Reading Response #1 PDF

Preview

Summary

Reading Response #1...

Description

Reading Response to “Masters of Desire: The culture of American Advertising” Jack Solomon’s main point of his essay is to inform the public of the ways advertisers choose to make their advertisements and the reasoning behind those choices. He explains that there are two portions of the American dream. The first is communally egalitarian and the second is competitively elitist. Advertisers realize those desires and form their advertisements to show that their product satisfies those wants. Not only do the advertisers focus on desires of the public, but they also recognize the fears and use those against the public. They are able to claim, “If you don’t have this product you will not belong or receive social rejection.” These advertisements are known as guilt adds. The last portion of Solomon’s essay mentions a ”new realism” approach to advertising. This approach is when the producer attempts to make the add in a way that makes it look like little effort was put into it, making people think the product is “as real as it gets.” Advertisements are manipulative in the way they get people attracted to what there are selling. They are deceitful and no matter how they are created. I understood all of what Jack was saying and it totally makes sense about how advertisers would use those strategies to get the public to buy their goods. After seeing advertisements my entire life and then reading Solomon’s essay, it would be easy to recognize which approach an advertiser is using on a specific campaign. I’m sure that now after reading this, I will really think about if I want the object that the advertiser is trying to get me to buy, or is it just manipulating my emotions, making me think I want an item much more then I actually do if at all.

Should advertisers be allowed to include any forms of sexual acts in their advertisements? The culture of America has let sexual implications and acts happen more publically over time. Many have come to just accept the fact, but few have not. That is why this question at issue could have many responses. Should advertisements have the opportunity to lead their viewers in a false direction? Or should it be required that every word must be a true one? The room left for deceit in advertisements may be minimal because of the high level of education of the majority of the viewers, but it is still there. It gives advertisers the opportunity to trick the audience, but is it the advertisers or the audience that has to have the boundaries and control? Personally, I believe that individuals should be required to have the self-control of buying or not buying something based on the advertisements....