In
the textbook, chapter ten of Media/Impact discusses
advertising in mass media. Throughout the chapter, experts on the
subject commented on the industry and its affect on society. One of
those experts, Louis Kaufman, author of Essentials of Advertising,
found that critics of advertising claim the following: "advertising
adds to the cost of products, advertising causes people to buy
products they do not need, and advertising reduces competition and
thereby fosters monopolies" (Biagi 220).
The
first argument is that the overhead cost of advertising in in the
different mediums, critics feel that it adds to the cost of products.
This makes it unnecessary more expensive for the consumer. On the
other hand, advertisers claim by that ads actually create competition
which can drive the prices down. I think that business have to get
their name out to the public and ads help bring the customers in the
door. Therefore, when the business starts to make more money, they
are able to pass deals on to their customers and still make a profit.
The
second argument is that advertising causes people to buy products
they do not need. The most obvious example is the way advertisers
market toys to children. However, advertisers say that these ads are
nothing more than getting people to try new products. I feel that
certain advertisers do try to manipulate people into buying a
product, but it is ultimately up to the individual to decide what
they need and can afford.
The
third argument is that advertising reduces competition and thereby
fosters monopolies. Critics claim that only companies that can afford
to advertise how an unfair advantage. Moreover, they claim that this
limits the amount of competition. The counterpoint of this argument
is that ad campaigns are just part of introducing the product to the
public. I think that ads are essential to promoting a product. If a
company has more money to spend on a campaign, it does not guarantee
that it will strike a chord with the audience.
25/25
ReplyDelete