negative effects of advertising essay

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Advertising Makes Us Unhappy

• Nicole Torres

The more a country spends on ads, the less satisfied its citizens are.

The University of Warwick’s Andrew Oswald and his team compared survey data on the life satisfaction of more than 900,000 citizens of 27 European countries from 1980 to 2011 with data on annual advertising spending in those nations over the same period. The researchers found an inverse connection between the two. The higher a country’s ad spend was in one year, the less satisfied its citizens were a year or two later. Their conclusion: Advertising makes us unhappy.

• Nicole Torres is a former senior editor at Harvard Business Review.

Partner Center

17 Biggest Advantages and Disadvantages of Advertising

Advertising is the profession or activity of producing consumer marketing messages for commercial products or services. Although there are times when companies can advertise for free, this tactic typically involves paying another agency for space to promote something specific. The goal of this investment is to reach as many people as possible who are likely to pay for the items suggested in the ads.

When businesses start advertising, then it is essential for each firm to find their ideal customer. It is cheaper to create ads that work with a specific population group instead of working with generalized data. Companies can look at gender, age, education, income, and a person’s geographic location to determine if there is a strong likelihood that someone will become a customer.

Advertising can occur in a variety of ways. Outlets include television, radio, newspapers, and magazines. Some companies use billboards, the sides of buildings, or product packaging. Internet options continue to expand.

That’s why the advantages and disadvantages of advertising require a careful review. It could be a way to expand the influence of a brand, but this investment could also be a waste of money if not approached correctly.

List of the Advantages of Advertising

1. Advertising is what sets companies apart from each other. Advertising is the fastest way for an organization to prove the expertise it offers in its industry. This marketing approach allows a company to look at the specific pain points its goods or services address so that customers can independently decide if there is value available to consider. The free-market system allows consumers to make choices based on their needs for innovation, so the advantage here is that improved communication occurs from the business to the consumer.

2. Companies can reach multiple markets and population groups simultaneously. Advertising is one of the most straightforward ways to contact multiple demographics simultaneously. This investment helps a company to discover who their primary consumers are in better ways, along with the demographics to which they belong. Marketing through paid and unpaid platforms contributes to data that enables prospect duplication.

Advertising also allows a company to reach out to multiple new markets to judge how influential their marketing messages can be in the future.

3. Businesses can concentrate their advertising on a single population group. Advertising enables a company to target one population group specifically. We see this benefit daily through direct mail efforts, email marketing blasts, and television commercials. When you can time these messages to correspond with times or circumstances where a consumer feels a pain point, then a successful conversion is more likely to happen. It forms a natural networking opportunity that helps prospects engage with a brand message because they can acknowledge the created value proposition.

4. Advertising creates economic benefits at every level. The advertising economy in the United States is responsible for almost 20 million jobs. It is available in every market at each level, from ultra-local to international campaigns. This industry provides opportunities for almost every skill, ranging from sales-based approaches to creative careers like graphic design or writing. When successful outreach efforts occur, then businesses increase revenues. That creates even more jobs that support other companies at every level.

This cycle repeats itself every time a new advertising campaign occurs. Although there are no guarantees for success, a company must make itself known to its community for customers to become aware of its goods or services. That means there’s always a place for it.

5. The advertising industry creates a global culture. Every global event that involves participation, goods, or services requires advertising content to increase exposure. The budget for the Olympic Games in each cycle is several billion dollars. Companies use sponsorships, naming rights, and other strategies to increase brand awareness in a variety of ways. It gives us an opportunity to work together to support the common good at every level.

Even a group of businesses that support a youth soccer league get to take advantage of this benefit. Although the benefits are more localized with that support, it’s still creating a global culture within that community.

6. It gives an opportunity to create niche expertise presentations. The prevalence of PDF downloads, ebooks, whitepapers, and similar written content is a form of advertising that businesses use to prove their expertise. Advertising is moving toward a place where the value to the consumer is the priority instead of what the customer can do for the business. This benefit works for B2B and B2C firms because it shows people what can be done for them instead of telling them what can happen.

That’s why this form of advertising is so effective. It builds loyalty by focusing on relationships instead of relying on logo recognition or a tagline to stay at the top of the mind of possible consumers.

7. Advertising helps a customer make positive choices. Each customer has a different preference for specific products or services based on the pain points they encounter in life. Some choices are going to be more appealing than others, which is why businesses promote what they offer proactively. If someone can compare value propositions in real-time situations to determine what options provide the best value, then that ability increases the likelihood of a transaction taking place.

Businesses can provide specific or broad data about their goods or services to each demographic in unique ways to encourage this advantage. It is a benefit that can lead to tremendous growth opportunities when handled appropriate.

8. It is a straightforward way to support moral or social issues. Companies can support the public good by producing advertising campaigns that can bring more awareness to specific societal issues. Homelessness, cyberbullying, and similar concerns receive exposure in ways that wouldn’t be available to consumers without this marketing effort. Even though there are production costs to consider with this advantage, the value that occurs through increased revenues and economic activities from helping others more than makes up for the initial investment.

List of the Disadvantages of Advertising

1. Everyone is advertising. The average person gets exposed to over 2,000 brand messages every day because of advertising. That makes this marketing effort less effective unless there is a way for a company to rise above all of that noise. This disadvantage is the reason why you see businesses like Geico take unique approaches to this investment, using a mix of humor and character development to create something memorable.

Most people spend less than five seconds to determine if an advertisement is worth their attention. If that content fails, then the remainder of the ad gets forgotten.

2. Advertising cannot produce guaranteed results. Businesses take a gamble when they pay for advertising. This marketing effort doesn’t come with a guarantee. The companies that purchased TV spots during the 2020 Super Bowl were paying over $5 million for a segment. That’s a massive investment in something that may not produce additional revenues.

Although there is value in brand recognition, that outcome only translates to investment when it creates an eventual conversion. Having someone know that Flo represents Progressive isn’t beneficial if that person always uses public transportation. That’s why most small businesses focused on targeted, localized ads as a way to create results.

3. The cost of advertising can be a disadvantage to small businesses. The cost of TV advertising at local television stations is at least $5 for every 1,000 viewers during a 30-second commercial. Then you have the cost of creative development when taking this marketing approach to consider. By the time the first spot hits the air, a company has likely spent at least $10,000 to create the materials and purchase the airtime.

National spots are much more expensive. Businesses that purchase a 30-second television ad on a national broadcast spent an average of $115,000 per slot in 2019.

4. Potential customers may be on multiple platforms. If brand recognition is the goal of an advertising effort, then a business may need to invest in multiple platforms to gain the levels of familiarity they require. You can advertise in printed publications, online blogs, television, radio, Internet ad services, and all of the other traditional methods. A company might find over 100 different ways to reach their customers. When an advertising budget is financially limited, then finding out where most people are consistently becomes a top priority.

5. Advertising requires interesting materials to be useful. The best advertising efforts create memorable experiences for targeted consumers. If you’re a science-fiction fan, then you probably remember all of the exposure Taco Bell paid for itself in the movie Demolition Man. If you’re a fan of older superhero movies, then you may remember the giant Coca-Cola billboard blowing up in Superman. If a business can’t create such an experience, then the entire message gets forgotten.

This disadvantage means that every business must continuously invest in innovative marketing approaches to stay relevant. It’s also the reason why you see brands trying to copy the success that others find in this arena.

6. The “Fake News” movement tarnishes the reputation of advertisers. Politics in the United States has become a fractured, cantankerous space where anyone who doesn’t agree becomes an enemy. If a business advertises through a traditional media outlet that promotes a political agenda or news stories that someone finds to be disagreeable, then that company’s brand becomes directly tied to that experience. Although the people who agree will be more likely to purchase goods or services, those who don’t will boycott the agency indefinitely.

7. Advertising increases the risk of a brand message getting tarnished. Advertising can be memorable for all of the wrong reasons sometimes, leaving viewers to wonder what a business was thinking when putting a spot together. Qiaobi often receives credit for putting together one of the most racist commercials in history by having a Chinese woman forcing a black man into her washing machine after he whistles at her. Once the washing cycle is finished, a winking Asian man emerges.

Miracle Mattress put together a local advertising spot that mocked the events of 9/11, including having two stacks of mattresses fall on workers. Burger King unleashed a regional spot for their Texican Whopper that had the tagline of “The taste of Texas with a little spicy Mexican” – and the add featured a tall American cowboy and a short Mexican wrestler.

8. Most people consider advertising to be a nuisance. Extravagant advertising may have a positive effect on the economy. Still, it tends to harm consumers when the same promotions happen repetitively. This disadvantage occurs in the United States every two years during the election cycles when political ads take over the television and radio. It can also happen when spots frequently occur within the same broadcast or publication.

Hundreds of millions of dollars in advertising may get spent on a single election, exposing populations to competing messages that get monotonous and bothersome when they air several times per hour.

9. The targeted consumers may not see the marketing message from an advertising effort. New technologies make it easier than ever before for consumers to proactively opt-out of viewing advertisements. Popup blockers for Internet browsers can eliminate almost every ad that might display when users are online. Families can fast-forward through ads on broadcast networks when they record shows to watch. Some providers even offer tech that eliminates this marketing effort automatically.

Even if someone is watching live TV, an advertisement break creates an opportunity to walk away from the television. Companies can pay millions without ever knowing if their intended audience is available to watch what they’ve put together.

Advertising messages are an effort to persuade people to purchase specific goods or services. This outcome is also the goal of B2B transactions. A person must become convinced that one item is better over another. That’s why each ad offers a headline, subheading, body copy, image, and a call-to-action. It’s like a 30-second speech that shows how much value something has to a potential client.

Advertising isn’t the only way to get a message seen or heard. It can be more expensive to utilize than other marketing opportunities. That’s why it tends to be more popular with large corporations than sole proprietors and other small businesses.

The advantages and disadvantages of advertising balance cost with the opportunity to increase revenues and consumer awareness. Although there are no guarantees for success, this marketing option can produce immediate and memorable results.

Home — Essay Samples — Business — Advertisement — Essay On Effects Of Advertisement

Essay on Effects of Advertisement

• Categories: Advertisement

About this sample

Words: 567 |

Published: Mar 19, 2024

Words: 567 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

• Expert in: Business

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 531 words

3 pages / 1301 words

3 pages / 1239 words

3 pages / 1427 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Advertisement

Microsoft. 'Microsoft Super Bowl Commercial 2014: Empowering.' YouTube, uploaded by Microsoft, 27 Jan. 2014, www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaOvHKG0Tio.

The advertisement industry has become increasingly influential in today’s society, with product promotions appearing on various media platforms such as print, television, radio, and online pages. One such industry that has [...]

Commercials have become an integral part of modern society, shaping our perceptions and influencing our purchasing decisions. One such commercial that has garnered attention and sparked discussions is the teddy bear commercial. [...]

Coca Cola, one of the most iconic brands in the world, has been a master of advertising for over a century. The company’s marketing campaigns have continuously managed to captivate audiences, create emotional connections, and [...]

Most advertisements use a triangle of rhetorical strategies comprising of pathos, ethos, and logos to cast a profound impact and influence on the minds of the targeted buyers. The cosmetic industry relies on the effectiveness of [...]

Banner advertising is a form of an online advertisement on the world wide web and is delivered by an ad server which is embedded on a web page with an aim of attracting traffic by linking the web users to the website of the [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Advertising’ Damaging Effects in Society Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Negative effects of advertising.

Specific groups such as listeners, readers, and viewers form a large part of consumers and are referred to as the audience. In order to improve the volume of sales, business organizations are usually obliged to launch marketing campaigns for their products. The campaigns are known as advertisements. Hence, consumers can be manipulated, persuaded, and encouraged to develop loyalty towards certain products.

This form of marketing tool can also be employed in promoting social and political agenda. However, advertisements constantly bombard the targeted audience and are often out of control according to Gary Ruskin. The author also notes that coercive advertising is common since the audiences are compelled to change their buying behavior. The act of advertising is widespread even in undeserving locations like elementary schools.

A number of advertising gigs have angered several people. Some do not adhere to the moral standards of society. However, Adam Thierer notes that advertising can be beneficial to both an organization and the targeted audience. The author notes that advertising assists consumers to save money because they obtain adequate product knowledge and eventually settle on the best and most affordable item according to personal tastes and preferences.

This line of argument may be partially true. For instance, close to 10 billion US dollars is spent by Samsung annually on advertising. In addition, we may agree that media houses that advertise products also benefit hugely from such services. Consumers are equally in a better position to understand the products quite well before making their final choices.

Nonetheless, the latter assertion cannot be substantiated bearing in mind that some companies may go to the extent of providing false product information with the aim of persuading consumers to make purchases. Misleading advertisements are common in the market today.

The main purpose of any piece of advertisement is to paint the brightest image of a product. While the advertised product may not meet the purported standards, advertising makes it appear perfect.

This can easily lead to a false representation of a product. Several companies have found themselves in this fix (such as the case of Red Bull). When a case is filed by a consumer in a court of law for false or misleading advertisement, it can attract hefty fines on the part of the manufacturer. This explains why advertising is generally undesirable to society.

Perhaps, it might be crucial to consider one of the worst impacts of advertising in society when it comes to ‘direct-to-consumer’ advertisements on sensitive products such as drugs. Some drug manufacturers portray their medical products as extremely effective in curing certain illnesses.

Consequently, users of such drugs obtain unrealistic expectations on the functional nature of the advertised drugs and eventually end up being disappointed. In extreme cases, false advertisements might lead to casualties when patients take prescription drugs that are not effective as stated in the advertisements. Several deaths have been witnessed owing to the negative effects of prescribed drugs in advertisements.

Worse still, consumers may waste millions of dollars on products related to beauty and health. Several health and beauty products contain harmful components such as mercury. However, most consumers are usually oblivious of the underlying dangers in such products. As a matter of fact, disclaimers are hardly visible in products that contain harmful components. When consumers are not informed of the side effects of products, they tend to fully believe the advertising messages.

As already hinted out, advertisements are everywhere and non-discriminatory. In other words, even the most vulnerable audience (such as school-going children) are targeted through their programs. It can be considered to be morally wrong to persuade young minds (children) to go out of their way and like certain products. While children do not have the autonomy to purchase and a mature mindset to make decisions, advertisers will always target them.

In recap, advertising is not a healthy practice in society. Consumers should be left to make their independent choices after being provided with sufficient and authentic product details.

• The iPad Air Pencil Advertising
• Advertising Principles: Coca-Cola Ad
• Online Gaming and Its Effects on Teenagers
• Melania Trump and Daily Mail' Case
• Suicide: "The Bridge" Documentary by E. Steele
• Coca-Cola's Advertising: Media and Cultural Criticism
• Advertising of the Kia Soul: Hamsters Campaign
• Advertisement: ‘Budweiser: King of Beers’
• The Nivea Skin Care Product Advertisement
• Television Commercial
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, March 22). Advertising' Damaging Effects in Society. https://ivypanda.com/essays/advertising-damaging-effects-in-society/

"Advertising' Damaging Effects in Society." IvyPanda , 22 Mar. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/advertising-damaging-effects-in-society/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Advertising' Damaging Effects in Society'. 22 March.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Advertising' Damaging Effects in Society." March 22, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/advertising-damaging-effects-in-society/.

1. IvyPanda . "Advertising' Damaging Effects in Society." March 22, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/advertising-damaging-effects-in-society/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Advertising' Damaging Effects in Society." March 22, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/advertising-damaging-effects-in-society/.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Effects of Advertising: A Qualitative Analysis of Young Adults’ Engagement with Social Media About Food

Annika molenaar.

1 Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Notting Hill 3168, Australia; [email protected] (A.M.); [email protected] (W.Y.S.)

Wei Yee Saw

Linda brennan.

2 School of Media and Communication, RMIT University, Melbourne 3000, Australia; [email protected]

3 School of Economics, Finance and Marketing, RMIT University, Melbourne 3000, Australia; [email protected]

Megan S. C. Lim

4 Behaviours and Health Risks, Burnet Institute, Melbourne 3004, Australia; [email protected]

5 Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton 3053, Australia

Tracy A. McCaffrey

Associated data.

The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available as consent was not provided by the participants to provide their responses outside of the study team but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Young adults are constantly exposed to energy-dense, nutrient-poor food and beverages, particularly through advertising. Exposure can influence poor food choices and negatively impact health. This study aimed to understand young adults’ attitudes and experiences associated with food-related advertisements, particularly on social media. This qualitative analysis involved n = 166 Australian 18 to 24-year-olds who were involved in a four-week online conversation on different areas relating to health, social media, and eating. Inductive thematic analysis was utilised on two forums on the recall and perceptions of food-related advertisements. Young adults commonly mentioned aspects of the marketing mix (promotion, product, price, and place) in food advertisements. Participants were more readily able to recall energy-dense, nutrient-poor food advertisements compared to healthy food-related advertisements. Digital advertisements were often discussed alongside the use of ad-blockers and algorithms which tailored their social media viewing to what they like. Participants felt constant exposure to unhealthy food advertisements hindered their ability to realise healthy eating behaviours and created feelings of guilt. This current analysis highlights the need to provide an advertising environment that appropriately motivates healthy eating and a food environment that allows healthy food to be the affordable and convenient option.

