What is subliminal advertising?
Subliminal messages are a common part of popular imaginary. Surveys indicate how “respondents believe that subliminal advertising is widely and frequently used and that it is successful in selling products.” (Zanot, Pincus and Lamp, 1983, p. 43). This method refers to sending stimuli below the threshold of consumer’s consciousness. The definition itself presents several challenges, summarized by Solomon (2013, p.61) in four main subjects: the issue of variability of threshold levels; practical difficulty to convey a hidden messages to a vast audience; the matter of attention; the difficulty of being specific enough in the hidden message.
Regarding the threshold of consciousness, it cannot be definitely measured: even the same individual in different circumstances, will present a different level of awareness. Additionally, it is hard to measure (and even defining) what is conscious or subconscious: “the unconscious, after all, is not something that we can measure, see, feel, hear, or touch” (Klass, 1958, p. 149). Studies on possible effect of subliminal messages are likely to be biased because they cannot effectively reproduce the conditions of the consumer watching or hearing a promotional message, which differs from the controlled environment of the experimentation. It must also be noted that the advertising embedding a subliminal message is likely to be filled with other stronger stimuli that are likely to negate the hidden message. Can we therefore say that subliminal messages actually reach a person’s subconscious to the extent of inducing a change of behavior?
In my view the debate on subliminal advertising presents a clear contradiction because if we were to question the ethicality of penetrating customers’ subconscious then we should question other marketing techniques that affect consumers far more forcefully than “hidden” messages.
The (in)effectiveness of subliminal messages in advertising
The effectiveness of a marketing campaign implies targeting a segment of consumers and ensuring a certain degree of responsiveness. With this regard subliminal messages don’t guarantee such effectiveness because “there is no particular stimulus intensity or duration that can guarantee subliminality for all viewers. In order to preclude detection by those with relatively low thresholds, the stimulus would have to be so weak that it would not reach viewers with higher thresholds at all” (Moore, 1982, p. 41).
There is another reason why subliminal advertising may prove ineffective. Research in social psychology and marketing reveals the importance of both affect and cognition in generating a satisfactory experience and particularly that “as the number of experiences increases over time, the influence of cognitive factors increases, whereas the influence of affective factors decreases” (Homburg et all, 2012, p. 27). It is questionable whether a fast moving imperceptible message could really stimulate affection and cognition in a way that can determine proper encoding, storage and retrieval. Marketing strategies compete in getting consumers’ attention, which is contrary to the assumptions that subliminal messages can elicit changes in consumer’s behaviors. We are all familiar with the technique used by TV channels to increase the volume of the audio during adverting: should we expect better results by lowering the audio to make it imperceptible to the audience? The same may apply to so called subliminal messages and the findings of several experiments “do not support the hypothesis that subliminal embeds generate significant influence of brand or illustration recall” (Kelly, 1979, p. 22).
Ultimately, it may be a gross exaggeration to assign high persuasion power to flashing subliminal messages or imperceptible sounds because “we each put our personal “spin” on things as we assign meanings consistent with our own unique experiences, biases, and desires” (Solomon, 2013, p. 46). Consumer behavior is extremely complex and articulated and it would be reductive to believe that hidden messages can turn a consumer (otherwise inserted in a composite psychological and social) into a remote controlled executioner.
Ethical implications
As there is no conclusive evidence on the effectiveness of subliminal messages, advertising codes of conduct often err on the side of caution banning the use of subliminal techniques. For example, the UK Independent Television Commission (2002, p. 16) includes the following directive: “no advertisement may use images of very brief duration, or any other creative technique, in such a way as to exploit the possibility of influencing viewers without their being fully aware of what has been done”.
If we were to question the ethicality of marketing influencing our subconscious, then we should question the influence of schoolteachers, parents, friends, managers, entertainment or information. We should question the actual design of logos and the sound of brand names, that are crafted in a way to evoke emotions or cognition at a deep level of consciousness. Among adults, it is the individual’s responsibility to be informed, to develop critical skills and to be aware of whom and what influences one’s behavior.
