Ryan Brining, Sublymonal Advertising and the History of Manipulation

Most marketers design television advertisements with the intent of manipulating the viewer or consumer in some way to increase the chance that he’ll buy the product. There is only so much advertising that can be done to describe most products, so corporations find other ways to entice buyers to choose their stuff. Originally, most television advertising promoted fitting in or defining oneself with a group, and how the product would allow for this inclusion. Many twists have developed since this strategy, and Sprite is usually the first one to respond to ever-changing societal needs for novelty in both products and in the way they’re advertised. Sprite launched one of the first ad campaigns that parodied the previous manipulative ads and related to the ad-wary consumer by telling everyone that Sprite will not make them better at basketball or cooler, as other soft drink ads suggest. These Sprite ads gave the impression that they were not intended to manipulate the consumer’s opinion even though in doing so they accomplished that anyway. In the last few years Sprite has initiated their “Sublymonal” campaign. It employs a method similar to the earlier ads of parody as it immediately exclaims that the commercial uses “Sublymonal Messaging.” This was a bold step in advertising because subliminal or manipulative ads have been on TV for decades and disliked by many. But most people had never seen an ad that warned the viewer of its controlling nature before the commercial even began. Sprite took a daring step in venturing to this style of advertisement, but they may have started a new era of commercials in the process.

Television advertisements have been around since the invention of television and they all seem to have a common theme in promoting their product: manipulation of the consumer. Marketers in the 1980s weren’t concerned with the uniqueness of the product, but instead they used “primal, flim-flam appeals to sell sugary crud to people whose identity [was] nothing but mass consumption” (Wallace, 60). For instance, a 1980s Miller Lite commercial shows a conversation in a bar between a football player and his cool friends before the football player crushes the beer can. In this commercial any beer could have replaced Miller Lite, the only thing attractive in the commercial was the people whose lives could be emulated by the viewers if only they drank Miller Lite. This kind of manipulation was common in commercials for a long period of time before the rise of Joe Isuzu ads and Grant Hill Sprite commercials. Eventually television viewers caught on to the idea that every commercial promoted a better or more interesting life through the company’s product, whatever it was. In response to the consumer’s awareness of this artificiality, brands began making parodies of these commercials that had dominated television for so long. Isuzu Inc. began its series of Joe Isuzu commercials in the late 1980s which poked fun at other car commercials for their oily and Satanic looks, without even mentioning anything about the car itself (Wallace, 61). These commercials allowed the viewer to appreciate the humor in the ad and also to drive an Isuzu as a statement against all other car commercials in general. Companies like PepsiCo and Coca-cola followed this new trend, coming up with their own versions of satirical ads to please customers. With this new commercial style, the viewer believes that the ad transcends manipulation and actually relates to him, whereas this different style of marketing is simply a different form of manipulation.

Sprite’s TV advertisements developed similarly to other companies’ ads: changing the message and hiding the manipulation for as long as culture would allow. Original Sprite commercials followed similar structures to other ads at the time. For example, a 1987 Sprite commercial shows a trendy guy and girl walking down the street seemingly not affected by any brands or products. Eventually they are seen together and they like each other, and then background music sings “I like the Sprite in you”. Again, this is an example of an old-style commercial in which the actual product is completely detached from the advertisement. Sprite graduated from this phase fairly early as Grant Hill became the new face of Sprite. This series of ads in the 90s was called ‘Grant Hill Drinks Sprite?’, and was probably Sprite’s most successful ad campaign. The commercials feature a kid or kids who watch Grant Hill play and think they can play as well as him after they drink Sprite. They try to dunk or play him one on one, but each fails miserably as the slogan ‘Image is Nothing. Thirst is Everything. Obey you Thirst’ comes over the screen. These commercials place more emphasis on the fact that Sprite can’t make you cooler or better at basketball, but it will quench your thirst. As Douglas Rushkoff says in his Merchants of Cool, Sprite wasn’t just saying, “‘Please drink our product.’ They didn’t – they almost weren’t even selling the product. They were selling the fact that they understood the culture” (Rushkoff). Viewers new to this concept loved it and thought that these ads rose above manipulation because they were telling consumers not buy products that celebrities told them to buy. However, the method had the same effect because Sprite was still manipulating viewers into drinking Sprite under the illusion that they were choosing to do so on their own. As Sprite commercials developed they found that people were more attracted to individual thought or choice than anything else. Consumers wanted to have a sense that they were choosing what to buy independently, and Sprite wanted to allow this while still influencing them to drink Sprite. The result of this thinking was the creation of a completely new line of advertising: Sublymonal Messaging.

