English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-02-01 13:36:13 · 4 answers · asked by megalomaniac 7 in Social Science Economics

4 answers

I believe overall, it is harmful. The basic premise of a capitalist system is that producers make good in order to respond to a need. The system is considered to be the most efficient to that end.
However, it is my personal belief that the technological efficiency of our world at this point in time has brought the system way over the "needs" limit. So that in order to continue to survive, the system needs to create "needs", or at least desires.
In an ideal world, publicity would serve to inform the public of the options that are available to it and would actually foster free market conditions. However, we all know how sophisticated modern marketing has become. The goal is no longer to inform the public, but, in effect, to instill needs, to create a demand. (Although basic food, clothing, etc... will always be necessary, the vast majority of products fulfill other functions as well, including the function of bestowing prestige).
So in my view, it has become an absurdity of the system that it has become more efficient than it needs to be and that the type of economy we have today serves more to perpetrate itself than to fulfil actual human needs, and that marketing is one of the main tools of this perpetuation.

2007-02-01 14:04:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think in a broad sense, advertising is beneficial. Advertising is the modus operandi of the free market. Without it, we would never know if we were getting the most for our money. I think, however, that sellers benefit more than buyers. Buyers fail to consider the detail in ads. Statements like "no other brand offers more value," tend to be interpreted as "our brand is the best value."

2007-02-06 13:05:38 · answer #2 · answered by Scott K 7 · 0 0

I think advertising is more harmful than helpful. Advertisers know what messages they want to get across and are experts at brainwashing people. When you see and ad for men's perfume, it is not only selling the perfume, it is selling sex, happiness, money, power. It is appealing to people's desires and dreams. Buying the product not only means I'll smell good, it means I'll get the girl, get the job, have lots of money, or be accepted. When that doe not happen people will think "well if the perfume didn't do its job something must be wrong with me." They play with people's self esteem. Ads are harmful when they are made by the wrong kind of people.

2007-02-01 13:56:29 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

hi Lioness, i attempted to discover "objectified" and "objectification" interior the dictionary and no exhilaration. nicely, i'm no longer precisely useful I understand your queston, yet think of i could have an thought. besides, have you ever heard of the "bell curve"? this is a curve this is formed like a bell and does a stable activity of representing archives. As for elegance, at one end of the curve we've the least captivating and on the different end the main. the comparable could be real for earnings ... poorest on one area and richest on the different. interior the midst of the bell we've all the commonplace persons. i think of what you're asserting is real, yet purely purely a actuality of existence. we've the comprehensive spectrum for the two genders. As for why adult adult males do no longer protest ... i assume they understand that that is purely the way issues are and protests are no longer likely to alter something. wish this facilitates!

2016-12-16 19:04:27 · answer #4 · answered by niang 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers