Tutorial 6 – Persuasion and rhetoric in advertising

To begin this post concerning rhetoric and persuasion first we need to understand these concepts. According to Socrates, rhetoric “is an art of gulling the ignorant about the justice or injustice of a matter, without imparting any real knowledge” (Simons, 2001, p. 4). Other philosophers doesn’t necessarily agree with Socrates and find that the ability to impress an audience is a path to power and influence and that power is the greatest good.

Rhetoric which in academic circles is the name given to studies about persuasion is an old matter with many interpretations and ways of regarding it either as something good and useful or foul and manipulative. However, it is important to remember that persuasion doesn’t have to mean power over others, it can also imply power with others by not only adhering to ones own personal interest but also the audience’s interest. One definition of persuasion is that it is “human communication designed to influence the autonomous judgments and actions of others” (Simons, 2001, p. 7). This quote concludes that persuasion is a form of attempted influence since it tries to change the way others think, feel or act but that it differs from other forms of influence since it doesn’t impose its truth by force. Persuasion is a way to predispose others without imposing by choosing the way we communicate. To summarize persuasion is a communication practice that is intended to influence the judgments, actions and emotion in others but at the same time giving them the final power of decision. Therefore, persuasion predisposes instead of imposes. It is a practice defined as communication designed to influence the autonomous actions and judgments in other people (Simons, 2001).

Sonesson (2013) argues in his text two strands of rhetoric in advertising discourse that in order for persuasion to have full effect socio-cultural values must be shared, and that in advertising discourse this creates a paradox. The paradox is that advertising must apply to a consensus to influence the audience but at the same time redefine the objects of our experience. Sonesson goes on to argue that after a long history rhetoric is now divided into two different senses of rhetoric. A more traditional take on it which focuses on advancing arguments and how to convince others of your point of view and a second one which attempts to go beyond the classical figures of persuasion. The second tradition attempts to go beyond verbal language and find out how these operations responsible for the workings of the rhetoric in verbal language can be applied to for example pictures.

Sonesson’s main issue however is how communication within rhetoric is actually carried out as a “double set of acts” which in order to be initiated need both a sender and a receiver. Basically, you can communicate all you want as a sender but if no one is there to receive and encode your message no communication will have been carried out. The question that rises from this in terms of advertisement is that in order to attain adherence the message has to share presuppositions with its target but at the same time it has to try and convince them if things not naturally taken for granted. He displays this conflict of interest in ads for “Absolut Vodka” and “IKEA” where basically they either denounce or embrace their Swedish heritage and origin. Vodka denounces it and Ikea tries to embrace it but it is always based on the assumptions and stereotypes foreigners have about Sweden. Ikea markets themselves based on the socio-cultural viewpoints that the customers have about Sweden in that country, so it differs everywhere even though they make a big deal about staying true to their Swedish roots. Vodka markets its product similarly but in a different way, they play on the notion that Sweden is a part of Europe which can be considered as a land of tradition for example Americans so instead of focusing on Sweden they change their image to that of Europe and shed all Swedish ties. What is the same is the tendency to adhere to the consumer’s viewpoint and promoting the positive values instead of the negative when it comes to such stereotypically based advertisements (Sonesson, 2013).

Another example of such an advertisement is the Swedish commercial for “Kalles Kaviar” a Swedish fish product. They go out in the world and let people try it just to discover that no one likes it and the slogan for the campaign is “a very Swedish taste”. This commercial does the same thing as Sonesson talks about but in a reverse manner, it plays on “Swedishness” as a marketing opportunity but by stereotyping the product as Swedish to the Swedish population enhancing our sense of self and lifeworld as something to be cherished and something that is only ours.

Sources:

Simons, H.W. (2001). The Study of Persuasion. In: H.W. Simons with J. Morreale & B.E. Gronbeck, Persuasion in Society, Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Sonesson, G. (2013). Two strands of rhetoric in advertising discourse. International Journal of Marketing Semiotics, 1(1), 6-24.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *