Page 1 of 1
Marketing... what's with it?
Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 9:48 am
by roid
Who decides to study howto manipulate people, just to sell the service to the highest bidder? no really, who?
Who actually says \"oh gee... look at all those companys who want to manipulate people but need help. FEAR NOT I WILL HELP!\" and then runs into a university to study psych/marketing - emerges in 3 years - then lives their dream?
Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:58 pm
by DCrazy
People who enjoy creating universes through different media (graphic design, paint, viral marketing) and would like to make a living doing it.
Marketing has a very creative appeal. I dunno if you've seen the Dunkin' Donuts ads with They Might Be Giants as background music (which they specifically recorded for the ads), but they're classic, lighthearted, world-within-a-world ads that don't manipulate you any more than suggest you stop at Dunkin Donuts for coffee next time, because you can drop in, grab some, and get on with your life.
Marketing is fun. And where the hell can you graduate with a degree in Marketing in 3 years?
Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 4:09 pm
by Mobius
DCrazy wrote:And where the hell can you graduate with a degree in Marketing in 3 years?
Anywhere the average IQ is above 65.
I direct your attention to Laura Penny's "Your call is important to us: The Truth About BullSh!t".
Yes, marketing AND advertising are pure BULLSH1T.
But PR is the
purest and
most distilled bullsh!t by far.
Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 8:43 pm
by roid
ah i should have included PR too, good form Mobi.
i can't understand why so many people would knowledgeably enter a field dedicated to creating, managing and perfecting "bull****". Who's only purpose is to steer people away from the truth.
Do you have to have a dislike for mankind as a whole?
DCrazy wrote:People who enjoy creating universes through different media (graphic design, paint, viral marketing) and would like to make a living doing it.
Marketing has a very creative appeal. I dunno if you've seen the Dunkin' Donuts ads with They Might Be Giants as background music (which they specifically recorded for the ads), but they're classic, lighthearted, world-within-a-world ads that don't manipulate you any more than suggest you stop at Dunkin Donuts for coffee next time, because you can drop in, grab some, and get on with your life.
Marketing is fun. And where the hell can you graduate with a degree in Marketing in 3 years?
Yeah there's no doubt it's creative, but so is designing weapons. Why don't these people dedicate themselves to doing something that will HELP humanity instead of hold it back?
The thing is, if i WANT to stop into dunkin donuts i WILL. I don't need some company trying to manipulate my reflexes, to change my
"i DON'T want to go in there" into a
"i DO want to go in there" through the use of some THEY MIGHT BE GIANTS song and happy visuals. If i currently don't stop into dunkin donuts, it's because my priorities are straight.
Marketing is solely about increasing profit for the client. Every advertisement - no matter how lighthearted and harmless it seems - is used because it WORKS. At the end of all the brainstorming and inner-psych study, the end of the process is that it increases profits. It gets more people eating donuts. I don't think we should be studying psych to encourage people to eat more donuts. People should be eating less donuts.
Our knowledge of psych should be used for good, to help us all become better consumers of our own consciousnesses. The problem i have with marketing/PR/propeganda is that these people know what they are doing. They know the average joe doesn't understand his own motives, and they manipulate these motives to bring about anything they wish! These people should know better, don't they have ethics? It's difficult to study psych without growing a personal understanding of what people really NEED to function healthily, i can't understand how people in these fields can know this and then purposefully go against what they know to be right.
It's like studying medicine, then using this knowledge to becoming a really efficient killing machine. Psychology doesn't seem to have a hypocratic oath, but maybe it should.
Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 10:58 am
by Lothar
Most of the marketing people I know aren't into the whole \"I'm teh EVIL, I'm going to manipulate people!\" aspect of it. They believe they have a worthwhile product, and want to convince people it's worth spending their time (or, money, which comes from spending time working) on.
We do the same with ideas here on the DBB. I try to convince you that it's worth 20 minutes to read the article I linked to in some other thread; you try to convince me it's worth an afternoon to study a particular topic; we've all convinced each other it's worth at least a few minutes to read and respond here. Over time, Drakona and Sirian have convinced most of us that even if their post is 10 screens long it's going to be worth reading, but most of us would tell AceCombat tl;dr for the same length post. That's marketing, in a nutshell.
Marketing (and PR and so on) is important for the simple fact that people don't have unlimited time/money. We have to make decisions as to how to spend it, and the more information we have, the better. That's why I consistantly criticize people for linking to long articles without providing an explanation as to why it's worth my time to read -- I could be reading your article, or some other article, or I could be sleeping or working or eating or spending time with my wife; you need to convince me your article is worth it. I work at a museum, and we have a fairly large marketing/PR division, simply because we want to convince people to come visit our museum instead of spending the day mowing the lawn or whatever else. Again, this is all a good thing.
