Sex. (Way to go, back row.)
What is Michael Jordan doing?
It.
Nike is selling Control. Michael Jordan is in control, in a way that is impossible. If you have control, you can do anything, you can fly, you can stay in the air, just like Michael Jordan.
What more can people possibly aspire to except control?
Lusk, WY Commercial
People are using technology to keep their town just the way it is. "Microsoft."
Commercial makes an incredible promise - you can stop change by changing.
Showing posts with label Session 5. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Session 5. Show all posts
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Anti-Smoking Commercial
truth campaign:
Jerky camera work, gritty, edgy material, anti-establishment megaphones, young people against blurred faces in suits - anti-establisment, man.
This is paid for by funds from the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement. So you have "tobacco executives" in the commercial who paid a bunch of teenagers (actors in their 20s?) to heckle them at work. This is the beauty of the market.
Jerky camera work, gritty, edgy material, anti-establishment megaphones, young people against blurred faces in suits - anti-establisment, man.
This is paid for by funds from the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement. So you have "tobacco executives" in the commercial who paid a bunch of teenagers (actors in their 20s?) to heckle them at work. This is the beauty of the market.
Smoking Commercial
A play on Marlboro ads: People as cattle being herded by the Marlboro man, terrified, corralled, and then addicted. Pretty good commercial, using the Marlboro font (Illegal? Isn't that copywrighted?).
Good frames have been non-specific, and haven't relied on a lot of facts. This is advertising, don't let information/facts get in the way of the message.
Skirting the issue? Pulling the wool over people's eyes?
Argument: Do we need the facts if we're telling the truth? Do we need good facts to feel good about manipulating people?
To feel good about ourselves, clearly not to manipulate people.
Props to Miriam - Paternalism in public health advertising. You are the winner.
Siegel - Not coercion to advertise, not coercion for cigarette companies to advertise, not coercion to make people do something we think is good for them? Siegel understands the ethical argument as whether or not we lie to people when we manipulate.
Question from the front: Manipulate to act how one chooses - no, sorry. Manipulate people to act how the manipulator chooses, why else would we manipulate?
Comment from the back: This is only a difference of medium. Again, no. Comparing a list of facts to an emotional video, the fundamental difference is not list/video but fact/emotion.
Comment in the middle: Manipulation not a neutral tool (destruction of society? Way to throw that in.) shouldn't we try to educate people more instead of fighting fire with fire?
Media literacy training - teach children how media works, protect them from advertising to reduce susceptibility to tv, make them more susceptible to literature or other media. So you can convince them to shop at Whole Foods with a recycled paper flier posted in Starbucks.
Good frames have been non-specific, and haven't relied on a lot of facts. This is advertising, don't let information/facts get in the way of the message.
Skirting the issue? Pulling the wool over people's eyes?
Argument: Do we need the facts if we're telling the truth? Do we need good facts to feel good about manipulating people?
To feel good about ourselves, clearly not to manipulate people.
Props to Miriam - Paternalism in public health advertising. You are the winner.
Siegel - Not coercion to advertise, not coercion for cigarette companies to advertise, not coercion to make people do something we think is good for them? Siegel understands the ethical argument as whether or not we lie to people when we manipulate.
Question from the front: Manipulate to act how one chooses - no, sorry. Manipulate people to act how the manipulator chooses, why else would we manipulate?
Comment from the back: This is only a difference of medium. Again, no. Comparing a list of facts to an emotional video, the fundamental difference is not list/video but fact/emotion.
Comment in the middle: Manipulation not a neutral tool (destruction of society? Way to throw that in.) shouldn't we try to educate people more instead of fighting fire with fire?
Media literacy training - teach children how media works, protect them from advertising to reduce susceptibility to tv, make them more susceptible to literature or other media. So you can convince them to shop at Whole Foods with a recycled paper flier posted in Starbucks.
Sex Commerical
The only way to protect yourself is abstinence. (And unlubricated condoms, the single man's choice - no sticky hands.)
This was actually an abstinence commercial. A guy sleeping alone, with red trojan condoms. He is abstinent, whether intentional or not.
"You're actually rebelling against authority by using condoms. You're reframing by changing the idea from abstinence to using condoms." And masturbating.
