Ethics and Persuasion - Nov. 30th Reading Questions
1. “Time concluded, ‘Ethics, often dismissed as a prissy Sunday School word, now is a new national debate’” (Larsen 22). Why, assuming we live in a rather “unethical” world, has unethical behavior progressed over the years? Is the problem, or part of it, that we believed good and honest behavior to be so “prissy” for so long and so we acted as “bad guys” to prove something? I am not referring to ethical behavior around the subjects of abortion, death penalty or adultery, but rather people’s choice to commit fraud, lie on a grand scale or purposely take advantage of others and/or incite them onto wrong-doing. The main question here is not how people should be punished for their actions, if at all, but why they committed those actions. Are we really worse now then we were ten years ago? Think of a current event where such behavior is apparent and relevant. How did the audience perceive the event? Does the reason it was done justify its means; for example, would a lie told by a presidential candidate be justified if its purpose was to win the election?
2. In a recent episode of NPR’s This American Life, host Ira Glass investigates stories of “Bait and Switch” (Episode and its description found here). Each story told here applies to the debate of ethical responsibility presented by Larsen in his chapter “Perspectives on Ethics in Persuasion.” Listen to just the first act about a strategy applied by police departments to catch car thieves. It is argued that just as some police officers dress up as a hooker in attempt to arrest any customer, a car is parked for some time on any given street with the keys in the ignition in attempt to arrest any person who tries to drive away in it. This tactic has been successful in arresting quite a few people. How ethical do you find this practice? Does it really rid us of potential criminals, or is it an unnecessary and manipulative test of people’s behavior?
3. In the school of ethics in Western philosophy, there are three prominent ideas, briefly noted in our textbook, dominant in the discussion on the subject. Aristotle and Plato focus on the benefits to the person delivering the message and the benefits to the receivers based on the given society’s virtues (like justice and generosity). In Kantian terms, moral action is only worth when performed for the sake of duty, so are the intentions innately good? The third idea is utilitarianism, which discusses ethics in terms of whether the greater good is considered in a rhetor’s message, so does it contribute to the benefit and happiness of the greatest number of people. In the composition of a persuasive message, what school of thought do you think should be most closely applied and followed in order to deliver a purely ethical message?
Saturday, November 28
Monday, November 9
Persuasion and Consumption at Trader Joe’s
“Welcome to Trader Joe’s, Your Neighborhood Grocery Store” reads the top of this store’s website. When you go into the actual store, an equally welcoming message awaits you, and not only in verbal form. On Capitol Hill in Seattle, Trader Joe’s (or TJ, as often referred to by loyal customers) is located on 17th and Madison, about five blocks east of the Seattle University campus. The interior of the store has a comfortable and approachable feel to it, helping promote its affordability and community involvement. The ongoing theme in stores as well as on the website are Hawaiian flowers and cedar planks, which decorate not only the walls, but also the staff’s t-shirts. Already, you are in the right mood to walk around the place and check out their products.
Around the store, are featured items, which are often chosen according to season and piled up at the end of an aisle. Now, these items include apple cider and maple leaf cookies. With four or five of these around, the piles often need restocking. Featuring them and making it impossible not to pass by is a successful marketing strategy. Another vey successful strategy here is the tasting booth. This one is not like Costco where they have a woman of age whose hair doesn’t have a smidge of oxygen underneath her plastic cap yell out about the delicious packaged chili. Here, there is a stand of more substantial structure that looks like it’s made of straw and bamboo (Hawaiian theme). Behind it is an employee serving out small portions of whatever has been prepared. On this day it’s beer bread topped with some butter. It was delicious, and yes, I considered purchasing it to have my roommate taste. They marketing ploy almost worked, but I set it down, figuring I should spend the $3 on cheese instead. But I’m certain other equally satisfied customers did buy this TJ product.
Perhaps the most prominent marketing strategy at TJ’s is its approachability. The prices below the items all look like they are handwritten with a sharpie, as do the big signs. Staff members will all greet you, a few strike up a conversation. Most of them are in their twenties and thirties. The cashier and I had a very friendly conversation about our Halloween weekends during which another cashier chimed in to remind him that his skeleton mask was left at his house. In our textbook “Persuasion and Influence in American Life,” Woodward and Denton claim that “the most effective form of persuasion is that which is created with a specific audience in mind” (267) and TJ has a rather specific audience. It is a grocery store, so it will tend to anybody who comes through its door, but its target audience, as the staff demographic portrays, is the young crowd (at this location at least). TJ has low prices and a wide variety of frozen and pre-made meals ideal for the student and those without families to cook meals for all the time. It also closely tends to the vegetarians and vegans by providing a number of items for their specific diets. Additionally, they sell a few bathroom and cleaning products that are environmentally friendly for the simple consumers who choose not to opt for name brand shampoos. TJ knows how to gain the attention of its audience (be friendly and casual), address its needs (low budget, special diet, environmentally friendly) and solve its problems (low prices, own products).
Trader Joe’s definitely tries to “promote the recognition of one’s uniqueness” (271) in its marketing techniques, especially by standing out from other franchise supermarkets, making its customers stand out, feel unique. Its strategies in general, as I noticed more during my last visit to the store, appeal to emotion with the use of humor in the rhetoric on their signs for example, the friendly staff who make you feel welcome, the maple leaf cookies as an ode to all, etc. They also use rational functional appeals by setting the norms for the “right” kinds of groceries to purchase and the “right” store to go to in the area. They do so also with reminder ads that you find in you mailbox or on someone’s tote or t-shirt that they bought at the store (297).
“The more pervasive and persuasive, the more invisible advertising becomes in terms of influence and impact. Its presence and images become natural, expected, and even desired” (268). I would say that this has certainly been the case for Trader Joe’s. The store has become a definite a staple in this neighborhood (I do not have another experience with TJ’s to compare this to). Undoubtedly, the marketing has played a large role in this. You like the store, you will talk about it to all your friends and they will become regulars there too. You will also carry the TJ tote that you will carry around town and everybody will somehow be exposed to TJ. The store also sends newsletters to neighborhood residents and participates in certain community events. We find it in a lot more places than we think and it has become so natural that we don’t notice when it’s actually being advertised. TJ marketing is marketing well done.
Around the store, are featured items, which are often chosen according to season and piled up at the end of an aisle. Now, these items include apple cider and maple leaf cookies. With four or five of these around, the piles often need restocking. Featuring them and making it impossible not to pass by is a successful marketing strategy. Another vey successful strategy here is the tasting booth. This one is not like Costco where they have a woman of age whose hair doesn’t have a smidge of oxygen underneath her plastic cap yell out about the delicious packaged chili. Here, there is a stand of more substantial structure that looks like it’s made of straw and bamboo (Hawaiian theme). Behind it is an employee serving out small portions of whatever has been prepared. On this day it’s beer bread topped with some butter. It was delicious, and yes, I considered purchasing it to have my roommate taste. They marketing ploy almost worked, but I set it down, figuring I should spend the $3 on cheese instead. But I’m certain other equally satisfied customers did buy this TJ product.
Perhaps the most prominent marketing strategy at TJ’s is its approachability. The prices below the items all look like they are handwritten with a sharpie, as do the big signs. Staff members will all greet you, a few strike up a conversation. Most of them are in their twenties and thirties. The cashier and I had a very friendly conversation about our Halloween weekends during which another cashier chimed in to remind him that his skeleton mask was left at his house. In our textbook “Persuasion and Influence in American Life,” Woodward and Denton claim that “the most effective form of persuasion is that which is created with a specific audience in mind” (267) and TJ has a rather specific audience. It is a grocery store, so it will tend to anybody who comes through its door, but its target audience, as the staff demographic portrays, is the young crowd (at this location at least). TJ has low prices and a wide variety of frozen and pre-made meals ideal for the student and those without families to cook meals for all the time. It also closely tends to the vegetarians and vegans by providing a number of items for their specific diets. Additionally, they sell a few bathroom and cleaning products that are environmentally friendly for the simple consumers who choose not to opt for name brand shampoos. TJ knows how to gain the attention of its audience (be friendly and casual), address its needs (low budget, special diet, environmentally friendly) and solve its problems (low prices, own products).
Trader Joe’s definitely tries to “promote the recognition of one’s uniqueness” (271) in its marketing techniques, especially by standing out from other franchise supermarkets, making its customers stand out, feel unique. Its strategies in general, as I noticed more during my last visit to the store, appeal to emotion with the use of humor in the rhetoric on their signs for example, the friendly staff who make you feel welcome, the maple leaf cookies as an ode to all, etc. They also use rational functional appeals by setting the norms for the “right” kinds of groceries to purchase and the “right” store to go to in the area. They do so also with reminder ads that you find in you mailbox or on someone’s tote or t-shirt that they bought at the store (297).
“The more pervasive and persuasive, the more invisible advertising becomes in terms of influence and impact. Its presence and images become natural, expected, and even desired” (268). I would say that this has certainly been the case for Trader Joe’s. The store has become a definite a staple in this neighborhood (I do not have another experience with TJ’s to compare this to). Undoubtedly, the marketing has played a large role in this. You like the store, you will talk about it to all your friends and they will become regulars there too. You will also carry the TJ tote that you will carry around town and everybody will somehow be exposed to TJ. The store also sends newsletters to neighborhood residents and participates in certain community events. We find it in a lot more places than we think and it has become so natural that we don’t notice when it’s actually being advertised. TJ marketing is marketing well done.
Sunday, November 8
Questions; week of November 9th
1. “The historians and archeologists will one day discover that the ads of our times are the richest and most faithful daily reflection that any society ever made of its entire range of activities,” states Marshall McLuhan. To what extent, if at all, do you agree with this statement reaffirmed by a number of academics referenced in our textbook “Persuasion and Influence in American Life”? Consider our ads today, from those promoting cell phones that depict our lives from the phones’ points of view to others portraying a man chased after by beautiful women who sense the scent of his deodorant. If advertisements tell the story of societies, what is the story of the American society? The television show Mad Men, about the advertisement business in 1960’s New York, is acclaimed for its rather accurate depiction of the ad industry’s relation to society at the time. We see Marilyn Monroe lookalikes in the ads they produce as well as in the ad agency producing them. Cleaning material, food, etc. ads are only targeted at housewives and we hardly see any of the women (living outside of the urban city) do anything besides cook for their families or organize house parties. That is how we now view part of American Society in the 60’s. If a show were produced forty years from now about our ad agencies in the United States, what do you reckon would be the principal content? How will those viewing the show view the American society we are now living in and helping create?
2. When the subject of advertisement is alluded to, the first thing that usually comes to mind is product sales. Pepsi, Ford, Wonder Bra, Blackberry, Cheerios, etc. An aspect of the industry we often neglect to acknowledge, or perhaps connote as advertisement is advocacy. Woodward and Denton note on page 267 of their textbook: “by design, advertising is perhaps the strongest form of advocacy.” Those who sported a Barack Obama t-shirt during the President’s campaign were advocating his election. Anyone who changed their Facebook profile picture to “Vote Ref. 71” during the Washington state elections last week was advocating the passing of this bill. This is a more grassroots form of advertisement, one that doesn’t include all the expenses of makeup and a set, amongst many other things. Do you think advocacy is just as persuasive as other kinds of advertising? Can you think of anyway you advocated a cause, a person or a thing, or on the opposite end, was influenced by someone else’s advocacy efforts? Explain the advertised “product” and the impact (if any).
3. An essential element in visual persuasion discussed by Paul Messaris in the chapter “Pictures and reality” is direct eye gaze. He claims that in advertising, “having a model or spokesperson look into the viewer’s eyes is a standard attention-getting device” (21). The example he uses to demonstrate his point is what is of most interest to me, the image of Uncle Sam saying “I want you for U.S. army” that he juxtaposes with another add of Uncle Sam that does not point to the viewer. In the latter, there is more text and less visual intensity, so “the illusion of entering the viewer’s space is considerably diminished” (21). Compare these two advertisements shown in figure 1.12 and 1.13 on page 22 of the chapter. Which do you find more powerful and why? Do you think less text makes an ad more persuasive?
2. When the subject of advertisement is alluded to, the first thing that usually comes to mind is product sales. Pepsi, Ford, Wonder Bra, Blackberry, Cheerios, etc. An aspect of the industry we often neglect to acknowledge, or perhaps connote as advertisement is advocacy. Woodward and Denton note on page 267 of their textbook: “by design, advertising is perhaps the strongest form of advocacy.” Those who sported a Barack Obama t-shirt during the President’s campaign were advocating his election. Anyone who changed their Facebook profile picture to “Vote Ref. 71” during the Washington state elections last week was advocating the passing of this bill. This is a more grassroots form of advertisement, one that doesn’t include all the expenses of makeup and a set, amongst many other things. Do you think advocacy is just as persuasive as other kinds of advertising? Can you think of anyway you advocated a cause, a person or a thing, or on the opposite end, was influenced by someone else’s advocacy efforts? Explain the advertised “product” and the impact (if any).
3. An essential element in visual persuasion discussed by Paul Messaris in the chapter “Pictures and reality” is direct eye gaze. He claims that in advertising, “having a model or spokesperson look into the viewer’s eyes is a standard attention-getting device” (21). The example he uses to demonstrate his point is what is of most interest to me, the image of Uncle Sam saying “I want you for U.S. army” that he juxtaposes with another add of Uncle Sam that does not point to the viewer. In the latter, there is more text and less visual intensity, so “the illusion of entering the viewer’s space is considerably diminished” (21). Compare these two advertisements shown in figure 1.12 and 1.13 on page 22 of the chapter. Which do you find more powerful and why? Do you think less text makes an ad more persuasive?
Tuesday, October 20
Is the commonplace a good place?
Jamie’s Question 3
On page 169, a definition of a commonplace is given: “a commonplace serves everyone as a touchstone, an instrument of recognition. It is rarely quoted, but it is constantly present; it is behind thought and speech; it is behind conversation. It is the common standard that enables people to understand one another.” (Jacques Ellul). Commonplaces are links that connect people of a common cultural group and are important when identifying an audience. If commonplaces are the basis of audience identification, is it troublesome that they often remain unspoken? Does the fact that commonplaces are “constantly present” yet “behind thought and speech,” make it more likely that audience values will be incorrectly generalized? Should we engage more in conversation about what our true beliefs are to avoid possible mistakes?
Response:
The internal struggle of what to share and what not to is ever present in our quotidian. We fear that we might be burdening others with too much information, or leaving them underwhelmed with too little. We try not to bore, offend or harm while still wary of the need to input our own thoughts, ideas and feedback. In such a process that often occurs over a time span of mere seconds, messages are bound to get lost or neglected in the process. We often admire those who speak their minds without restraint, emitting a sense of confidence in their words as well as a disregard for how the listeners might react. But what allows them to feel this way? Is it a sense of belonging to a commonplace? How might this attitude be received in an environment they are unfamiliar with where the audience cannot be clearly identified? For this reason, “locating the right commonplaces is vital.” (W & D 169).
The commonplace seems to fit in the same category as the set of unwritten rules common in a large number of social setting, communities, groups, etc. The assumption that those we are communicating with have a similar general knowledge base facilitates interaction and often makes room for more fruitful and insightful conversation. I might even use the word efficient to describe this sort of interaction. It is so because in a commonplace, we do not need to present lots of background information about certain subjects, assuming those we are interacting with already have the same knowledge base. For example, in talking about health care in the United Sates today (amongst adults principally), it can be assumed that most people are aware of the general debate around this heated issue and some of the basic information about it, and this way the speakers can spend more time discussing the issue’s current standing and their thoughts about it instead of explaining its background.
However, Jamie’s concern here is certainly legitimate as it can be troublesome that commonplaces remain unspoken. Continuing with the example of the discussion around health care in the US, it is rather likely that some people don’t know where the senate stands on passing the latest bill or how the bill is actually going to affect citizens, whether it will fix the fundamental problem of the system that causes the bankruptcy of many and the confusion around insurance plans. The list of things to be ignorant about is long. Not everyone is wiling to admit their ignorance and this can often lead to discomfort within this so-believed commonplace and to a stunted exchange of ideas.
The presence of a commonplace is natural in any society because living in a similar environment inevitably leads to common behaviors, ideas, customs, etc. so it is often assumed that people are aware of the community’s on goings. This incites people to stay updated on the news, significant government issues, cultural events and so on. It is also what allows for rather superficial connections if you will; “commonplaces are useful…precisely because they are so unremarkable…” (W & D 170). For this reason, I think that engaging more in conversation about what our true beliefs are as to avoid possible mistakes about audience values should occur amongst smaller groups, or more specified commonplaces. The commonplace described in the textbook makes reference to general groups mostly where conversations are not in depth and where core values are not addressed. But it is this main commonplace that allows for a general understanding of people we share national and cultural customs with.
“Some social theorists have noted hat we are less a ‘melting pot’ that blends variations than a culture that more or less accommodates differences” (W & D 165). This is perhaps what best describes the American commonplace and explains the difficulty of reaching a common understanding that allows for correct (or closest to) generalization and time to listen to evaluate everybody’s differences.
On page 169, a definition of a commonplace is given: “a commonplace serves everyone as a touchstone, an instrument of recognition. It is rarely quoted, but it is constantly present; it is behind thought and speech; it is behind conversation. It is the common standard that enables people to understand one another.” (Jacques Ellul). Commonplaces are links that connect people of a common cultural group and are important when identifying an audience. If commonplaces are the basis of audience identification, is it troublesome that they often remain unspoken? Does the fact that commonplaces are “constantly present” yet “behind thought and speech,” make it more likely that audience values will be incorrectly generalized? Should we engage more in conversation about what our true beliefs are to avoid possible mistakes?
Response:
The internal struggle of what to share and what not to is ever present in our quotidian. We fear that we might be burdening others with too much information, or leaving them underwhelmed with too little. We try not to bore, offend or harm while still wary of the need to input our own thoughts, ideas and feedback. In such a process that often occurs over a time span of mere seconds, messages are bound to get lost or neglected in the process. We often admire those who speak their minds without restraint, emitting a sense of confidence in their words as well as a disregard for how the listeners might react. But what allows them to feel this way? Is it a sense of belonging to a commonplace? How might this attitude be received in an environment they are unfamiliar with where the audience cannot be clearly identified? For this reason, “locating the right commonplaces is vital.” (W & D 169).
The commonplace seems to fit in the same category as the set of unwritten rules common in a large number of social setting, communities, groups, etc. The assumption that those we are communicating with have a similar general knowledge base facilitates interaction and often makes room for more fruitful and insightful conversation. I might even use the word efficient to describe this sort of interaction. It is so because in a commonplace, we do not need to present lots of background information about certain subjects, assuming those we are interacting with already have the same knowledge base. For example, in talking about health care in the United Sates today (amongst adults principally), it can be assumed that most people are aware of the general debate around this heated issue and some of the basic information about it, and this way the speakers can spend more time discussing the issue’s current standing and their thoughts about it instead of explaining its background.
However, Jamie’s concern here is certainly legitimate as it can be troublesome that commonplaces remain unspoken. Continuing with the example of the discussion around health care in the US, it is rather likely that some people don’t know where the senate stands on passing the latest bill or how the bill is actually going to affect citizens, whether it will fix the fundamental problem of the system that causes the bankruptcy of many and the confusion around insurance plans. The list of things to be ignorant about is long. Not everyone is wiling to admit their ignorance and this can often lead to discomfort within this so-believed commonplace and to a stunted exchange of ideas.
The presence of a commonplace is natural in any society because living in a similar environment inevitably leads to common behaviors, ideas, customs, etc. so it is often assumed that people are aware of the community’s on goings. This incites people to stay updated on the news, significant government issues, cultural events and so on. It is also what allows for rather superficial connections if you will; “commonplaces are useful…precisely because they are so unremarkable…” (W & D 170). For this reason, I think that engaging more in conversation about what our true beliefs are as to avoid possible mistakes about audience values should occur amongst smaller groups, or more specified commonplaces. The commonplace described in the textbook makes reference to general groups mostly where conversations are not in depth and where core values are not addressed. But it is this main commonplace that allows for a general understanding of people we share national and cultural customs with.
“Some social theorists have noted hat we are less a ‘melting pot’ that blends variations than a culture that more or less accommodates differences” (W & D 165). This is perhaps what best describes the American commonplace and explains the difficulty of reaching a common understanding that allows for correct (or closest to) generalization and time to listen to evaluate everybody’s differences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)