Pages

Friday, February 24, 2012

Blog # 2 Jour 4470: Advertising Ethically


Do advertisers have a duty to the public to present the actual truth to the audience or does their loyalty lie with the client who is paying them to come up with and execute a concept?

The video in this blog discusses advertisements by Apple, a wrinkle cream and Doritos. Some of the ethical aspects of advertisements I agree with, some I don’t. The Apple commercial, for instance, does make it appear that the download speed of the phone takes only a few seconds. The actual download rate is shown and the person who shot the film shows the final result after video is spliced and cut. In this case, yes Apple is acting a tad unethical giving the impression that the phone is faster than it actually is.
 
However, within Egoism it is acting ethically toward the company. Since the ad gives Apple the connotation that it’s the fastest and best technology on the current market it promotes the company’s own long-term self-interest through the use of sales. Although, its state of corporate transparency is in question.

I don’t agree with is the video’s view on the Doritos commercial. The commercial isn’t meant to inform the audience of the cheesiness that is Doritos. The commercial was meant to entertain, and it completed its objective when I saw it.

Advertisements do have an obligation to be truthful, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be fun as well.

An example of advertisement being exposed for lying is the Dove commercial where an average woman has professionals do her makeup and hair, completes a photo shoot and even after has her picture photoshopped for the final product. This commercial revealed the edits the beauty industry makes all the time. It’s good that Dove did this because there are young women and girls who takes what’s in the magazines for face value, not knowing that the majority, if not all, of the photos in it have been altered somehow. An example of over dramatization is the case where Ralph Lauren edited the body of Filippa Hamilton to the point where her head was bigger than her pelvis, and actually her body.

The Ralph Lauren incident is a clear violation of ethical practices. The purpose of the ad was not to entertain. The model’s body was altered because it was perceived that it would be more beautiful that way. It ended up looking like nothing in this world, and not in a good way.





















It’s important that young girls learn not to take everything in as they see it. They should know that the picture was altered. Even though it might take away the artistic value of a photo if there’s a disclaimer on the bottom stating, “Models in the picture are bigger than they appear.”

In accordance with Utilitarianism, the greater good would be to use models as they are or put a disclaimer on the advertisements so that a false ad is not taken for reality. And in this case the end doesn’t justify the means. The end being that the company makes a little bit of money, the means being a person is altered. Ads like this have a very heavy affect on young minds, and can leave an impression that if you don’t turn invisible when you turn sideways you’re not pretty.

It actually goes against cultural relativism as well. In some cultures being “thick” is what is considered beautiful. Take a look at hip-hop music videos. You won’t find too many walking toothpicks in them.

Another debate of ethical practices of advertisements is one that was discussed in class. Actually, this is the second class that this subject was brought up in. That is the way that advertisers appeal to children.

Cereal commercials are basically 30 second Looney Tunes commercials, and the box is the souvenir that kids ache for when they see the box at the grocery store.

In the grocery store cereal boxes directed toward children are placed on the lower shelves of the aisle. Why? Well, there aren’t that many 6-year-olds who are 5’ 6’’.

Is it ethical to exploit children with talking rabbits, leprechauns and pretty colors to make a profit?

Looking back, I don’t agree with how advertisers lured me into the sugary sweetness that is Lucky Charms. However, my mother was there to tell me no when I wanted to eat certain things. If I wanted something sweet I was offered a piece of fruit. My communitarianism view is that advertisers should alter how they sell kids’ cereals, but I also think that parents should step up and spend time with their kids instead of just letting Dora the Explorer and the Backyardigans baby-sit them. Everyone has to alter their behavior in order to make a lasting change.

No comments:

Post a Comment