It used to be that advertisers simply marketed their ads to as many people as possible in hopes that it would attract the most customers. Then as the internet developed, interest tracking became the most dominate method in reaching consumers most likely to follow the particular advertisement. However, the general negative attitudes people develop towards advertisement is just a surface level issue. Underneath, there is an underlying problem beyond what is easily perceivable.
The widespread nature of corporate advertisements can put consumers at risk to conforming with what they perceived to be the overriding values. Though, that's not to say everyone person is susceptible to the negative influences of media. Understanding how to recognize these influences on our cognition can be developed. Those who lack that personal integrity are most prone to the influences of whatever they are hit with in the media whether it be that marketers hinge onto the value of physical appearance in women when trying to sell skin products by implying, "you must use our product in order to look beautiful and be loved as a person" or how marketers might market their beer products to men with the robotic subordination of women in a beer commercial. They are reinforcing and amplifying a negative stereotype creating yet another obstacle in society's positive development. By definition, a business's purpose is to make a profit so often times, this priority subdues marketer's concern for consumers. However, the most important thing to recognize is that doing good and making a profit are not mutually exclusive. So it takes more than strategy to be a good marketer; it takes morally-enforced strategy to make a great business leader.
Advertisements are more than just subtle posters, flashing backgrounds or funny commercials; they have the power to influence entire cultures - and not always in the right direction. The way some business schools teach people how to market is to reinforce the current popular culture. They teach to-be business leaders how to "analyze the markets" but what they are really doing is teaching them to blindly chase trends. Mere associations can have devastating affects. Most marketers are simply trained to frame and utilize a popular figure, image or culture in their ads to make an association between the influencer and their product as long as it makes them a profit. Consequently, when little concern for it's effects it has on society, they blindly amplify and reinforce a certain culture in association with what is followed that ultimately threatens the psychological expectations of consumers.
The widespread nature of corporate advertisements can put consumers at risk to conforming with what they perceived to be the overriding values. Though, that's not to say everyone person is susceptible to the negative influences of media. Understanding how to recognize these influences on our cognition can be developed. Those who lack that personal integrity are most prone to the influences of whatever they are hit with in the media whether it be that marketers hinge onto the value of physical appearance in women when trying to sell skin products by implying, "you must use our product in order to look beautiful and be loved as a person" or how marketers might market their beer products to men with the robotic subordination of women in a beer commercial. They are reinforcing and amplifying a negative stereotype creating yet another obstacle in society's positive development. By definition, a business's purpose is to make a profit so often times, this priority subdues marketer's concern for consumers. However, the most important thing to recognize is that doing good and making a profit are not mutually exclusive. So it takes more than strategy to be a good marketer; it takes morally-enforced strategy to make a great business leader.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Psychology behind influence:
Individuals are more influenced by their social environments than most like to think. Human minds are programmed to experience cognitive dissonance when their mental states are not congruent with their behavior or the social environment. Two ways of solving this is either matching one's attitude with that behavior or changing that behavior to match that attitude. For example, if a student entered a new high school where everyone behaved a certain way in opposition to how that individual acted, he or she will most likely experience cognitive dissonance. For the sake of the case, let's say the school had a rude and aggressive culture while the new student came from a school that valued more and emphasized kindness. One way to reduce this inconsistency between the internal and external states is to conform one's attitude to the opposing behavior by believing that being rude is the appropriate way to act. Now, it matches with the expectations and one will no longer feel the distress of defying the social pressure. However, the other way is to match one's behavior with one's attitude. In order to do this, one must allow their polite behavior to remain connected with their their personal preference of kindness and acceptance. Likewise, for people who have circle of friends who don't use drugs, it is easier for them to develop a healthier lifestyle than those who are brought up in a drug filled environment.
Depending on how well an individual practices the decision making behind what is best for their well-being or other's well-being, it becomes easier and quicker with experience. Attitude to behavior or behavior to attitude, however, is not the static function of good or bad; it is the situation itself. It take analysis beyond face value. For example, if everyone at school were hard workers and kind people, it wouldn't hurt to conform in this situation because it supports one's well being. Likewise, it might not be the best decision to maintain one's lazy and rude behavior in match with the attitude that being uncivilized is preferred. Interpersonally, flocks or herds are more likely to survive if they all acted the same because it creates communal harmony. This is the same way human brains work but the counter is that the way everyone acts is not always for the best interest of that individual so it takes experience in judgement to decide what's best. This is the same reason why young children are most easily influenced because they have not experienced the challenges of deciding whether to conform or hold true to their personal health. In part, this ability to decide at a second level is one aspect that sets humans apart from the animal kingdom. Overtime, guiding and allowing children to make these decision will help them develop greater integrity.
Very well said...
ReplyDelete