Other then providing jobs and countering itself, does the ad industry provide any social or economic benefits?

Question

Obviously, it supports public broadcasts and websites, but it seems to me that without it, companies would have to spend significantly more on actually improving their products- although we'd have to subscribe to radio, the standard of living in most every other area of life might be noticeably higher. It would be somewhat more difficult to find out about new products, but suppose companies were required to announce new products through independent media- lots of for-profit product review services would pop up, I bet.

I've always been of the opinion that public manipulation of any sort undercuts both capitalism and democracy, but I don't mean to rely on vague generalities. What do y'all think?

rronnieneilan1983: I'm not so sure- advertising doesn't actually make broadcasting cheaper, it just causes companies to pay for it. Without advertising, I doubt companies would simply increase their profit margin by their current ad budget. What I'm wondering is simply wether advertisements are worth the resources actually spent on producing them.

scott.braden: There's a significant difference: manipulation appeals to the subconscious, and it attempts to distort facts in order subvert rational judgment. I'm posing an idea, in candid terms, and asking for counterpoints. I'm arguing with reasoning, not psychology.
The reason I say manipulation undercuts capitalism is that it tends to cause people to make irrational purchasing decisions. Capitalism requires that consumers have as realistic a view of the market as possible.

Answer 1

I have been in the 'printing' industry for 34 years. My biggest clients are part of the "ad industry". Their profit margin is high. They pay well. They employ a lot of people. They 'circulate' a lot of money........kinda "wrong/right" situation........They brain-wash people (kids). We buy 'their' products,,,,,,,,,, and then we finish watching the 'show'. Economically,,,,YES !
Socially,,,, for a small percentage !

Some where in the definition of "public manipulation", I'm sure you would find the word 'commercial'.

Answer 2

Life is cheaper with advertising. We don't pay for radio (unless we want to), and the same could be said for television. Internet services are a heck of a lot cheaper because of the advertising. And really, nobody would watch the super bowl if there weren't commercials. Our billboards would be nonexistent. Public transit would be more expensive because of the loss of revenue from no advertising.
TV stations would either have to become a paid-for service, or EVERY national broadcasting station would have to run pledge weeks like PBS does.
Life's cheaper with commercial advertising.

Answer 3

C'mon. I think your question is rhetorical.

Advertising pays for the development of content. So, there are creative, cultural, and societal benefits.

In purely economic terms advertising is about information, and information is about efficiency. So advertising is about helping consumers to make efficient product decisions.

If the product is no good, it is not the advertising agency's fault. In fact, there is an oft quoted saying that "nothing kills a bad product faster than good advertising". People hurry to buy on the promise of the advertising, and then don't repeat because the product doesn't stack up.

Answer 4

"public manipulation of any sort undercuts both capitalism and democracy"

hmmm... when you say "manipulation" isn't that the same as "persuasion?"

as in, "hey, I think companies should be equired to announce new products through independent media" - that's definitely a manipulative statement. You want a specific result to happen as a result of your words and actions.

Like when your buddy goes into the kitchen for another beer and you say, "hey, bring me one too" you evil manipulator.

Oh by the way, what brand of beer do you prefer?

You demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding of what capitalism is and how it works. I won't even comment on your "democracy" reference since this is the ad section.

Answer 5

No. Singles pay more taxes than married couples. And getting married has no impact on the local economy. Money spent on weddings would still be spent even if there was no wedding. People don't dig into savings to buy wedding presents. If I didn't spend the 20 grand on my wedding, I would have bought the new car I was looking at. If I didn't spend the $500 at all three of my niece's weddings, I would have spent it elsewhere.

Answer 6

What about public service announcements? Those definitely add some value (e.g. "Just say no", "this is your brain on drugs," etc.

Answer 7

There's a very old axiom in business.

HALF OF THE MONEY SPENT ON ADVERTISING IS WASTED!

NO ONE KNOWS WHICH HALF!