The Negative Effects of Advertising free essay sample

Unethical Advertising Unfortunately, advertising is sending our country into a quick downward spiral, doing an immense amount of harm and little good. Companies pay millions of dollars each year, in hopes to successfully pull the wool over our eyes and get their product sold. The dishonesty is leaving the citizens of this country with nothing to gain. The biggest problem with advertising is that the majority of it is alarmingly misleading. Advertisements convey an unrealistic view of a particular product. Companies go to extraordinary lengths to persuade consumers to indulge in unnecessary luxuries. Once again, the consumer falls victim to their tricks and gimmicks. The American people have grown incredibly naive over a short amount of time. The majority of society favors the superficial and materialistic. All they see is an image. In the article â€Å"Sex Appeal in Advertising has Negative Effects,† Shawna Robertson states that â€Å"Not only have people become deceived by the images they are seeing, but their moral values are suffering as well† (n. We will write a custom essay sample on The Negative Effects of Advertising or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page pag. ). Children are affected the most. At a young age one allows his or her mind to be molded and constructed. A child will grow up to be everything they are surrounded by, being very susceptible to outside influences. That being said, for future generations growing up in a media infested country, there is little hope. Attempting to thrive in a consumerist country, with a consumerist attitude, will hinder the United States for years to come. Once an idea is planted in the minds of weak-willed people, there is rarely hope for reform. Advertising is unethical, above all else. It creates a false, unrealistic image and urges people to buy in, leaving most unsatisfied after the initial â€Å"new† feeling has worn off. America revolves around material possessions. Most are in debt due to this. Everyone wants the newest, most expensive, and impressive things on the market. Unfortunately, we have our hands full trying to tackle the monster that is advertising. The negative impact advertising has on us could be turned into a positive impact if advertising was honest, there was no advertising, and the public became educated about misleading ads. Undoubtedly, advertising should be honest. What advertisements depict is false and unjust. Advertising and the media convinces the American public that if they succumb and go along with the trend, then they will have some grand award waiting for them when all is said and done. Magazines airbrush models until they appear to be flawless goddesses adorning the front pages. In the article, â€Å"Negative Influences of Media,† Manalie Oak states that â€Å"It is often seen that young girls and boys imitate their role models blindly. The negative things the celebrities do are often talked about. The controversies in the lives of the celebrities are often highlighted by the media. This leads to a blind imitation of what appears in the news† (n. pag. ). If advertising was truthful and conveyed honest images, it would do a world of good for society. Consumers would realize that they should not conform to everything they see and should resist spending their money on frivolous outlandishness. Young girls would realize that the model they see in that commercial has a pimple on her forehead, or a single hair out of place. Advertising dishonest products should be outlawed and companies should be fined if their advertisement does not meet a specific set of necessary requirements. If a company would like to advertise a specific product, the product should be inspected along with the ad to ensure the people of this country are not throwing their money away on a lie. If the product, in fact, does not perform the exact way the ad suggests, it should be taken off the market immediately. Companies should be fined for trying to propagandize unethical merchandise or unrealistic images. If this were a requirement a lot of commercials would no longer be able to air on national television. The American people would then be trusted to make an educated decision when purchasing items. Unquestionably, if there were no such thing as advertising we would see a great deal of improvement in the attitudes and beliefs of the American people. We are constantly being bombarded with unhealthy information. In this age, we are driven by technology. The internet, television, and media run our lives to an extent. We are constantly seeing some sort of advertisement, whether on a billboard or otherwise. People want the image hat is expressed in advertisements, and more often than not, the image portrayed is not practical. In the article, â€Å"A Mighty Image† by Cameron Johnson, he informs us that â€Å"The image creates an allure, that is, an attractive association of the thing†¦with a set of ideas. That set of ideas can be entirely divorced from reality, entirely separate from the needs of everyday life† (180). If there was no advertising it would allow the public to see other things about the world they would have never noticed otherwise. More attention would be placed upon the arts and literature if ads were not constantly in our faces. This would counteract everything we are learning and beginning to believe about the media and advertising. If advertising was outlawed we could thrive. Companies would have to find some other source of funding for television programs, magazines, etc. We would be forced to think for ourselves, for a change. Getting rid of advertising altogether would be a leap forward for this country. In addition, it is a safe assumption that if the people were educated about misleading advertising and the damage it is causing, it would benefit everyone. We could witness change take place for the good. If the dishonesty of the media was exploited society would get a wake-up call and some would change their ways. The public now knows about the harms of cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, and drug use. In all fairness, they should be educated about the other ways they have been harmed and misled by advertising. The government inspects our medicine, our food, and other miscellaneous details about our lives, so it is appalling that there is no attention placed on the thing that rules our lives the most. When discussing this issue with a fellow classmate, Molly Smith, she stated, â€Å"If we weren’t constantly being lied to by the ads we see on a daily basis, I think some old values would be restored. Advertising should not be so misleading. The public has a right to be educated† (n. pag. ). Our children should be taught in the classroom that advertising cannot be trusted. Instead of bright minds becoming brainwashed with pointless fads and trends, emphasis should be placed upon valuing oneself and making productive, healthy decisions. People should be urged to realize that advertising is misleading and false for a reason. Companies do that intentionally to dupe us. It is startling that companies are even allowed to do this. False advertising surrounds us and if people were completely aware of the harmful effects advertising has on everyone, change would take place. Without a doubt, the best solution to this problem is eliminating advertising altogether. Honest advertising and educating the people would help but those are not as practical and realistic. Eliminating advertising is the only fair approach to the issue at hand. Companies will always find a way to mislead the public. We live in a time where advertising has been such an enormous factor in our lives for far too long. The issue at hand must become extinct in order for progress to be made, unfortunately. In the journal, â€Å"The Impact of Media Images on Body Image and Behaviours: A Summary of the Scientific Edidence, Dr. Helga Dittmar informs us that â€Å"Advertising, the mass media (including the World Wide Web), and consumer culture highly profile ‘body perfect’ ideals that are both artificial and biologically inappropriate† (n. pag. ). Trying to find middle ground with big business and compromising the issue is not an option. Taking a call to action and grabbing the bull by the horns is the best way to overcome this issue and witness optimal results. Unfortunately, some may argue that the problem will never be solved. Some still believe that advertising is a good thing. People may argue that it is a positive thing that we stay updated with all the latest gadgets and trends. This sort of mindset is astounding and saddening. These people could not be more wrong. If we would do away with advertising, people would be forced to develop and grow in a way that is unique. For once, we would separate ourselves from the unrealistic demands of the media and advertising. People would be much happier and would live healthier lifestyles if there were not ridiculous pressures from outside influences. We can be confident in the idea that if advertising was nonexistent, a new world would emerge. There would be no such thing as stereotyping and cliques. We would be forced to create our own ideas, and be forced to make our own decisions about the image and lifestyle we want to convey. Originality is where we can find growth and connect with ourselves and others, harmoniously. The effects of advertising are cutting us deep, in a way they never have before. Controlling what is thrown in our faces on a daily basis is not an easy task, but it is imperative we do something about it. Subjecting new generations to this problem that we have created is unfair and unjust. We must get our heads on straight and recognize what surrounds us. Not only that, but we should also be able to understand and separate the good from bad. The people of this country must be strong enough to captivate young minds and set a healthy example for the young people.

