But it will be DIFFERENT – It may be hard to believe, but it’s true: In a large leap from their Communist past, the Russians once suggested putting advertising displays in space, where they could be seen worldwide. So far, the only advertising we see when we look up at the sky is a blimp or a skywriting plane. But all that may change very soon, and in a BIG WAY.
MIT is designing tiny, lit, remote controlled “drone” helicopters which can create a 3-D advertising display in the night sky. To get an idea of what this would look like, click here.
In Wired.com, Priya Ganapati quotes designer E. Ron Kang as saying, “Each of the helicopters then acts as what we call a smart pixel. By controlling their movement, we can have the pixels flying through the air.” This will not only drive stargazers wild, it will lead to many bogus UFO sightings.Meanwhile, anti-alcohol advertising is having the same effect as anti-Marijuana ads: INCREASING viewers’ interest. Marketing expert Adam Duhachek says, “The public health and marketing communities expend considerable effort and capital on these campaigns but have long suspected they were less effective than hoped. But the situation is worse than wasted money or effort. These ads ultimately may do more harm than good because they have the potential to spur more of the behavior they’re trying to prevent.”
The shame and guilt induced by these ads can have the unintentional backfire effects. According to Duhachek, “Advertisements are capable of bringing forth feelings so unpleasant that we’re compelled to eliminate them by whatever means possible.” (In other words, we tune them out). “This motivation is sufficiently strong to convince us we’re immune to certain risks.”
A good example of this is tobacco advertising: While the proven negative health consequences of smoking and tanning are undeniable, tobacco and indoor tanning advertisers would like consumers to think otherwise. A new study comparing the tactics used in advertising tobacco and indoor tanning products found several similarities in how these two industries market unhealthy products.
Dermatologist David A. Jones made an observational study which concluded that both industries employ advertising strategies to counteract health concerns of their products in order to positively influence the consumer’s perception of smoking and indoor tanning and drive industry demand. He says, “The indoor tanning industry reported domestic sales in excess of $2.7 billion in 2007 , and it relies heavily on advertising to sell the misleading idea of a ‘safe’ or ‘healthy’ tan to the public. Even though it is well documented that UV radiation from natural sunlight and indoor tanning devices is a known cause of skin cancer, the public is not always aware of the serious health risks associated with indoor tanning, and the tanning industry
NOTE: This news story, previously published on our old site, will have any links removed.