How many times have you seen or heard something in media (TV, radio, newspaper) that was glamorized, edited, or fixed that it made the real thing look like crap? I know I have, and not just once. I think the trend of deception is very rampant in both the media industry and the advertising industry; both go hand in hand. Advertisers make their products look good in order to entice audiences to buy while media practitioners on the other hand care about the aesthetics of their programs. After all, who would buy an ugly product or tune in to a television channel that had bothering advertisements and shows? Indeed, first impressions are very important.
Although I’m quite sure that deception happens in all forms of media, I think the most deceiving form of media would be those that are visual. Countless times I’ve seen food commercials and print ads that look mouth wateringly delicious but the moment you purchase it your heart drops because you spent your money on something that did not do the ad any justice. How many times have you bought a product hoping it could bring the change and effects you were promised? And who here has seen a celebrity and said to themselves, “Wow. She looks different. She’s not that thin in real life.”?
Is it okay for media and advertisers to deceive their audience and target market? After all, when people see print ads and TV commercials part of them expects to see the same thing when they purchase these objects, avail of these services, or see certain people. But then again, people aren’t turned on by an ugly site. I suppose deception is acceptable to a certain extent. I think its okay to make products and people more presenting so that they don’t look sore on the eyes. But I think it is completely wrong to present to the audience something or someone that they are not. Because of deception from advertisers and the media, people tend to buy things they don’t need and idolize the wrong people. I think advertisers and media practitioners have to set a fine line between what is acceptable to change or tweek and what is not. In the short run it may benefit their business, but in the long run it may hurt society by leading to believe in things that are nonexistent.
You're right - first impressions are key in drumming up interest and influencing purchase, so when advertisers present products and services, they are always at their most enhanced. But the line between deception and enhancement is very fine, as you have pointed out. It may work in the short-term to encourage purchases, but if the deception actually leads to great disappointment in the actual product, its business can be hurt in the long run. Building an image can only get you so far, because it always goes back to the actual quality of the product, and long-term business requires a relationship of trust to be maintained with the consumer so that purchases can be sustained.
TumugonBurahinThat being said, I personally take advertisements with a grain of salt, because what you see is indeed not what you always get. As consumers, we are aware of the differences between the promo poster and actual thing, and so before we purchase anything, we should always consider how it fits in our reality. It's important that we also become smart consumers, so that we can also challenge gross deceptions too.
I think most of us are already aware that ads are meant to entice and deceive. But still, that doesn't stop us from trying some new meal from KFC or Mcdo. We always pounce on whatever's new in the market like a hungry wolf, regardless of all the deception we experienced beforehand. We are always eager to try something new.
TumugonBurahinThis is really frustrating for consumers, isn't it? Sometimes I think this goes the same with clothes -- some items look amazing when worn by a mannequin, then I'll be just so enticed that I'd buy the thing, then afterwards realize that it doesn't suit me. :(
TumugonBurahinThey lure consumers through advertisements, and in order to get the best appeal, they would resort to deception. I don't have an idea of how Sharon Cuneta looks like nowadays, but she's kind of another example I could think of (aside from Angelica Panganiban) when we talk of deception in terms of physical appearance. I remembered her Marie France billboard, which drew so much criticisms because it looked disgustingly photoshopped.
What's really interesting is how deception in advertising doesn't stop consumers from being loyal to the brand, just like what Sheila said. I'm guessing it's more on the experience, instead of the satisfaction.