Over the past week, I
began seeing certain parts of the media where you wouldn’t expect to.
Specifically, I saw advertisements in areas I wasn’t expecting. There were two
specific instances that come to mind. First, when I was using the restroom in a
public bathroom, I looked up and there was an ad. Its not something one really
expects to see while using the restroom. The next example that comes to mind is
that when I went ice skating on Friday, there was a RT logo beneath the ice.
Once again, one doesn’t really expect to look down and see a logo for a company
underneath ice, and it definitely does put that company in the back of your
mind. This form of advertisement is becoming more and more common, with ads
appearing everywhere. This advertisement is called guerilla advertising.
Guerilla advertising is essentially
putting ads for a company in every public spot available to put an ad in. This
means advertising on the actual pavement of the street, public buildings and
even advertising within other ads. Guerrilla advertising can also include
advertising stunts performed by companies to promote their product. For example,
Red Bull performed a stunt where they had a skydiver break the world record for
the highest sky dive. The company immediately gained a lot of publicity from
this one stunt, even though the actual ad had nothing to do with what Red Bull
actually creates. This kind of advertising can be very beneficial to the companies
that do it, and certainly do put an association of certain things with these
companies in the back of your mind. Guerrilla advertising first officially began
in 1984, with a book published on the subject. Back then, however, this form of
advertising was typically used with local businesses or small companies that
didn’t have enough money to match the ads larger companies put out. In recent years,
large companies are using this kind of advertisement more and more. Most studies
believe that this type of advertising can be several times more beneficial then
most other advertising.
However, for all the good
this advertising creates for the companies, it is generally bad for the
consumers. This is because with advertising becoming more and more of a
regularity in our society and increasing in where advertising is acceptable, we
lose a bit of our culture. Once a society is completely open to advertising, it
ceases to be a culture. With guerrilla advertising pushing the boundary of what
is acceptable every day, we lose a little part of our culture to advertising
every day. Furthermore, this guerrilla advertising can push susceptible
consumers to buy even more products that they don’t necessarily need. This in
turn pushes the company to assume that this marketing scheme worked and that
they should therefore try the marketing scheme again or something different but
still similar and pushing the boundary. Once again, this same consumer will
look at a slightly changed product and assume that he or she needs it again,
buying that same product. This creates a double negative spiral. The first
spiral is that advertising boundaries continue to be pushed by the companies and
accepted by consumers, chipping away at our culture. The second spiral is that
this advertising pushes companies to spend more money in marketing rather than
the actual product they are selling, leading to a lackluster product as
compared to the ad. Overall, guerrilla advertising is a good scheme for
companies when used with control, but has been taken too far in today’s
society.
I worry especially when it comes to stunts companies may go too far. I think if something were to go wrong the company if anything may get more attention. I’m not say companies would try to hurt people on purpose but I do think they may stretch the boundaries of safety in order to gain attention. -Lindsay
ReplyDeleteRegarding your reference to the RT logo, why would a government program need guerrilla advertising? If infrastructure is created to serve the people, why would they resort to guerrilla advertising to make a profit?
ReplyDeleteBesides that, why do you think guerrilla advertisement chips away at our culture? You say, "Once a society is completely open to advertising, it ceases to be a culture", but I would argue the alternative. If our society is open to advertisement as a part of the media, wouldn't it be included as part of our culture as well?
https://www.businessinsider.com/worst-ads-of-the-year-2017-12#2-doves-racist-3-second-facebook-ad-grade-f--9
DeleteTake a look at this and then decide on how beneficial advertisement is to our culture. Furthermore, I argue that once society is open to any advertisement of any kind, not advertisement as a part of the media all together. However, I take your critisism as critiques a successful blogger must endure. Thank you
I'm not saying that the advertisement is beneficial to our culture. I agree that it has harmful effects. I'm just saying that it doesn't make our current culture disappear
DeleteI once again disagree. I do believe that once a culture becomes completely desensitized to all kinds of advertisement, it ceases to be what can be considered a culture. This is because there are no solutions to problems any more, just solutions provided to us by these ads.
DeleteI see. However, if a culture becomes completely desensitized to all kinds of advertisement, why would those solutions provided by ads matter?
DeleteAlso, what makes you say that our culture becomes completely desensitized to all kinds of advertisement?
DeleteWhat I'm trying to say is that if a culture hypothetically did become desensitized to all kinds of advertisment, ads would essentially create the enviornment we live in, creating both the problems and the solutions rather than us encountering problems and creating a solution, which is what a culture is.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete