Cont. discussion

One of the activities I wanted to do in class was distribute advertisements and talk about the fictional examples they might address as well as the underlying premises, whether they be positive or negative. A couple of ads in particular I wanted to talk about were a Joe Camel cigarette ad and a McDonalds ad. The book states that “Advertisers often use animals or fabulous human beings to sell their products. If everyone can remember the Joe Camel ads, he was always thought to be cool and popular whether he was playing pool or riding a motorcycle. Many adults, mostly parents were against these ads due to the camel itself. They feared the ads were trying to target younger generations by having a “fun loving” animal smoking.
Another ad, I wanted to touch on was a McDonalds ad that features two young black boys, maybe ages 6-8, having a discussion about something on some steps. Underneath the boys is the saying “The bigger we get, the bigger our dreams get. The problem is what they are wearing in my opinion. These young boys are wearing baggy clothes and baggy sweaters with their shoelaces untied. When I asked various family and friends if they saw anything wrong with ad, majority of them said, “Do they have to be in such baggy clothes, like little thugs?” The answer…of course not. McDonalds is no stranger to controversy though. A few years back, many African Americans were upset because the commercials for the food chain mainly focused on blacks either rapping or dancing. Many people thought, is this how they view us? I just happen to think that these two ads are great example ads having negative premises.