New Sublymonal Advertising is Sprite’s most recent creation and comes the closest to completely transcending manipulation. The new ads all begin by flashing “Sublymonal Advertising” before the commercial starts. This warning about the contents of the ad makes the viewer aware of the possibility of manipulation, but also serves as a makeshift title for the commercial. Sprite has developed their advertisements so they seem more like regular programs in order to keep the attention of the viewer (Wallace, 58). This particular advertisement is over a minute long, and also has a little story behind it. Six men with paintball guns and masks, three lemon and three lime-colored, enter a building from opposite ends. One of the lime-colored men is Lebron James. As they make their way through the house more men come in their support and the viewer realizes they are all trying to find a giant tongue. The ad randomly flips to two midgets (lemon and lime) flying towards each other, and two lego men attacking each other in a different set. In the original set, the men all enter the room with the giant tongue and begin firing paintballs at it. The impact of the lemon and lime paintballs on the tongue is shown closely at the end of the commercial, as is the mixture of lemon and lime in the other parts of the commercial. These instances seem to place an importance on the taste of Sprite that wasn’t present in the Grant Hill ads, even while the ridiculous action of the commercial continues to occur. Sprite has always been interested in fully involving itself in pop culture, and the addition of Lebron in this commercial reminds teenagers that it’s still cool to like Sprite. The majority of the mini plot, however, seems to be completely useless to the viewer. The effect would have been the same if it were a ten second commercial with the giant tongue or a sixty second one, but Sprite adds this aspect to keep the viewers interested in a story and also to make sure they want to know how it ends. This drawn out plot is a form of manipulation by Sprite, as viewers don’t realize what’s happening to them while they watch. But the emphasis is mostly on the taste of Sprite and the mixture of the two flavors to invoke a memory of the experience. The ‘Sublymonal Advertising’ message appears at both the start and the end of the commercial, and its presence along with taste as the main emphasis of the commercial make this series the least subliminal and manipulative set of advertisements that Sprite has designed yet.

Works Cited

Wallace, David Foster. ”E Unibus Pluram: television and US Fiction”

Youtube. “Grant Hill Sprite Commercial – Grant Hill drinks Sprite?”

Youtube. “Sprite Sublymonal”

Rushkoff, Douglas. “Merchants of Cool”

Kevin McDonald- "The White Cord Subculture": The iPod and Generation X

Innovation in technology is the earmark of the present American generation. Just as the jazz and cars were to the 1920’s and the rock and roll revolution was to the “baby boomers,” technological superiority is to “Generation X.” With the young American population so reliant on computers and television, corporations have capitalized on the opportunity to exploit their desires for the most (literally) revolutionary products. Hip-ness is at an ultimate premium when it comes to modern technology; the search for the coolest and newest products is a never-ending and cyclical process within youth culture. The Apple, Inc. brand name has quickly moved to the forefront of the technological consumer culture. Its marketing strategies draw upon the “the tastes, the music, and the slang of young people” that Thomas Frank emphasized in Conquest of Cool (Frank 35). The iPod portable music player is the stronghold of Apple’s trendy appeal. iPod advertisements are some of the most recognizable ones within the past decade because of their colorful, hip, countercultural characteristics. Apple’s iPod and its marketing campaign have come to epitomize Generation X’s consumer culture; it is a youthful, perceivably “cool” product that appeals directly to America’s technology fetish.

The iPod burst onto the technology scene in 2002 and its introduction was recognized as the coming of a new age in musical technology (Merton 32). It quickly became a product that belonged to youth culture; CD and tape players became virtually obsolete and were discarded for older people to use. Music has a significant ability to transcend age, but changes in technology, such as seen with the iPod, do not, as Paul McFedries believes (McFedries 76). The product’s image was absorbed into the identity youth culture as quickly as it was sold. By the end of 2004, ten million iPods had been sold (Conhaim 25). Other companies, such as Microsoft, attempted to match the iPod’s success with similar products, but sales could not compare. Paul McFedries cites the rise of “gadget porn,” or “images and text that glorify high-end or high-tech devices” as the reason for the iPod’s instant success (McFedries 76). However, there is something much more elemental and simple that encompasses most explanations for the iPod obsession. Thomas Frank succinctly describes the phenomenon as “hip consumerism.” iPod advertisements appeal to the values of rebellion and “coolness” that youth culture constantly seeks. The product itself is now widely recognized as a symbol for “coolness,” and its sales support this notion. They have not lagged off since its inception, and the advertisements, for the most part, have not wavered. The iPod’s unflinching stranglehold on music listening devices and its appeal in modern culture is a testament to the human desire to be part of hip, countercultural ideals that are routinely exploited by corporations to sell products.

Apple’s successful advertising campaign was an important catalyst in the rise of the iPod because of its simple, yet suggestive nature. The most well known commercials feature black silhouettes dancing, with iPod in hand, to youthful, energetic music against brightly colored backgrounds. As Moren states, “the stark images of the iPod dancers have really burned themselves into your brain” (Moren 32). The recognizable nature of the ads comes not only from their simplicity, but also their exploitation of human desires. The characters are perceived as icons of youth culture because of their unique style, innovative dance moves, and technological prowess. The dancers are somewhat tributes to the “flapper” phenomenon, a youth movement in dance (and style) that defined youth culture in 1920’s. As Thomas Frank believes, youth is an essential value for consumers: “youth is an attractive consuming attitude, not an age” (Frank 118). This attitude extends into the realm of identifying with a large youth movement, which Apple targets within their ads. This marketing strategy can be related most closely with the “Pepsi Generation” campaign of the 1960’s.

