Those straws will crumble to pieces if you clutch at them any harder.

Don't get me wrong, some adverts do cover the criteria that I've specified in previous posts, but quite a lot are too consumed on glamourisation.
Me, too.

But as Stu said, they are not exclusive from each other. And half the time a product doesn't need too much insight; if you don't get the basic concept of a hairbrush (using your example from earlier) then clearly you need an education.

And if the advertisers are making money from a product with a method that works why would they alter it to please the minority that don't even buy their product?

I think you need to go back and study marketing.

Speaking of ads, there's a great Australian show called "The Gruen Transfer". It's an awesome show, anyone who knows how to do torrents, you should check it out.


http://dropin42.olive.feralhosting.com/images/Gruen.jpg

The Gruen Transfer is named after Victor Gruen, the guy who designed the very first shopping mall. The term describes that split second when the mall's intentionally confusing layout makes our eyes glaze and our jaws slacken... the moment when we forget what we came for and become impulse buyers.

The Gruen Transfer (TGT) is a show about advertising, how it works, and how it works on us.
Brilliantly hosted by Wil Anderson, who is even taller than he looks on TV, TGT decodes and defuses the commercial messages that swirl through our lives, with the help of a panel of ad industry experts.

You're making some very good points, Stu and Ben, but my point is that I'm pretty sure there are other ways of making a product look good without stretching the realms of realism.

Just my opinion.

:laugh2:

And advertisers use them. But sometimes they need to stretch realism. To make more money. Some products wouldn't sell as well otherwise.


Just going in circles now.

I hate the new Haribo Ad.

Kinda camp.