In an older study in TIME Magazine, they reported that the first nude print ad was published in 1936 for Woodbury Soap. It featured an undressed woman lazily lying at the beach, her arm positioned at just the right angle to shield her breasts from view. It followed the old advertising adage that sex sells.
But that no longer holds true, according to a new study released by the Psychological Bulletin. Brad Bushman, a communications professor at Ohio State University and a co-author of the study, says it’s not that sex and violence don’t grab our attention - of course they do. In fact, paying attention to such things are evolutionary responses that are necessary for survival.
But just because they grab our eye doesn’t mean the ad translates into sales. Advertisers think sex and violence sell, so they buy advertising time during sexual and violent programs, and in turn producers continue to create sexual and violent programs that attract advertising revenue,” the authors write.
But when a person is being shown a product - say, laundry detergent or shoe polish - with a sexy backdrop, it’s not the detergent that’s capturing the attention so much as the action onscreen. Sex is distracting, Bushman says. “We have a limited capacity to pay attention to cues.”
...
Any of the jewelry pieces my wife creates
make great Valentines Day gifts.
Click the picture to see what she has available today.
...
...
Don't know about that, the Noxema Girl comes to mind, often.
ReplyDeleteJpaul
Baloney. I still remember Betty White selling appliances. And Miss Americas selling cars and orange juice. Don't forget Jane Mansfield selling cross your hear bras, the Breck shampoo ads Most ads today are idiotic and I couldn't name one product.
ReplyDeleteI don't know about that. The. Sydney Sweeney American Glory Jeans ad campaign was pretty effective.
ReplyDelete