Pepsi’s 1960’s campaign to make its cola “the drink of young America” is eerily similar to Apple’s campaign to make the iPod the gadget of the present. Just as Pepsi promoted the ideal of “nonconforming, daring, enthusiasm for the new” against Coca-Cola’s traditional image, Apple promotes the same progressive values in opposition to the technological stalwart that is Microsoft (Frank 172). Both campaigns support a vague “revolution” against popular culture, a culture which their respective corporations ironically propagate. The “Pepsi Generation” advertisements featured “full, vivid color,” much like the backgrounds of the iPod commercials (Frank 175). They also both “embrace action, vitality, and youthfulness” by featuring young, lively characters. Pepsi exploited the burgeoning counterculture of the 1960’s to sell its products, similar to Apple’s exploitation of McFedries’s American “technolust.” While the general promotion of subversive behavior and values is common in both of these campaigns, the marketing strategies are somewhat different in both. The iPod commercials are relatively text-less and word-less (save background music) compared to Pepsi’s explicit labeling of the “Pepsi Generation.” Pepsi directly stated that its product was for “those who think young” (Frank 171). Pepsi’s overt targeting of consumers differs from the implicit nature of the iPod commercials. The dancers simply show that the iPod is for lively, enthusiastic people by using the dancers; no direct statement is needed to explain that the product is meant for youthful people. The advertisement’s blackened silhouettes do not have an explicit race or creed, unlike Pepsi’s use of continuously white, handsome people. In some ways, the iPod marketing campaign reaches out to a more significant demographic than the “Pepsi Generation,” and is therefore more effective. The general premise of both campaigns remains the same, however; they both offer an escape from mainstream culture simply by consuming a product.

The iPod phenomenon can be attributed to human attraction to niches and subcultures that are considered hip or cool. The iPod sells mainstream, but still maintains the underground appeal by creating a perceived iPod sub-culture, what Paul McFedries refers to as “the white-cord subculture” (McFedries 76). It is strange that a product can represent a certain culture, but the iPod represents youth and youth culture. The “white cord-subculture” makes the members feel included in a larger movement. Inclusion in the group simply depends on whether or not one owns an iPod. Exploiting the human “fetish” for commodities, which Karl Marx introduced, is the reason why Apple is able to gain great profits. The iPod’s large following exemplifies consumer fetishism. The iPod has gone beyond material value and posesses cultural value. Thomas Frank expressed this cultural oriented belief when he stated that “mass produced culture is both a site of oppression and rebellion: even as it is calculated to exploit consumers, it unintentionally provides various groups and individuals with the implements of power” (Frank 17). The iPod culture is propagated by corporations for profit motives, but at the same time the consumers gain a feeling of superiority by using such an advanced product, the “implements of power” that Frank discusses. Consumers are meant to feel both individualistic, as seen by the individual dancers in the commercials, but also a part of the “technolust” movement that Paul McFedries describes (McFedries 76). The iPod has become more than a piece of useful technology; it symbolizes the youth, rebellion, and “coolness” that so many seek in order to be part of the in-group.

The iPod has significantly changed the cultural and technological landscapes, which have become almost one in the same for the present generation. It has become somewhat of a fountain of youth, except it is readily available to all consumers. Apple’s brilliant marketing strategy of promoting both individualism as well as inclusion within a “cool” subculture accounts for the product’s enormous success. The energy featured in the iPod advertisements mirrors the energy of the technological boom within the past cople of decades. Generation X was swept up with the popularization of the computer and has not looked back in terms of technology. A dependence on electronics has formed in the present generation. The iPod is a product that feeds the technological addiction of many, but also helps them form an identity within a larger group. Impressionable young people searching for identities have come to find it as consumers, a process exemplified in Pepsi’s “Pepsi Generation” campaign in the 1960’s. Apple has exploited our nation’s fetish for technology just as Pepsi did for America’s fetish for counterculture in the 1960’s. The iPod “nation” is a countercultural group, but it also represents all that composes the present, hip, generation. The 1920’s had the Model T, the baby boomers had the guitar, and belonging to the youth today, is the iPod.

Works Cited

Conhaim, Wallys W. "IPod Sprouts Successful Changes in Media Landscape." Information Today (2005): 25.

Frank, Thomas. Conquest of Cool: Business Culture, Counterculture, and the Rise of Hip Consumerism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago P, 1997.

McFedries, Paul. "The IPod People." IEEE Spectrum (2005): 76.