This was actually an abstinence commercial. A guy sleeping alone, with red trojan condoms. He is abstinent, whether intentional or not.
"You're actually rebelling against authority by using condoms. You're reframing by changing the idea from abstinence to using condoms." And masturbating.
Framing Theory
Siegel shows the "Yes, We Can" Obama video. (Damn, that is an emotionally manipulative video.) Clearly an Obama man. We contribute the 3,921,922nd viewing. This has also been described as the greatest value in political advertising ever. (4 million views, $0). Also, it has John Legend.
Framing theory is a consumer theory - people buy an image, or behavior based upon its packaging. Another example of this, from the New York Times: Obama is the "Starbuck's Democrat"'s candidate, while Hillary is the "Dunkin' Donuts Democrat"'s candidate.
Framing is applying a metaphor to the subject (MLK, the Little Engine that Could, David and Goliath[?], a celebrity).
Works better on self-conscious teenagers/young people (who purchase a brand for identity).
Siegel makes a McCain joke: "No, You Can't."
A girl says she would be moved to be more patriotic by watching this video over and over again.
Nobody mentions the negative potential of framing.
Can framing be intellectual? -Good framing is emotional. Can emotions be tied to one's intellect, or can you tap people's feelings regarding intellect? (See "Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?")
Framing theory is a consumer theory - people buy an image, or behavior based upon its packaging. Another example of this, from the New York Times: Obama is the "Starbuck's Democrat"'s candidate, while Hillary is the "Dunkin' Donuts Democrat"'s candidate.
Framing is applying a metaphor to the subject (MLK, the Little Engine that Could, David and Goliath[?], a celebrity).
Works better on self-conscious teenagers/young people (who purchase a brand for identity).
Siegel makes a McCain joke: "No, You Can't."
A girl says she would be moved to be more patriotic by watching this video over and over again.
Nobody mentions the negative potential of framing.
Can framing be intellectual? -Good framing is emotional. Can emotions be tied to one's intellect, or can you tap people's feelings regarding intellect? (See "Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?")
Fabulous Prizes are tainted?
Oh no! We've all been led: Fabulous prizes are only to set a precedent for answering questions.
Do you feel pavlovian? We may all drool when his voice lilts up for a question.
The Tipping Point in question-answering: People won't answer until other people answer.
Do you feel pavlovian? We may all drool when his voice lilts up for a question.
The Tipping Point in question-answering: People won't answer until other people answer.
Group Behaviors - Diffusion of Innovation
o Semester before Siegel began to teach SB721, sat in on class that had been getting poor evaluations
• Attendance of class – tipping point for people to not show up
• Now we have seminars, so we have to show up more often
• People didn’t skip until they had enough other people – established pattern – to follow
$100 to stay ($400 per lecture. He realizes this.) and students wouldn’t walk out?
15 people at second-to-last lecture
• People stop coming because they recognize that there are no negative consequences
Not a rational weighing of individual behavior?
A rational weighing of consequences to other people…
• To demonstrate this (and fashion is a good place to do this) you would have to demonstrate a reversal in behavior simply due to the amassed action of other people – such that the only data new to the individual is the number of other people performing an action
o Siegel doesn’t clean the board if the person before him doesn’t – this can’t be explained by individual actions?
o Empty lot (better metaphor is the sink full of dishes – do you wash your dish or add to the pile) – Siegel also litters if it’s into a lot that’s already dirty
o Speeding – if someone speeds past you, you speed?
Way to go class - attack the people are sheep theory by arguing for a rational weighing of individual consequences.
• Attendance of class – tipping point for people to not show up
• Now we have seminars, so we have to show up more often
• People didn’t skip until they had enough other people – established pattern – to follow
$100 to stay ($400 per lecture. He realizes this.) and students wouldn’t walk out?
15 people at second-to-last lecture
• People stop coming because they recognize that there are no negative consequences
Not a rational weighing of individual behavior?
A rational weighing of consequences to other people…
• To demonstrate this (and fashion is a good place to do this) you would have to demonstrate a reversal in behavior simply due to the amassed action of other people – such that the only data new to the individual is the number of other people performing an action
o Siegel doesn’t clean the board if the person before him doesn’t – this can’t be explained by individual actions?
o Empty lot (better metaphor is the sink full of dishes – do you wash your dish or add to the pile) – Siegel also litters if it’s into a lot that’s already dirty
o Speeding – if someone speeds past you, you speed?
Way to go class - attack the people are sheep theory by arguing for a rational weighing of individual consequences.
Harry Potter
o Harry Potter
• “I invited J.K. Rowling, we’re using Harry Potter to teach social and behavioral sciences. She said no.”
• Four Houses:
Hufflepuff, the dumb ones, are SB?
Re-read: Gryffindor is group-serving, or at least willing to subordinate personal desires to the good of all (Harry’s desire to be normal, or to escape the conflict with Voldemort, not to die if that is necessary to defeating Voldemort) whereas Slytherin is self-serving above all (and therefore cast as evil)
• Draco Malfoy – born into Slytherin
Cast as a dark wizard – WHOA. Spoiler alert.
Malfoy’s actions are more due to the actions of the house he’s assigned to than to his personal convictions
• Someone brings up the Harry-in-Slytherin possibility
Internal struggle with the external world
• Group-level or individual-level explanation for behavior
• Group-level Muggle vs. Group-Level Wizard is a better comparison
• Pansy Parkinson
The ugly one. Malfoy’s girlfriend?
• (With Crabbe and Goyle?)
These characters are “foils”
Slytherin attached to monied families – rich people are evil?
Fabulous Prize for our expert: Harry Potter 20Q. Does it only know Harry Potter objects or answers? Siegel is amazed. (His first answer was spaghetti. Is it flat? Yes. Aren't spaghetti round? Cylindrical, if possible?) (Snake is next. Is there a theme here? Snakes, noodles?) (Public Health: Machine answers "sunshine." Siegel's mind is blown.)
• “I invited J.K. Rowling, we’re using Harry Potter to teach social and behavioral sciences. She said no.”
• Four Houses:
Hufflepuff, the dumb ones, are SB?
Re-read: Gryffindor is group-serving, or at least willing to subordinate personal desires to the good of all (Harry’s desire to be normal, or to escape the conflict with Voldemort, not to die if that is necessary to defeating Voldemort) whereas Slytherin is self-serving above all (and therefore cast as evil)
• Draco Malfoy – born into Slytherin
Cast as a dark wizard – WHOA. Spoiler alert.
Malfoy’s actions are more due to the actions of the house he’s assigned to than to his personal convictions
• Someone brings up the Harry-in-Slytherin possibility
Internal struggle with the external world
• Group-level or individual-level explanation for behavior
• Group-level Muggle vs. Group-Level Wizard is a better comparison
• Pansy Parkinson
The ugly one. Malfoy’s girlfriend?
• (With Crabbe and Goyle?)
These characters are “foils”
Slytherin attached to monied families – rich people are evil?
Fabulous Prize for our expert: Harry Potter 20Q. Does it only know Harry Potter objects or answers? Siegel is amazed. (His first answer was spaghetti. Is it flat? Yes. Aren't spaghetti round? Cylindrical, if possible?) (Snake is next. Is there a theme here? Snakes, noodles?) (Public Health: Machine answers "sunshine." Siegel's mind is blown.)
Class Five!
Fabulous prizes!
Blue group (Flower model) gets a prize by popular demand. Who are these people? Who demands prizes for other groups? Or was this entirely a group-demand for prizes?
A promise for our Valentine's (Halloween?) to be worthwhile if spent in class - more prizes to come?
Former student: Automatic fabulous prizes.
And there are supposedly more. I'm almost bribed into silence. But this is still awful.
Vegan Options: Jolly Rancher Lollipops.
We've wasted 15 minutes of class. This class costs $80 an hour. Those are $20 lollipops. Enjoy.
Blue group (Flower model) gets a prize by popular demand. Who are these people? Who demands prizes for other groups? Or was this entirely a group-demand for prizes?
A promise for our Valentine's (Halloween?) to be worthwhile if spent in class - more prizes to come?
Former student: Automatic fabulous prizes.
And there are supposedly more. I'm almost bribed into silence. But this is still awful.
Vegan Options: Jolly Rancher Lollipops.
We've wasted 15 minutes of class. This class costs $80 an hour. Those are $20 lollipops. Enjoy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)