The ethical implication of subliminal messages lies in the possibility of influencing consumers without their awareness, which would be highly questionable. This relates to the issue that advertising in general should not invade people’s rights to decide their level of exposure to advertising. In my view, the real ethical issue regarding advertising would arise if consumers were exposed to it without knowing about it. Occult publicity during TV shows, movies or in magazines is in my view a clear unethical practice, as well as the issue of false and misleading messages. The matter of how much a message can penetrate in the subconscious is not an ethical issue, as long as messages are delivered in a space clearly framed as advertising and recognizable as such by an adult audience (children often cannot understand they are exposed to advertising, which is unethical).
We cannot demonize advertising for influencing us and we should not attempt to put in place regulations about their degree of influence in our subconscious. The reason is that they are many other interactions that deliver messages at our subconscious, yet we do not expect to regulate them. People attend religious functions expecting to be influence; we engage in social activities and interpersonal relationship which impact on our emotions and innermost psyche, often to a degree we cannot control or be aware of. Salesman, managers, teachers use techniques to communicate at a deep level of consciousness. Mothers regulate their tone of voice, or select the use of words to induce emotional responses and behaviors on their infant children. Do we consider all this as unethical? Clearly not. So why should we be shocked and defensive if advertisers have learned to speak to our deep levels of affection and cognition? Kotler (1972, p. 48) described marketing as a transaction, which can be defined as “the exchange of values between two parties. The things-of-value need not be limited to goods, services and money; they include other resources such as time, energy, and feelings”. We may therefore consider advertisers as a party engaged in a transaction with another party, the consumer. Shaw and Jones (2005, p. 273) asked pertinent questions such as: “are all interchanges in the universe market exchanges? If not, is all human behavior directed toward social exchanges marketing?”
If we were to question the ethicality of marketing influencing our subconscious, then we should question the influence of schoolteachers, parents, friends, managers, entertainment or information. We should question the actual design of logos and the sound of brand names, that are crafted in a way to evoke emotions or cognition at a deep level of consciousness. Among adults, it is the individual’s responsibility to be informed, to develop critical skills and to be aware of whom and what influences one’s behavior. Clearly, we may say, many people are not sufficiently equipped with such skills; nevertheless, this lack of filters and awareness may be responsibility of educational systems and other social and political entities: it is not the responsibility of marketers to shape society; if they do is because something else failed in our society.
Luis Miguel Battistella, MBA
Director, Audere Group
References
Homburg, C., Koschate, N. & Hoyer, W.D. (2006) ‘The role of cognition and affect in the formation of customer satisfaction: a dynamic perspective’, Journal of Marketing, 70 (3), pp.21-31, Communication & Mass Media Complete.
Kelly, J (1979), ‘Subliminal embeds in print advertising: a challenge to advertising ethics’, Journal Of Advertising, 8, 3, pp. 20-24, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost.
Klass, B (1958), ‘The ghost of subliminal advertising’, Journal Of Marketing, 23, 2, pp. 146-150, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost.
Kotler, P. (1972) ‘A Generic Concept of Marketing’, Journal of Marketing 36 (April):
46–54.
Moore, Timothy E. (1982). “Subliminal Advertising: What You See Is What You Get.” Journal Of Marketing 46, no. 2: 38-47. Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost.
Shaw, E.H. & Jones, D.G.B. (2005) ‘A history of schools of marketing thought’, Marketing Theory, 5 (3), pp.239-281, Sage Journals.
Solomon, M.R. (2013) Consumer behavior: buying, having, and being. 10th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Zanot, E, Pincus, J, & Lamp, E (1983), ‘PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF SUBLIMINAL ADVERTISING’, Journal Of Advertising, 12, 1, pp. 39-45, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost.