Moren, Dan. "Apple's Ad Game." Macworld 25 (2008): 32-33

Lauren Klinzing, Duracell: Trusted Everywhere Campaign

Duracell’s most recent campaign, “Trusted Everywhere,” is centered on the idea that if the batteries are strong enough for American heroes, they are powerful enough for use in everyday items by all types of citizens. This is highlighted by two commercials from the campaign: the commercials featuring the Denver Airlife crew and the commercials featuring the T PASS communication device for firefighters. Pulling on Americans conception of heroes arising from the knowledge and fear of disaster, the campaign attempts to relate the feelings of pride, honor, and sacrifice with the power of their battery. This is also a response to the powerful image of their largest competitor, Energizer batteries. The Energizer bunny has become an American icon, thus Duracell has to draw on another powerful American image with the notion of the flight crew and firefighters. Especially since hurricane Katrina and the Events of September 11, emergency workers have becomes symbols of America’s ability to overcome obstacles, making ordinary men and women heroes, icons.
The war between Duracell and Energizer is comparable to the struggle between Coke and Pepsi that Frank writes about as both attempt to appeal to their populations in a series of advertisements. Surprisingly, the Duracell bunny predates the Energizer bunny. However, Duracell failed to renew their trademark on the bunny, allowing Energizer to grab hold of the bunny as their mascot. The Energizer bunny is clearly a spinoff of the Duracell bunny. Although both are pink rabbits, the Energizer commercials feature only one rabbit, while the Duracell commercials feature an entire species of rabbits. Additionally, while the Duracell rabbits often had toys, the Energizer bunny is always seen with a single drum, reminiscent of the toys of the Duracell bunny. In the United States, Energizer managed to build the image of their bunny to promote the long lasting capabilities of their battery embodied by the never ending bunny that became an American icon. Still seen in Europe, the Duracell bunny promotes the long life of the Duracell battery with the slogan, “Duracell last longer, much longer.”
However, Duracell needed something strong, powerful, and durable that they could associate with in the United States to combat the well known image of the Energizer bunny. In the 1990s, Duracell created a robotic family, the Puttermans, with batteries visibly powering them. Chasing after Energizer, this campaign also sought to promote the long life of the batteries with the slogan, “No battery is stronger longer.” (Holst) These commercials featured the family in events that could last longer powered by Duracell batteries. A family member collapses because he didn’t have a Duracell battery, the daughter sits outside with her boyfriend, an event that can last a while due to the batteries, and even grandma can dance forever thanks to her powerful batteries (Holst). Although popular, the Putterman family did not give Duracell the icon they hoped for to compete with the Energizer bunny. Duracell’s most recent campaign, “Trusted Everywhere” is unique in not seeking to create an icon, but by drawing on existing American icons (emergency personnel) to promote the strength and endurance of their battery.
The Denver Airlife commercials feature the crew of the helicopter responding to a vehicle accident. The commercials focus on the intense pressure and extreme conditions that these crews can face in their attempts to rescue a patient (Jurrien). The accident scene is in low light conditions on the side of a cliff. Flight nurses use night vision equipment and portable electronic equipment powered by Duracell batteries to care for the victims. Interwoven with this depiction of the great service of these people is a young girl playing with her toy helicopter with her father in a large field, tying the powerful images of the rescue scene with the serene images of the young girl and her father. This incorporates simple pleasures and important duties to suggest that the battery can bring happiness as well as strength. Without the battery, it would be impossible to save lives, but it would also be impossible to enjoy the simple things in life such as the bond between father and daughter.
This campaign also features a commercial centered on firefighters designed to tie images of these brave workers with the lasting, dependable power of the Duracell battery. Similar to the “Two Helicopters” commercials, the firefighter commercials depend on the integration of a powerful lifesaving device with ordinary uses in daily life. The commercial opens with a fireman listening to music on headphones powered by the Duracell batteries, relaxing with a Dalmatian at his feet. However, the scene shifts quickly to show the engine company responding to a large working structure fire. This sets the scene to showcase the importance of a properly powered PASS device (Personal Alarm Safety System). A PASS device (the T PASS 3 in this commercial) sends out a signal when a firefighter has been inactive for 30 seconds and can also send out an alarm to clear the structure. This device makes it easier to find fallen firefighters and clear the building when in danger. The commercial highlights the importance of being able to communicate danger with firefighters clearing the building just in time. The commercial manages to identify the Duracell battery with an American institution, a lifesaving device, and an everyday item.
Both these commercials depend on American heroes as icons of American life. Disaster has become a past of American culture. As Delillo shows in the book, White Noise, we have become consumed with thoughts and images of disaster. It covers our television, radio, and becomes a fixation in our minds. The plane crash grabbed the attention of the community, increasing an appetite for disasters. Jack notes, Ëvery disaster made us wish for more, for something bigger, grander, more sweeping”(64), later commenting that, “it’s more or less universal to be fascinated by disasters” (66). Culture is fascinated with disaster. The airborne toxic event becomes the center of life for the people in the town. Even if no concrete information is known, they circulate stories and rumors, magnifying the event.
Out of this cultural importance of disaster also arises a cultural need for someone to help the country overcome hometown adversity; thus arises the image of emergency personnel as American icons. Society needs someone to look to for help in a disaster. Although just doing their job, many emergency personnel (especially firefighters) have come to be seen as heroes especially since the events of September 11. Firefighters have always held a revered place in society, available to rescue a kitten or dash into a burning building to save a life. In service and on call 24 hours a day, firefighters have been idolized as strong, brave, and maybe a little eccentric. Since September 11, the image has grown as 343 lost their lives in an attempt to save others, reminding Americans of the heroes at home. The image of a firefighter and his Dalmatian has become an integral part of American society. In their campaign, Duracell seeks to remind Americans of these images while associating their battery with these ideals of bravery and courage.
Duracell relies on the images associated with firefighters as American icons of heroism. Unable to solidify the bunny as their icon, Duracell needed something to take hold of in American culture to compete with the Energizer bunny. They found this in the image of the American firefighter and the dedication of aircare crews. By associating their battery with the strength, dedication, and never ending work of these crews, Duracell is able to tap into a universal cultural icon. With the disastrous events such as Katrina and September 11, these emergency personnel have gained a foothold in society. Culture thrives on disaster and these people rise to the front to help the society cope. However the focus of the campaign is not the heroes themselves, but the idea that the battery they use to overcome disaster is available to the general public and dependable for children’s toys or household items.


Works Cited

"Duracell Bunny." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 19 Apr 2008, 10:57 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 23 Apr 2008 .

Delillo, Don. White Noise. New York, NY. Penguin Books,1985.
Holst, Jerome. “Advirtising Mascots-People”. 2002. TV Acres. 21 April 2008. http://www.tvacres.com/admascots_puttermans.htm

Jurrien, Ilse. “Duracell Advertising Campaign.” Lets Go Digital. September 2006. 21 April 2008.

Avery Gordon, The Fast Food Cheeseburger: An Emblem of America

In recent years, multiple consumer products have been promoted through the media to the extent that American culture essentially becomes defined by them. Through flashy commercials, widespread slogans, and the improvement and upsizing of products, the evolution of American consumer culture can be traced. The American fast-food cheeseburger is a major product that has evolved from a simple food into a symbol of our nation’s consumer evolution.

The invention of the cheeseburger is credited to Lionel Sternberger of Pasadena, California, 82 years ago. This sparked the wildfire that spread to every fast food chain in the country and likely inspired the birth of many more. Since its invention, the cheeseburger has evolved immensely in size, nutrition, and even in its commercial appearance. The American fast food cheeseburger quickly promoted itself as the official food of America alongside the hot dog. While the hot dog became the symbol of American sport, the cheeseburger established its place as the official fast food product of America. The original cheeseburger, simply a beef patty and a slice of American cheese, has become an entity far more famous than could ever have been imagined. It is no longer a mere food product, but an icon imperative to the completion of the American image. It has evolved into a representative of the country, often more recognizable than our politicians or state symbols.

The evolution of the American fast food cheeseburger was heavily influenced by the changing consumer culture of America. Beginning as a small, individual food product, the cheeseburger quickly attached itself to side orders and drinks, soon transforming itself into a full meal rather than a single entity, a strategy that greatly advanced its success in the fast food world. The size of the cheeseburger has increased immensely and the prices have dropped relatively. Often endorsed through fast food commercials and endless ads, the cheeseburger has become one of the most readily available food products in the nation. It has become a commodity: its commercials promote happiness and wellbeing, causing the cheeseburger, in a sense, to essentially assume the identity of an antidepressant. The McDonald’s cheeseburger is a specific product that has repeatedly shown itself to be a key competitor in the battle of the burger. Through ample commercials and endless value promotional changes on the menu, McDonald’s has become a staple of the average American diet.

In the earliest McDonald’s commercials, the cheeseburger, presented by the McDonald’s clown mascot, Ronald McDonald, was evidently targeted toward the younger population in the form of a happy meal. In a 1970’s commercial, Ronald McDonald takes pictures of kids saying “cheeseburger”, refusing to give a cheeseburger to the unhappy villain.

McDonald's Say Cheeseburger Commercial

Through ad campaigns such as this, it is clear that the earlier years of the fast food cheeseburger involved pursuing children as the main consumer. The hamburgers were smaller, more individual, and the mascot was kid-friendly.

In later years, however, the cheeseburger was transformed into a bigger, more fulfilling, and more appealing product to the older teen and young adult demographic. As Ronald McDonald and other kid-oriented mascots became lesser advocates of the fast food chain, the Big Mac, and huge burgers similar to it, began to speak for themselves. Fast food chains were no longer advertised simply as kiddie playground serving meager portions, but as quick stop before the party or during lunch break at school to pick up a full dinner. They became cool. In this recent commercial for Burger King, competition becomes evident as they compare the size of their burger to McDonald’s. Adding humor to the equation, and using two attractive teens as actors, the commercial is naturally geared toward the young adult population.

Burger King Tiny Hands Commercial

Recently, commercials and advertisements of the American fast food cheeseburger have assumed all of the qualities of commercials for all consumer commodities. Humor, health, and explanation have all emerged within the ads for the cheeseburger. Combining all of these qualities within their commercials, the fast food producers have capitalized on the necessities of a product to the American teen. Low prices, delicious flavor, and extra bacon define the fast food cheeseburger as the perfect creation. In many commercials, humor, if executed correctly, can cause the ad to stick in one’s mind. In a near-future teen dilemma of whether to choose the Burger King or the McDonald’s across the street, the commercial will hopefully come to mind and influence that decision.

Even more recently, health has become advertised as an advantage at McDonald’s and similar fast food chains. Perhaps with the recent fad diet craze, producers have begun to notice that thin is cool. While many fast food chains have gone in the direction of “bigger is better” and “more for your money”, such as the hungry cowboy mentality of Arby’s or the “how many toppings can we fit on this burger” policy at Red Robin, chains such as McDonald’s and Wendy’s have began to notice the advantageous effects that health has on advertisement to a different, health-conscious demographic. With the rise of the recent health trend, the rise of obesity as a customer of the fast food restaurant rose with it, and producers noticed that this needed to change in order to keep their restaurant cool. Soon, healthier products such as salads and fruit parfaits were added to the menus alongside the biggest, juiciest burgers. With any luck, a hungry young adult would pull up to the drive through window and, with the healthy commercial in mind, accidentally be tempted to buy that cheeseburger instead of that low-fat yogurt cup. The cheeseburger would be cool again.

The commercial evolution of the fast food cheeseburger also changed in response to complexity. With the addition of exponentially more fast food chains in America, and even more choices on each of their never-ending menus, the cheeseburgers of each were required to make names for themselves. As Loren Geistfeld explains it, “not only does the [recent] consumer need a tremendous amount of information for an informed purchase decision, but the number of purchase decisions is also rather large.” Geistfeld goes on to explain the growing complexity of consumer choice with a comparison. In order to understand this need for explanation through commercial, we must “juxtapose the young homemaker of 1900 with the one of 1977. With respect to major appliances, the modern homemaker may have a dishwasher, range, refrigerator, microwave oven…and a freezer [while] her counterpart of 1900 [merely] had a cookstove. Not only have the number of purchases increased, but also the complexity of the purchase decision has increased” (Geistfeld, 48). Thus, it becomes increasingly necessary to successfully explain the benefits of one’s fast food restaurant over the others while also capturing the attention of a hungry viewer through humor, health benefits, or simply a juicy-looking cheeseburger flashing on their screen. In this sense, the American fast food Cheeseburger has become a commercial product. It is evident that it can no longer stand on its own and sell successfully, but each move and campaign of the producer must be meticulously thought out in order to maximize income.

These changing trends in cheeseburger advertisements follow the trends of young adult hipster society. The necessity of “cool” as an ingredient in the advertisements for the American fast food cheeseburger echo the necessity of “cool” in any successful recent American product or trend. Journalist Paul Flynn explains that the “interplay between business and cool has been simplified to an extent by the fact that, over the course of the past decade, cool itself has become a business”. Flynn explains that “somewhere in the balancing act between big business and the taste makers, a new sort of cool has emerged. This part lifestyle, part vision is exemplified perfectly by the business model, marketing, design, advertising and product profile” (Flynn, 2). This is precisely the approach taken by fast food companies in the advertisement of the cheeseburger.

The American fast food cheeseburger has transformed since its invention from a cookout treat into an emblem of American consumer society. Developing itself into a commodity of our nation, the cheeseburger’s success is due largely to its advertising and its commercials in the media. As many products in American society become their advertisements and all the baggage that comes along with it, so did the American fast food cheeseburger. The cheeseburger is a product that was changed from food into fact by American consumer culture.

Burger King Snake Commercial

Works Cited:

Flynn, Paul. "Don't try too hard: The cool that lasts is born, not made". Sunday Times (London). 24 Sept 2006. 2.

Geistfeld, Loren V. "Consumer Decision Making: The Technical Efficiency Approach". Journal of Consumer Research. Vol 4, No. 1. (June 1977): 48-56.

Henerson, Evan. "The Tale of the Cheeseburger". Voices and Food. June 13, 1999. Accessed Apr 20, 2008. http://www.culturefreak.com/tale.html

"1970 McDonaldland 'Say Cheeseburger' Commercial". Commercial. You Tube. Aug 15, 2007. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWVQpJgPgIU

"Burger King: Tiny Hands Commercial". Commercial. You Tube. Feb 1, 2008. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SltqvE0b9uo

"Burger King Eat Like Snake Triple Whopper Commercial". Commercial. You Tube. Oct 5, 2006. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTXbMCOywVY&feature=related

Daniel Mason- Nike's "Just Do It" Consumer Revolution

Daniel Mason

Shopping Project - Nike

Nike’s advertising campaigns, specifically the Bo Jackson “Just Do It” ad and the Michael Jordan and Mars Blackmon ad, changed not only the sneaker market but advertising culture as a whole, through the use of celebrity, comedy, and above all else, a focus on brand and consumerist culture that was unprecedented in the world of sports. Within these ads, Nike transformed the definition of “sport” as a whole. Through the “coolness” exuded by their ads, Nike made exercising and sports sexy, while, at the same time, defining themselves as the keepers of this new found appeal. They turned their mass-produced sneakers, once simply an exercise necessity, into a luxury item that came, for the price of 80$, packaged with a little “cool” and an entirely new image, in addition to a great pair of shoes (CFAR 3). For the first time, conspicuous consumption transposed high fashion and made a startling appearance in the world of sneakers. Around these products, Nike marketing executives were able to develop an entire mass culture hell-bent on chasing down whatever “it” is that makes Michael Jordan and Bo Jackson so hip. Seemingly stripped of team affiliations and sport itself, these icons appear to fans, for the first time, in the same way as pop stars and musicians. Complete with startling imagery and personality, these legends leave consumers salivating over their skill, character, and swagger, offering a little piece of their “cool” for the right price and, in regards to purchases, urging consumers to “Just Do It”.

The most overarching theme in either ad is the aspect of celebrity endorsement. The use of celebrity in advertising has been a perpetually pervasive theme in society; however, its use on this scale in sports marketing is significantly more recent. Nike was one of the pioneers in this field, using celebrity influence, along with an air of confidence and comedy, to sell its products. Michael Jordan at the time was the first name on every list of important sports celebrities and considered a “super brand” himself (Klein 13). Through Jordan, in the first ad, Nike attempts to allude, by use of strategic irony, that the shoes are the reason for his success. Although Jordan continually denounces Mars Blackmon’s assertion with the calm, cool humility that’s enviable in contemporary society, it’s no accident that the Nike shoes are continually mentioned and made the focus of the camera. Being left out of the “in crowd” is a widespread fear in contemporary society and this dread is preyed upon by the advertising executives at Nike. No one wants to be Mars Blackmon, asking futilely,” What makes Michael Jordan the best player in the universe?” Each and every person watching the ad sees the humor but in Mar’s inquisition, however, also wants to know Jordan’s secret.

Likewise, the Bo Jackson ad retains similar humor and confidence, only inserting Bo Jackson for Michael Jordan. More so than in the first ad, the spotlight is taken off Bo Jackson’s team responsibility and accomplishments and, instead, is focused on his personality and on his Nike gear. Shown in the ad as a renaissance man of sports, Bo Jackson’s character shines through as an enviable trait, surpassed only by his athletic skill. The repetition of the phrase “nice shoes” continually brings the idea of shoes to the forefront of one’s mind, providing a direct correlation with the charismatic, athletic figure that deems the shoes worthy. Through the emphasis on the celebrity and the brand, Nike finds a formula for effectively taking sports stars off the field and using them, like pop and movie stars, as an identity and larger idea attainable through the purchase of a product.

Although athletic shoes were traditionally an item thought of as mere necessity, Nike was willing to try to change that reputation and turn their shoes into a “luxury” that people would want for status and not just need. Luxury is a term often synonymous with the opulent American society which we have studied in depth this semester. The Great Gatsby was a book brimming with consumerist culture, as exemplified in the passage where Jay Gatsby attempts to win Daisy over with his fine articles of clothing. “While we admired he brought more and the soft rich heap mounted higher—shirts with stripes and scrolls and plaids in coral and apple-green and lavender and faint orange, and monograms of Indian blue. Suddenly, with a strained sound, Daisy bent her head into the shirts and began to cry stormily. “They’re such beautiful shirts,” she sobbed, her voice muffled in the thick folds. “It makes me sad because I’ve never seen such—such beautiful shirts before (Fitzgerald Chapter 5).” Obviously the natural desire of people is to want others to be Daisy to our Gatsby, in admiration of us for one reason or another. Until the 1980’s, this type of conspicuous consumption was limited to the aristocracy and available primarily through high fashion. The cultural revolution of the 1980’s, however, brought about a significant increase in prevalence of branding on clothing. The increase in size of logos on polo shirts paved the way for Nike to create sneakers that met the definition of a “luxury” purchase. Nike culture would become a self-fulfilling prophecy “If you want to be hip, wear Nike; if you are hip, you probably wear Nike (CFAR 2)”, with Michael Jordan and Bo Jackson (among others) as the high priests of “cool”.

The thought of sneakers as a fashion statement was, in fact, a huge gamble for the advertising people at Nike (CFAR 1). Following their own “Just Do It” mantra, as displayed at the end of the Bo Jackson ad, they took a risk that society would conform to their newly coined culture. Until the late 1980’s, sneakers had served the purpose of shoes to wear while exercising or playing sports, but, because of Nike’s fitness revolution, 80% of sneakers today are never used for their originally designated activity (CFAR 1). This is a remarkable number considering that Nike’s campaign and ideas originally were met with mixed reviews by critics, one critic even going so far as to refer to “Just Do It” as an “impatient-bordering-on-contemptuous exhortation to the masses (CFAR 2).” The ads were successful, though, in getting the American people to see exercise as a sexy and cool pursuit. Because Bo Jackson and Michael Jordan appeared cool and confident in the commercials wearing their Nike shoes, the average person wanted as close to that culture as money could buy.

Nike’s next step in a cultural take-over was to create an environment in which sneakers could exist as a high-style “luxury” purchase. The creation of this subculture was in part achieved by the submersion of the consumerist American youth into a world in which Nike was pervasive in everyday society. Americans could see Nike shoes on the feet of star athletes on the field, as well as in commercials and advertisements. Nike sneakers were also on the feet of prominent music artists, particularly in the “hip-hop” movement. Finally, even pop-culture icons on television and in movies wore strategically placed Nike’s in order to boost the brand’s appeal to young America. Will Smith wore Nike Air Jordan V’s in an episode of the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air before the shoes were released, propelling them to immediate success despite their exorbitant pricing (nicekicks.com) This culture, spearheaded by the desire to blend in with society, proved to be a goldmine for Nike. The American youth became slaves to a certain form and, like in society today, had money to spend and very little which they needed to spend it on. Through the same formula by which great architectural and artistic pursuits were funded, commitment to form plus lots of excess money, a culture was erected from the inside by a youth determined to stay as cool as their trailblazing icons (Wolfe 2).

The sub-culture that developed under the calculated maneuvers of Nike developed into something significantly larger than anyone expected. It became the mass-culture phenomenon that blended corporations, athletes, and sport alike into one huge historically unrecognizable phenomenon. Nike ads moved away from having to talk up the brand and instead stressed the performance elements of Nike gear and it’s increasingly diverse base of sports celebrities. Michael Jordan appeared in later ads not as the super confident sports star of the late 1980’s, but instead as “CEO Jordan”, a humorous, yet increasingly real joke about the money involved in this mass culture enterprise. As is evident in both focus ads, Nike had successfully turned the focus on themselves and away from the team and the sports. By portraying Bo Jackson as an athlete, competing in a dozen different activities all while decked out in Nike gear, the corporation could transcend a single sport and instead place Nike at the paragon of the idea of sport itself (Klein 14). The very definition of sport had been changed as Nike attempted to swallow culture in giant gulps and erase the boundaries between the pure spirit of sports and the corporate sponsorship that followed ever closely behind (Klein 13).

While consumers worldwide are left chasing Nike’s “cool”, the corporation itself has been able to transcend sports, advertising, and even its own name. Recognizable as “the swoosh”, Nike has continued to build a battalion of celebrity athletes to further draw customers to its products. Because no one wants to be Mars Blackmon, left on the outside of an inner circle of athletic and social merit, consumers are willing to drop large sums of money for “the swoosh” itself. Although we know even Bo Jackson isn’t really looking for the Tour de France, we still recognize his greatness and are led to believe, through sparkling imagery and a larger-than-life personality, that we can be as great as the men we see wearing Nike sneakers on television. A pair of the Nike Air Jordan 1’s is for sale on eBay right now for the But It Now price of $4,999.99, proving that Nike has become a cultural icon, featuring a product obviously selling for much higher than the intrinsic value because of the value of the logo in the culture within which it is submerged (eBay). While every consumer has always envied the personality and athletic prowess of their favorite cultural and sports icons, Nike pioneered the harnessing, packaging, and marketing of “cool”, in a box with a pair of over-priced sneakers, altogether providing mass society with a commercial revolution, a pass to the “in-crowd”, and a little insight into what Mars Blackmon might never know.

Works Cited

Fitzgerald, F S. The Great Gatsby. Ebooks@Adelaide.Com, 2007. The Great Gatsby. 23 Apr. 2008 .

"Fresh Prince Wearing Air Jordan V Grapes." Nice Kicks. 2008. 22 Apr. 2008 .

Klein, Naomi. "The Brand Expands." Chapter 2: How the Logo Grabbed Center Stage. 21 Apr. 2008.

Mini Case Study- Nike's "Just Do It" Advertising Campaign. CFAR. Cambridge, MA: Center for Applied Research. 22 Apr. 2008.

"NIKE AIR JORDAN 1 OG 1985 3 4 5 What the Dunk Sb DS 10." EBay. 2008. 23 Apr. 2008

Wolfe, Tom. "The Kandy-Kolored Tangerine-Flake Streamline Baby." Chapter 6. 23 Apr. 2008.