Ads can only do so much subliminally. The biggest thing is getting you to know about the brand for when you want to buy that type of product. You’re more primed to think of their products first. Second is triggering insecurities that make you want to buy that type of product more. In that case, you can train to resist by paying specific attention to the ad and what it’s trying to do.
At this point, ads do more to make me dislike a product than make me want to use it. If it’s something I found early and actually like, I know that its days are numbered and it’ll go downhill thanks to corporate rot. If it’s something I know nothing about, I want to avoid it and look for alternatives if I ever need that type of product. If it’s something that preys on the vulnerable or is morally repugnant or is just flat out annoying, it only reinvigorates my hatred for capitalism.
Look at this sexy woman. Look at this cool refreshing air conditioner she’s next to. Isn’t she sexy? Isn’t it nice stepping in from the heat to stand next to an air conditioner? So anyway. Associate coca cola with all the feelings you’re feeling
With all the information that Google knows about us and everything, they could in theory be doing a great job suggesting things that would be great for us - for example showing me a product or service I don’t know exists which would help me with some problem I may be having.
Google pretends that it’s what they do - showing the best possible ads for us. But what they do is the complete opposite, they find the best possible users to show their ads to. They have a responsibility to the ad, not to the user.
Arguably for a lot of stuff that folk encounter that some count as “subliminal” just means they don’t understand the language and employ of framing devices, juxtaposition, abstraction or rhetoric. We need to start teaching that shit as basic literacy in schools because once you understand them it’s not “subliminal” anymore as it becomes readable text.
The simple presence of an ad in your peripheral vision definitely counts as properly subliminal though and it’s still a menace.
🤓 They dont! Or rather they do much less than they used to, and the effect of all the product hype has been deteriorating since anthromorphic cigarette boxes have been letting you know a particular brand exists and you may like it during the half-hour show intermission in the fifties.
We’re not completely sure why, because it’s complicated. For one thing, while were blasting adults with ads, we’re also desensitizing the next generation from the same intensity, so to influence them we have to up the hype, and guess what that does to their kids.
Another factor is competition. Even ads for non-competing products are still competing for your time, your memory, your attention, so while Coke and Coors are trying to tell you what to drink you’re still thinking about the hot woman in the Toyota ad. PS Sex sells, but mostly it sells sex. People remember the hottie twerking on screen, not that Raytheon sponsored her. If we’re thinking about banging the green M&M, we’re not thinking of her as tasty chocolate candy.
And then there’s the matter that ads now try to convince you you need this product rather than simply informing you this brand exists, and you might like it, on the assumption you’re already on the market for a new hair shampoo. And the advertising sector is saturated with false products, e.g. shampoos that allegedly (but don’t actually) make you irresistibly sexy to hottie passersby, rather than merely clean your hair. So we trust modern household products the way we trust politicians.
Advertisers have been losing the war for your attention since the fifties, which [each] successive more expensive ad campaign being less effective than the last, all the while further enshittifying the medium space they occupy.
Curiously, bad decisions by marketers are compounded by bad decisions by upper management, who insist on unethically sourcing their materials and labor to make shoddy products and then blame their marketing team when their business model tanks.
Same with ads. Never could figure out why they did anything.
Ads are subliminal and you are kidding yourself if you think you are immune.
Edit - except for perfume ads, those are pointless.
Ads can only do so much subliminally. The biggest thing is getting you to know about the brand for when you want to buy that type of product. You’re more primed to think of their products first. Second is triggering insecurities that make you want to buy that type of product more. In that case, you can train to resist by paying specific attention to the ad and what it’s trying to do.
At this point, ads do more to make me dislike a product than make me want to use it. If it’s something I found early and actually like, I know that its days are numbered and it’ll go downhill thanks to corporate rot. If it’s something I know nothing about, I want to avoid it and look for alternatives if I ever need that type of product. If it’s something that preys on the vulnerable or is morally repugnant or is just flat out annoying, it only reinvigorates my hatred for capitalism.
Look at this sexy woman. Look at this cool refreshing air conditioner she’s next to. Isn’t she sexy? Isn’t it nice stepping in from the heat to stand next to an air conditioner? So anyway. Associate coca cola with all the feelings you’re feeling
Any ace person: So, complete apathy at best?
it must suck that air conditioners don’t work on ace people
Well it does stand for air conditioning excepted
It actually blows
or put a normal priced item next t a really expensive one.
the normal priced item will look cheaper, so you buy it.
thats why they present luxury cars on private jets conventions.
I am not immune they are distracting my thoughts and stirring my deep hate for them.
Ads are assault. Adblock is accessibility.
Ethical advertisements can exist, its super rare.
With all the information that Google knows about us and everything, they could in theory be doing a great job suggesting things that would be great for us - for example showing me a product or service I don’t know exists which would help me with some problem I may be having.
Google pretends that it’s what they do - showing the best possible ads for us. But what they do is the complete opposite, they find the best possible users to show their ads to. They have a responsibility to the ad, not to the user.
The ads are subliminally manipulating the sort function of my spreadsheet that calculates the unit cost of every product in a category.
You’re kidding yourself if you think I’m kidding myself.
You’re kidding, I’m kidding myself.
It’s kidding all the way down.
No kidding?
No kidding.
Kids…
Arguably for a lot of stuff that folk encounter that some count as “subliminal” just means they don’t understand the language and employ of framing devices, juxtaposition, abstraction or rhetoric. We need to start teaching that shit as basic literacy in schools because once you understand them it’s not “subliminal” anymore as it becomes readable text.
The simple presence of an ad in your peripheral vision definitely counts as properly subliminal though and it’s still a menace.
🤓 They dont! Or rather they do much less than they used to, and the effect of all the product hype has been deteriorating since anthromorphic cigarette boxes have been letting you know a particular brand exists and you may like it during the half-hour show intermission in the fifties.
We’re not completely sure why, because it’s complicated. For one thing, while were blasting adults with ads, we’re also desensitizing the next generation from the same intensity, so to influence them we have to up the hype, and guess what that does to their kids.
Another factor is competition. Even ads for non-competing products are still competing for your time, your memory, your attention, so while Coke and Coors are trying to tell you what to drink you’re still thinking about the hot woman in the Toyota ad. PS Sex sells, but mostly it sells sex. People remember the hottie twerking on screen, not that Raytheon sponsored her. If we’re thinking about banging the green M&M, we’re not thinking of her as tasty chocolate candy.
And then there’s the matter that ads now try to convince you you need this product rather than simply informing you this brand exists, and you might like it, on the assumption you’re already on the market for a new hair shampoo. And the advertising sector is saturated with false products, e.g. shampoos that allegedly (but don’t actually) make you irresistibly sexy to hottie passersby, rather than merely clean your hair. So we trust modern household products the way we trust politicians.
Advertisers have been losing the war for your attention since the fifties, which [each] successive more expensive ad campaign being less effective than the last, all the while further enshittifying the medium space they occupy.
Curiously, bad decisions by marketers are compounded by bad decisions by upper management, who insist on unethically sourcing their materials and labor to make shoddy products and then blame their marketing team when their business model tanks.
/🤓
Hey, speak for yourself.