Aristotle and Advertising
One of the techniques that advertisers and marketers use that individuals may find it to be morally controversial is when marketers and advertisers shift from convincing consumers through rational means to appealing to emotion or subconscious means. This process is when marketers try to convince customers to buy their products by appealing to their emotions instead of trying to out beat the competitor. According to Clotaire Rapaille, consumers are moved by unconscious forces and this method has been proven to be more effective. On the lines of this method being controversial, the line would be drawn here because this method causes consumers to make decisions without thinking. When consumers make decisions without thinking they have the potential of choosing an object that may not be worth its value or an object in which the consumer may not be happy with in the long run. The marketers’ and advertisers’ strategy ...view middle of the document...
The consumers are trapped in amazement by catchy slogans and effective advertisement. After the decision is made the consumers are stuck with the product because they have been blindsided by what is behind the catchy advertisement. Hence, this can become a controversial issue. As example, the airline catering to mothers.
This case impedes consumers because according to Aristotle we should avoid doing things that will prevent ourselves from attaining the good life. In this case the consumers are impeded from attaining the good life because consumers choose products that are not both intrinsically valuable and will not bring happiness as a final end. Also according to Aristotle consumers are impeded because in this case, the consumers are prevented from developing and preserving moral traits. According to Aristotle in this case the consumers lack the virtue of temperance. Temperance is the ability to respond appropriately to things that are pleasurable. The consumers in this case lack temperance because they are distracted with advertisement. They lack temperance because they are allured by the advertisement and they are affected by making the decisions whether to buy the right product.
This case does not impede advertisers and marketers because they are doing things that will lead them to the good life. According to Aristotle the advertisers and marketers have the virtue of friendliness. According to Aristotle friendliness is the ability to respond appropriately to other people. The advertisers and marketers have the virtue of friendliness because they create ways to reach many people in different ways. Advertisers and marketers have the ability to create one ad and have it apply to many people. The ability of responding appropriately to other people puts them at an advantage. This shows that this company is able to serve more that on type of group of people.
Given my explanations in (b) and (c) I believe that Aristotle would determine this case to be unproblematic because there is no conflict between individual happiness and morality. I believe in this situation if marketers and advertiser can create ads and consumers can buy their products then everyone will be able to receive happiness.