[LINK] Aussie TV network guilty of subliminal ads

Stilgherrian stil at stilgherrian.com
Wed Oct 15 10:37:35 EST 2008


On 15/10/2008, at 11:24 AM, David Lochrin wrote:
>> Why is "surreptitiousness", in and of itself, a problem?
>
>   Because it's intended to make the subject(s) perform actions they  
> may not otherwise do with a minimum of conscious prior evaluation  
> and contingent responsibility.

You mean like say, putting the lollies next to the checkout at  
supermarkets to generate impulse buys?

Why is "conscious" evaluation so special? It's just a pretty skin on  
top of a very complex mechanism of mind.


>    Would you like some more direct examples?

I'm genuinely curious as to why this *specific* kind of "making the  
subject(s) perform actions they may not otherwise do" is different  
from any other kind, apart from the Twilight Zonesque scare-name  
"subliminal". A thousand different persuasion techniques are in use,  
why is this on so bad? (Particularly as there's no evidence that it IS  
any different...)

Give me reasons, and I will rail against it like the best Luddite in  
the house! Not that there's any of those on Link, no Sir! ;)

Stil


-- 
Stilgherrian http://stilgherrian.com/
Internet, IT and Media Consulting, Sydney, Australia
mobile +61 407 623 600
fax +61 2 9516 5630
Twitter: stilgherrian
Skype: stilgherrian
ABN 25 231 641 421



More information about the Link mailing list