Now, where marketing/PR goes wrong is when people try to convince others to spend their time/money on products that really aren't worthwhile, and people buy into it. Where it goes wrong is where the marketing people believe their product isn't worthwhile, but they'll sell it anyway using flashy ads with little substance. Here, I can't really blame the marketers -- if you're dumb enough to buy a donut you didn't really want because you saw a commercial with a TMBG song, it's your fault. If you're dumb enough to get AOL because you saw a flashy TV commercial about how great it is, it's your fault.
The right way to counteract what I call \"evil marketing\" (all style, no substance) is with \"good marketing\" and research. If you're the consumer, don't let the commercial guide you; read customer reviews on Amazon or ask others who've used the same product. And if you have a product you're happy with, let people know about it.
(On that note, if you're looking to buy a couch/sofa/chair for a dorm or apartment, check out homereserve.com -- the furniture ships in just a few boxes and takes about an hour to assemble with just a screwdriver. And it's really comfy. And if you need to lose weight, try Weight Watchers -- I dropped 31 pounds in 6 months, I don't feel hungry, and I can sustain the habits that got me here.)
Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:23 am
by Dedman
roid wrote:i can't understand why so many people would knowledgeably enter a field dedicated to creating, managing and perfecting "bull****". Who's only purpose is to steer people away from the truth.
Really? You can't understand it? I would think you of all people would get it.
95% of marketing and PR is psychology. Why do people behave the way they do? Why do they make the choices they do? What influences their decision processes? It's all just behavioral science.
The difference is that unless you are an MD in private practice, a marketing or PR exec makes a boat load more $$.
See, it’s a win-win. Study human behavior and get paid handsomely to do so.
The added bonus is no one can sue you for malpractice
Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:39 pm
by roid
Lothar wrote:Most of the marketing people I know aren't into the whole "I'm teh EVIL, I'm going to manipulate people!" aspect of it. They believe they have a worthwhile product, and want to convince people it's worth spending their time (or, money, which comes from spending time working) on.
...
The right way to counteract what I call "evil marketing" (all style, no substance) is with "good marketing" and research. If you're the consumer, don't let the commercial guide you; read customer reviews on Amazon or ask others who've used the same product. And if you have a product you're happy with, let people know about it.
my point was the later, the "evil marketing": the pure marketers. the people who DON'T have a product of thir own, they don't get into marketing so they can better push their own product/s. They get into it purely to specialise in marketing, they'll design campaigns for whoever's paying.
The thing is it's not as simple as
"if you're dumb enough to buy X because of an advertising campaign, it's your own fault". Campaigns often target painful insecuritys in people, a well designed campaign is designed to push "buttons" the consumer isn't even aware she has. It's their job to find the chinks in our psych armour, and not heal them as a good doc would, but EXPLOIT THEM FOR PROFIT.
Dedman wrote:roid wrote:i can't understand why so many people would knowledgeably enter a field dedicated to creating, managing and perfecting "bull****". Who's only purpose is to steer people away from the truth.
Really? You can't understand it? I would think you of all people would get it.
95% of marketing and PR is psychology. Why do people behave the way they do? Why do they make the choices they do? What influences their decision processes? It's all just behavioral science.
The difference is that unless you are an MD in private practice, a marketing or PR exec makes a boat load more $$.
See, it’s a win-win. Study human behavior and get paid handsomely to do so.
The added bonus is no one can sue you for malpractice
Someone else also suggested to me that it's all just
Greed. But i'm finding it difficult to accept. People studying psych not to help people overcome their weaknesses, but to exploit and even strengthen those weaknesses? It's an outrage. How can an industry such as this be allowed to be so ethically incompetent?
Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 9:16 pm
by Will Robinson
roid wrote:my point was the later, the "evil marketing": the pure marketers. the people who DON'T have a product of thir own, they don't get into marketing so they can better push their own product/s. They get into it purely to specialise in marketing, they'll design campaigns for whoever's paying.
Yea and Fed Ex doesn't have a product either, they specialize in delivering them. look at publishers and realtors and broadcasters and etc. etc.
You can't fault them for realizing they can focus on sales technique and then market a product better than the inventor of the product ever could. The inventor spends most of his time creating. Specialization is a natural thing in business it's not the cause of your problem or even a symptom of someones evil nature.
MD's don't have the exclusive right to be aware of, and make use of their knowledge of, the human condition.
It's actually morality you seek to regulate. I know that goes against your ideology a bit but really that's what you're on about. You don't have to find your standards in a religion to be wanting to make other people live by them do you? Ten commandments.....Roids commandment...what's the difference really? Preaching is preaching.
Posted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 6:59 am
by woodchip
Perhaps Roid, you should take out the word marketing and insert \"presentation\" instead. How one sets the table can make for a more inticing meal.
Posted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 4:42 pm
by Isaac
Deception, Roid! That's how humans live. Woman wear makeup to trick people into thinking they're prettier than they really are. Why do you wear a suit? Just because it’s tradition? Why is it?
