Howdy folks.. i'm starting this thread upon request..
Some of you all know me and some may not.. but I'm Jen. I'm actually a graphic designer and business owner but I started out as a psychology major. We've all talked about different ways of advertising and marketing... Well this thread is about the psychology behind it and to host a discussion or debate about it. Does marketing create a need? or is it simply pointing out the solution to a need that was already present? It really depends on how you're going about it. For example.. watch television for a 1 hour program and you'll find that the majority of the commercials are geared toward food. Now if you watch a commercial for a cheesy bacon burger smothered in all the extras you're more likely to do something about it if you're already hungry. But the body and mind can become sensitive to advertisements. someone who is not hungry who upon seeing the first ad wouldn't do anything WILL get up and do something about it if the same commercial is played again. Repeated messages in advertising will work. Why? Where we secretly hungry and didn't know about it?

Any thoughts? I'll come back with more later... need to run some errands.

There are other things too (guess i'm waiting on the errands), how one goes about advertising can affect the psychology behind it. How many advertising campaigns utilize the power of a good sex symbol? Why? Because sex sells. We all want to save the day, be the hero, get the girl, get the guy, Be popular...whatever it is. Marketing and advertising take advantage of that... but is it considered preying upon our weaknesses?
I can't wait to hear all your thoughts...

O.k., we did ask for it.

I once said to someone on another forum, who was ranting about marketing and marketers as they related to the hunting products industry, that businesses need to sell products to stay in business, and the best way to do that is through marketing and advertising. Even the kid who sets up a lemonade stand with a handmade sign is doing some sort of advertising. No one will buy your product if they don't know it is there.

That said, I think there are different purposes that marketers and advertisers pursue. One purpose is just to let people know their product exists. I don't think that, in and of itself, is a bad thing to do.

Another purpose of marketing is to sell things. This is where things can get dicey. Some marketing and advertising tactics do prey on the desire a lot of people have to accomplish their goals easily. Many people want to believe they can take a pill and all their belly fat will disappear, or that wearing the right body spray will make them irresistable to the opposite sex. Are these people being duped? Or are marketers and advertisers simply taking advantage of human nature and, if they are, is that wrong?

Part of the problem, and again this is just my opinion, is that people don't take responsibility for policing themselves. Everything is blamed on the marketing and advertising that sells product and how it is misleading. No one who takes a moment to think is really going to believe a certain body spray will really change them from a geek into a stud. Anyone who does even a small amount of research will realize that a diet pill is not the way to long term weight loss. Is it the fault of the marketing and advertising communities that people don't take the time to learn?

I also think we need to draw a distinction between creating an atmosphere and blatantly misleading the public. One example of creating an atmosphere is the White Diamonds commercials with Elizabeth Taylor. All the guys are sitting around playing poker, and she shows up looking beautiful and give the guy her diamond earrings so he can keep gambling. The ads have a specific look and feel, and give one the idea that they could capture a bit of the glamor associated with being a star. I don't see anything wrong with that.

On the other end of the spectrum we have the ads that mislead. There's one that airs here for something called Cortisol, which implies that taking this pill will miraculously melt your belly fat. To me, that's misleading and dangerous, because it might prevent people who need to exercise from getting the exercise they need.

I have no problems with advertising like the White Diamonds ad. I have a great deal of problem with the tactics used in the Cortisol ad.

O.k., so those are my initial thoughts. I'm sure I'll have more.

Since we started this thread after taking a completely different direction with another one, this will make for an interesting discussion.

Here is one problem I see, and it stems from the actual training I received in a marketing class. I strongly disagree with this, but it is what I was taught. Marketing seeks to identify an opportunity and makes no moral determination about it. In other words, if the opportunity exists, don't judge whether it's right or wrong, just take advantage of it.

Maybe this was not the intended outcome of the principle being taught, but it opens up the very lack of restraint that some believe is marketing. It's like Kristine said about being able to police yourself. If you don't police yourself, then anything goes.

Let me use this example. Consumers have an insatiable appetite for saving money (low prices). There are retailers who meet this marketing need with no regard for moral responsibility. If there are no restraints on the methods used to provide low prices, then causing human suffering is an acceptable way to win by marketing what people want. You can buy products from countries where slavery is still practiced, or the workers have no rights. You can hire illegal immigrants who will work for low pay under conditions that labor laws prohibit, but the illegal workers are in no position to complain. There are lots of ways to cut costs that no consumer would condone if they knew about it.

This thread is more about the methods we as marketers use, but the implications go much further than just how we market, it extends to what we market and how it is provided.

Good point. I think both sides of the marketing equation need to police themselves.

The marketers and advertisers need to make sure they are selling their products using ethical practices. They should not mislead or lie to the public about what their products can do. Creating a feel, a look and atmosphere for your product is acceptable. Implying that it will do something it won't is not.

The other side of the equation is the people at whom the marketing is being directed. Those people have the responsibility to learn, research and think for themselves. To place all the blame on one side of the equation and none on the other is, in my view, an unrealistic assessment.

This also assumes that people at whom the marketing is directed could make their own decisions if they chose. Those who target their marketing scams at children and others who aren't able to make informed decisions are lower than pond scum as far as I'm concerned.

I think it is possible to be in marketing and advertising and be an ethical person. Unfortunately at lot of people choose to go for the quick buck and don't care what damage they do to the image of the profession. That makes me sad.

I agree that responsibility falls on both sides, but usually, the marketer bears the heavier part as they should be the expert, not the buyer. There are plenty of legitimate opportunities available, ones that require no ethical compromises, so those who expoit do so because of their own rotten nature, not because they have to in order to succeed. Marketing is an honorable profession, it is necessary for a business to succeed, and the only reason to cheat is lack of self control.

Ok, I heard an interesting one today.... thought i'd share it all with you. I met this marketing student this week and he's a little... well too pushy for me, but here's his opinion: Marketing is supposed to take advantage.. we all have free will so marketers are there to push as much as they want. People will choose what they want to choose regardless.

I was actually left speechless after this comment. I had to walk away and collect my thoughts. Curious to all of yours.

Oh, I'm so glad I wasn't there. I would have slapped that boy into next week. I'm not a violent person, occasional urge to slug someone notwithstanding, but wow!

It's that kind of attitude that forces me to keep aologizing for my profession and causes me to have to listen to people telling me that I'm a shyster who is just out to sell people things they don't need. Marketing is NOT about taking advantage, it is about informing the public about products and services that can benefit them. There are ethical and moral ways to do this. Not all people in this industry, I won't dignify they by calling them marketers, choose that path. That doesn't mean all of us should behave that way.

As Steve said, the burden does lie on the marketing community to police itself and behave ethically. I have to wonder who that boy you met is learning from, Jen. If his teachers are teaching him this sort of crap, and not to behave ethically, the next generation of marketers may be in serious trouble.

I'm not sure, I would certainly hope that his teachers would correct that little error in judgement. But then again, i've known my fair share of crappy professors.

I've often sat and wondered about what the generations that come are going to be like (I currently have a four year old daughter and I see glimpses of the adult she will be come even now) in more ways than just in business. I think business as a whole is going to have some adjusting to do for all the new consumers who have literally NO patience.
You know, there are studies showing that television can affect people.. look at all the studies out there showing the implications of children and violence on television. We do get desensitized to things as we experience more and more and I think the same goes for advertising. Things that would shock and amaze the generations before us hold very little ooh and ahh value over us today. Same goes for the future.