Message-ID: <32D144B2.35F0@mind.net> Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:30:10 +0000 From: "B. Diamond" <mailto:bdiamond@MIND.NET> Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: pushing development-] To: Multiple recipients of list DEVEL-L <mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
kerry miller wrote:> Do you know any study that has used the 'tragedy of the commons' concept to
> analyse the effectiveness of advertising? The usual rationale seems to be
> a) if no-one else is advertising, one gains from the novelty, and
> b) if everyone else is advertising, one has to keep up to avoid losing.
> This sounds like a clear Hardin scenario to me.
No, I'm not aware of any studies to that affect, but as a "recovering adverstising executive" I can assure you that companies that sell advertising will say and/or do just about anything to get your money. Of course the 20-30 billion dollars a year spent world-wide on advertising kind of flys in the face of the notion that we're deep down inside we all long to consume, if that were true, then why spend all of that money to convince us of what we supposedly already know? Perhaps Asian and eastern European women weren't aware of the incredible "sexiness" of smoking until R.J. Reynolds et al unveiled their multi-billion dollar ad campaign (to make up for their shrinking markets here in the U.S.)
>
> In any case, isn't it clear that the essence of Western lifestyle is that
> we *like* that fresh, tingly feeling of being brainwashed (and set)? I
> expect we could all have 19.5 ft cars if the PR budgets could be all
> diverted to globally-relevant causes. (Do you suppose the FDA could rule
> on the addictiveness of greed?)
Sitting Bull once remarked that "their desire for "things" is like a disease among them," when referring to the (un)settlers. I'm beginning to think he was right....
B. Diamond