Just two more classes to submit DQs!
TrackBack URL: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/170788
When Jenkins quotes the Coca-Cola president on the last lines of the first full paragraph on page 69, its nuts. Whether you know this quote comes from the president of a soft drink company or not, it still is crazy to think how unrelatable the content of his words seem to a beverage. What I mean is this ploy if you will, would seem to make more sense for another product such as a television show or anything else aside from a soft drink. Yet at the same time, the technique he speaks of using to advertise to people makes sense. This idea relates to Jenkins idea of Coca-Cola seeing itself as less of a soft drink company and more as an entertainment company. That seems like its something I should have noticed way earlier in my life. It also leads me to wonder how many companies that engage in advertising relate themselves more as entertainers than their specialty market and therefore direct their advertising based on that idea?
While reading the article “Buying into American Idol” I encountered many aspects that were questionable, and many aspects that dealt with future change that have already taken place in American media. Towards the end, the author talks about gossip, but only in terms of women discussing ethical confrontations in popular media outlets in relation to their own self-judgment, but expand on this concept in terms of male viewers. This concept of gossip is important to advertisers and producers because, in the author’s viewpoint, when viewers engage in conversations about ethical and moral standards, they become more loyal viewers, and all of the implications that go along with that label. With that being said, how does the concept of gossip effect the male viewer? Or has the ethical and media conflict in the media been targeted towards female audiences? Do the same standards of gossip and the implications of gossiping hold true to male audiences?
I somewhat connected with the American Idol article.. The more in depth a viewer analyzes, discusses, and thinks about the issues surrounding media the more into it they get. Anytime you put more time into something you are bound to become more connected with it. The same goes with men I believe but would the topics of discussion with men possibly be a little different?
So while reading Buying into American Idol, I realized that it is somewhat out dated and it got me thinking about what predictions that were made were correct and which ones were way off. The author talks about the fear that advertising companies have about losing viewers to the DVR. What I'm wondering is this lack of viewer presence the reason why some companies and advertisers have gone so racy? Like the Marc Jacobs ad with Dakota Fanning posing in a sexual way with a perfume bottle and being only 17 years old? Do they need to do inappropriate things for the viewers to even stop to look?
While reading Buying into American Idol, I noticed that the author speaks of advertisers having the fear that they will lose viewers because DVR is becoming the norm. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe movie theaters used to do advertising where they would flash an image of popcorn or candy in a bottom corner in order to trigger more business. With how well DVR is going today, do you believe that advertising and television will begin to bring that, or something of that fashion back, and also utilize it in regular television programs? Why or why not?
In the article it talks about how the viewers use calls and text messages to engage to American Idol. I find it a good idea to have some way to engage the viewers to the show to create anticipation but does that increase the attention of the sponsored messages?
I thought it was very interesting to read the part about the different types of tv viewers that exist. Right away I tried identifying myself as one of them but then read on and realized that the type of tv watcher you are changes all the time and most people are not just one or the other. I'm wondering which type of television viewer is most ideal for tv production companies and which one generates the most income for them? I'm assuming the loyal watchers would be most ideal because they are the ones that are hooked on a show and watch it religiously but I wonder if sometimes the zappers are more ideal because they may result in more loyals...
This article really made viewers of American Idol to be cult-like; at least in regards to the first couple of seasons. I found it interesting how these big companies are using emotions as a commodity and unlimited resource. They could play with your emotions and make it lean any way that they want. Could these brands and TV shows be another form of agenda setting we see in journalism and the news?
Also, in the beginning of the article, it kept talking about Madison Ave. Maybe I missed it, but what is Madison and Vine?
All of this extreme advertising to audiences is crazy to me. I've never been one to get super into following a certain show, but I can see how some people may develop an emotional tie to a show like American Idol. I'm just curious how the marketers develop the right emotional ties to the show to the target audience they want to sell the product to. I think it's interesting how advertisers feel the need to have you make an emotional connection with their product; it's not enough to simply just show it.
This page contains a single entry by Melody published on December 5, 2011 9:25 AM.
Blog Makeup was the previous entry in this blog.
Make-up blog! is the next entry in this blog.
Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.