "choose" -- the latter suggesting more forethought).

This is true of many things.  Why don't hospitals make a big
effort to improve their "unnecessary complications" rate so
their are more successful outcomes?  Then, *boast* about it!

Why don't retirement homes focus on some key aspect of their
residents' lives (the meals they prepare, the activities they
attend, etc.) and make that really *shine* -- and then BOAST
about it!  E.g., imagine having the "dining room" in your
retirement home be a restaurant that was open to the public
(not just a "cafeteria" for the residents).  Serve *excellent*
food so The Public wants to eat there.  Now, give *preference*
to the residents in terms of seating (i.e., if a resident
walks in looking for dinner, they get the next table regardless
of how long the "public" has been waiting).  This makes the
residents feel special (something that many folks don't experience
later in life) and they'll brag about it!  The Public will
quickly learn when NOT to visit the restaurant -- to avoid the
"rush" of the residents -- so they, too, will enjoy their
experience.

And, The Public helps subsidize the retirement home as this is
added revenue that most retirement homes wouldn't have available
to them.

<shrug>  What's the alternative?  Cheapen your product (the
meals that you serve, the care that you provide to your residents,
etc.) in the hope of being "competitive" with the other retirement
home "down the street" -- who is doing exactly the same thing!?

[the soapbox is now available]