Provenience, Provenance, Lets Call the Whole Thing Off

Provenience, Provenance, Lets Call the Whole Thing Off Provenience and provenance are two words that have similar meanings and similar etymologies according to Merriam Websters dictionary  but have very different meanings as they are used by scholars working in the fields of archaeology  and art history. Provenance, according to the online version of Merriam Websters dictionary, means the history of ownership of a valued object and it is the oldest (or parent) of the two words. Provenance is derived from the French word provenir, meaning to come forth, and it has been in use in English since the 1780s.Provenience, according to the same source, is the younger (or child) of the two forms. It is a synonym for provenance, and it also derives from the French word provenir and it has been in use in English since the 1880s. However, amongst art historians and archaeologists, these two words are not synonyms, in fact, there is a nuanced meaning to each in our scholarly writings and discussions.   Artifact Context This discussion arises out of the interest of scholars and academics in verifying the authenticity (and thus value, whether monetary or scholarly) of an artifact or a piece of art. What art historians use to determine an objects authenticity is the chain of ownership: they typically know or can work out the likely maker, but who owned it first, and how did that painting or sculpture make its way to the present owner? If theres a gap in that chain during which time they dont know who owned a particular object for a decade or century, there is a possibility that the object was forged. Archaeologists, on the other hand, dont care who owned an object- they are more interested in the context of an object within the community of its (mostly original) users. For an archaeologist to maintain that an object has meaning and intrinsic value, she needs to know how it was used, what archaeological site it came from, and where it was deposited within that site. The context of the artifact is important information about an object, context which is often lost when an artifact is bought by a collector and passed down from hand to hand. Fighting Words These can be fighting words between these two groups of scholars. An art historian sees merit in a Minoan sculpture fragment in a museum no matter where it came from, they just want to know if its real; an archaeologist feels its just another Minoan sculpture unless they know it was found in a trash deposit in the back of a shrine at Knossos. So, we need two words. One to clarify the chain of ownership for art historians, and one to clarify the context of an object for archaeologists. Provenance: The detailed history of where an artifact has been since its creation.Provenience: The precise location where an artifact or archaeological sample was recovered archaeologically. An Example by Way of an Explanation Let us consider the meaning of a silver denarius, one of an estimated 22.5 million Roman coins minted for Julius Caesar between 49-45 BC. The provenance of that coin could include its creation in the mint in Italy, its loss in a shipwreck in the Adriatic sea, its recovery by shell divers, its purchase first by an antiquities dealer, then by a tourist who left it to her son who eventually sold it to the museum. The denariuss authenticity is established (in part) by its chain of ownership from the shipwreck. To an archaeologist, however, that denarius is one of millions of coins minted for Caesar and not very interesting, unless we know that the coin was found in the wreck of the Iulia Felix, a small cargo ship wrecked in the Adriatic while it  participated in the international glass trade of the third century AD. The Loss of Provenience When archaeologists lament the loss of provenience from a looted art object, what we really mean is that part of the provenance has been lost- we are interested in why  a Roman coin turned up in a shipwreck 400 years after it was made; while art historians dont really care, since they can generally figure out what mint a coin came from by the information stamped on its surface. Its a Roman coin, what else do we need to know? says an art historian; The shipping trade in the Mediterranean region during late Roman times says an archaeologist. It all comes down to a question of context. Because provenance for an art historian is important to establish ownership, but provenience is interesting to an archaeologist to establish meaning. In 2006, reader Eric P elegantly nailed the difference with a pair of apt metaphors: Provenience is an artifacts birthplace, while Provenance is an artifacts resume.