Why do many poor people in America spend most of their money on jewelry (bling bling), shoes, and cloths, when they live in a shack? Why not save for a nice house and live in rags? Because they don’t want to look poor to ‘other people.’
What explains your drive in life:
[Other People's Money]=OtherPeople+YourRep+(YourSkill+DirectedEffort)
Proof: You don’t fart loudly in meeting with the boss. You don’t pick your nose if you know it will blow your chances in getting what you want.
A companies drive:
[Other People's Money]=OtherPeople+CompanyRep+service
If this is normal human behavior, is it really wrong? Even killing can be right, sometimes. What you need to ask, why do people strive for mediocrity, instead of a good education, for a respectable job?
Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 6:09 am
by roid
i've continued reading, and found to my relief that back in 1999 a lot of psychologists shared my concern and petitioned the APA (American Psych Accociation) to do something about targeting marketing towards children. And as far as i can tell, the APA has been actively doing something about it since (i dunno how much, i'm still researching).
Here's the 1999 letter:
http://web.archive.org/web/200010101738 ... palet.html
September 30, 1999
Richard Suinn, PhD
President
American Psychological Association
Psychology Department
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
RE: The Use of Psychology to Exploit and Influence Children for Commercial Purposes
Dear Dr. Suinn:
The American Psychological Association (APA) was founded to advance the understanding of the human psyche in order to promote health. The APA's founding documents articulate this mission in inspiring detail. The organization is to \"work to mitigate the causes of human suffering;\" it seeks to \"improve the condition of both the individual and society,\" and to \"help the public in developing informed judgments.\"
That is a high calling. The APA's healing and helping mission is accentuated by what the organization and its members are not supposed to do -- namely \"exploit or mislead other people.\"
We are writing today about the latter prohibition. We are concerned that members of the APA are ignoring it, for monetary gain. They are not using their knowledge to mitigate the causes of human suffering. They are using it instead to promote and assist the commercial exploitation and manipulation of children. As individuals, that is their right, of course. But as a profession dedicated to human welfare, psychologists have a responsibility to the public. The APA should not condone such behavior among its members, nor should psychologists look the other way.
Regrettably, a large gap has arisen between APA's mission and the drift of the profession into helping corporations influence children for the purpose of selling products to them. Advertising and marketing firms have long used the insights and research methods of psychology in order to sell products, of course. But today these practices are reaching epidemic levels, and with a complicity on the part of the psychological profession that exceeds that of the past. The result is an enormous advertising and marketing onslaught that comprises, arguably, the largest single psychological project ever undertaken. Yet, this great undertaking remains largely ignored by the APA.
The sale of psychological expertise to advertisers to manipulate children for monetary gain goes without comment let alone sanction. The profession does very little to protect innocent children -- the people it is supposed to help -- from the psychological cajoling and assaults that it itself helps to create. This behavior is not even mentioned in the APA's \"Ethical Principles of Psychologists And Code of Conduct\" (\"Ethics Code\").
Several countries and provinces have laws to protect children from the attempts of adults to influence them in this way. For example, Sweden and Norway prohibit television advertising directly targeting children below twelve years of age. Greece bans television advertising of toys to children between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Quebec prohibits television advertising directed at children below the age of thirteen. However, in the United States, children have no such protections, nor any protection against the use of psychological insights and expertise to manipulate or influence them.
If the APA stands for anything, and if it takes its own mission seriously, it ought to expose and challenge this abuse of psychological knowledge. It must not continue to tolerate by silence such abuse by its own members.
Specifically, we urge the APA to:
1. Issue a formal public statement denouncing the use of psychological techniques to assist corporate marketing and advertising to children; and,
2. Amend the APA's Ethics Code to establish limits for psychologists regarding the use of psychological knowledge or techniques to observe, study, manipulate, harm, exploit, mislead, trick or deceive children for commercial purposes; and,
3. Launch an ongoing campaign to probe, review and confront the use of psychological research in advertising and marketing to children. The campaign would include: (a) ongoing investigation of the use of the tools of psychology in advertising, marketing and market research targeted at children; (b) publication and ethical evaluation of these findings; and, (c) the promotion of strategies to protect children against commercial manipulation and exploitation by psychologists and those who use the tools of psychology.
The use of psychological insight and methodology to bypass parents and influence the behavior and desires of children is a crisis for the profession of psychology. But it also presents a chance for the profession to affirm its high public calling. The American public is hungry for acts of principle and courage on the part of the professions, and we urge the APA to take this step.
Sincerely,
my only qualm with this is that while this letter is concerning children - children are just the mine-canarys of our bigger society, they are the easiest targets. What's psychologically good for kids is generally good for adults alike.
(don't have much time to post right now... may be back to rant more later
)