- Joined
- Jul 1, 2017
>trendy clothingI do not know why seeing as I am neither a woman nor a faggot but recently, I have been receiving Youtube Ads for the smartphone App “Depop“ which is an online marketplace for selling and buying used trendy and fashionable clothing. In the advertisement that I am being shown, an effeminate sounding negro says something along the lines of “I find out what the new trend is....and then I buy it *effeminate giggle*“. Really blatant promotion of mindless consumerism.
>used
How does that even make sense? If it's trendy, aren't you supposed to wear it until it isn't trendy and THEN sell it?
No, even way back then they used psyops to get you to buy into ads. A classic example is how from the 1920s onward they (and by "they" I mean "propaganda expert Edward Bernays") tied smoking to feminism and women's liberation starting with things like calling cigarettes "torches of freedom" which they even had placed into newspapers as some comment about why women were smoking. Edward Bernays said that "advertising competes with the news," therefore he had to find ways to get journos to write about the subject of his campaign. Or the infamous "doctors recommend Camel cigarettes" in the 50s was not just a way to get a trusted figure to sell you cigarettes, but also to alleviate the "is it healthy for you?" question.i like some of the very old school advertising work from maybe the 1960s or under because a lot of it was still almost naive compared to today.
"Buy food brand because food brand is tasty yum!" with a beautiful illustration of a lady and the product looking impecable. Everyone knows its an ad , obviously is seeling you something material and it is advertising on the intrinsic qualities of the product. A lot of car ads from the 50s and 60s specially are really nice, with often great artwork.
Nowadays every ad is an obtuse psy ops, products are supposed to be moral, a part of your identity, even a political expression, the object itself of the ad campaign is an afterthough, they are selling you an abstract idea of a product through very indirect means. Conceptually what the consumer wants or needs doesn't matter as much anymore, because the ad psy ops wants to create a want and a need in someone who didn't have those before, so who gives a shit if you are someone who likes tomatoes or not, they'll sell you the idea of wanting to be someone who buys tomatoes and will exploit every insecurity to get to the goal line. Nowadays you can't even 100% tell whats an sponsored ad and what is content, every media has covert advertising and subliminal messages, if they know you are sick of ads they'll astroturf or hide them into something else pretending is not an ad, even on the news. "every day until you like it".
If I had to notice a difference from classic advertising, advertising today really hammers you with the "brand as a lifestyle" angle that gets almost religious at times. I guess this is the logical outgrowth from the typical brand loyalty angle, but it's emphasized with all the other shit they sell that goes along with it. I'd say this probably originated as cross-pollination with merchandising for cartoons and TV shows starting around the 60s. For instance, say you like Corvettes. It isn't just a car. You can get all sorts of clothing, models, calendars, etc. branded with Corvettes on them, play a shitty PS2 racing game that only has Corvettes, and of course can go to the Corvette Museum in Kentucky where you can even get recursive merch like a Corvette Museum T-Shirt.
One of the most informative classes I ever took in college was about the history of the tobacco industry, and that's because it doubled as a look into how advertising and PR evolved because the tobacco industry was at the forefront of the evolution of advertising and PR to their current forms. For instance, Edward Bernays (professor showed clips from that one documentary on Edward Bernays in class) used psychological techniques (the same he used for World War I propaganda campaigns he consulted on) to convince people to buy cigarettes and convince journalists to give free press to his campaigns. It was one of the best ways for teaching critical thinking I ever had in college, even if the professor himself would disagree with some of the conclusions I drew from it.I had a class like that in college...thank god. I can't imagine it still exists. Probably turned it into something like "Manufacturing Outrage for Fun and Profit 101".
For me it was just a short and easy little class to pad out my required units but it still helps me avoid many of the tricks even to this day. The tech has gotten more sophisticated, but at the end of the day bullshit still stinks.
And it's come so much further these days than the tricks Edward Bernays or 50s PR firms were using to inform the public about the joys of smoking.