1. Introduction

Food advertising has been found to be an important influence on food choices, eating behaviours, and consumption patterns [ 1 ]. Energy-dense, nutrient-poor (EDNP) foods are associated with negative health consequences [ 2 , 3 ]. Additionally, EDNP foods are some of the most advertised foods on television [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 ] and online [ 8 , 9 , 10 ]. Increased exposure to fast-food advertisements has been associated with increased consumption of EDNP foods in adults [ 11 ]. The effects of food advertising on children and adolescents have also been widely studied due to the relationship between these advertisements and unhealthy dietary choices [ 12 , 13 ]. Consequently, marketing of EDNP foods to children is regulated in many countries [ 14 , 15 , 16 ]. Research on young adults specifically is more limited, with some evidence indicating potential vulnerabilities to food advertising [ 17 , 18 ].

Young adults have amongst the poorest dietary behaviours compared to other groups, with diets often high in EDNP foods and low in fruit and vegetables [ 19 , 20 , 21 ]. Young adults aged 18 to 24 years experience a potentially vulnerable and malleable transitional period known as the “emerging adulthood” years [ 19 , 22 ]. During this developmental stage, young adults encounter important life transitions which enable them to gain independence and responsibility, as well as possibly establish long-term health-related behaviours [ 19 ]. Although young adults may be less likely than older age groups to have current major health problems, they are still at risk of negative effects of unhealthy lifestyle behaviours which may track into later adulthood, potentially leading to serious health consequences later in life [ 19 ]. Young adults are therefore an important age group to understand in order to encourage the establishment and maintenance of healthy behaviours and protect individuals from the effects of EDNP food advertising.

Traditional food advertising channels are television (all types), radio, print (magazines and newspapers), and billboards [ 23 ]. However, in the digital era, advertising takes place on social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter [ 24 , 25 ]. Social media advertising can be defined as “the utilization of social media technologies, channels, and software to create, communicate, deliver and exchange offerings that have value” [ 26 ]. Social marketing, which aims to utilise marketing principles in order to create behaviour change for social good [ 27 ], also utilises social media [ 28 ]. Social media is utilised by both food and health industries as an advertising platform to increase brand and information reach [ 9 , 29 ]. Young adults are amongst the largest users of social media, with Australian 18 to 29-year-olds spending on average the longest amount of time on different social media platforms [ 30 ]. Due to the pervasiveness of social media, young adults are also constantly exposed to advertising of EDNP foods and beverages on social media [ 8 , 9 , 18 ]. Furthermore, social media is frequently used by young adults to communicate, gather, and share food- and health-related information [ 31 , 32 ].

As a result of social media’s effectiveness as a platform to disseminate food and health information [ 33 , 34 , 35 ], social media advertising has the ability to impact young adults’ health, regardless of whether the information provided is accurate or inaccurate [ 8 , 18 , 34 , 35 ]. Social media advertising relies heavily on social influence strategies, harnessing the economic value of social networks and social aspirations to persuade people to buy [ 36 ]. Using artificial intelligence, advertisements can be created, executed, evaluated, and refined within hours, thereby enabling more profound levels of persuasion than ever before [ 37 ].

An important component of social media advertising is that it can be created and targeted on the basis of algorithms, which track and react to individuals’ participation in the digital environment [ 24 ]. Further, this form of advertising is designed to ensure that ads are relevant to the context of participation and are a “natural” extension of peoples’ behaviours [ 38 ]. Consequently, advertising may not be automatically discernible as advertising because it is integrated seamlessly into an individual’s lived experience [ 18 ]. Such covert advertising is also known as natural or native advertising, but other masked forms of advertising can include sponsorships, influencer marketing, content marketing, stealth marketing, and product placement [ 39 ]. This is of concern, as individuals are often unaware that they are being persuaded to purchase EDNP food products [ 17 ] and are not able to discern the influence these advertisements are having on their food choices [ 40 ]. This is particularly apparent with children, and therefore governments have attempted to mitigate the effect of unhealthy advertisements by introducing regulations [ 41 , 42 ].

All these forms of advertising are designed to create a positive attitude towards a brand and persuade people to buy the brand’s products without necessarily being aware that they are being persuaded. When individuals are involved in or interested in the product, direct (overt) forms of advertising are applicable because they fulfil an information need that leads to people being able to make considered choices about their purchase behaviour. However, covert forms of advertising are applicable when the target audience is not interested in the product or motivated enough about it to pay attention to more complex messages in advertising [ 43 ] or they are unwilling to make considered rational choices [ 44 ]. In these cases, the indirect route to persuasion involves advertising in such a way as to increase the likelihood of behaviour that might lead to a change in attitudes or beliefs without the cognitive processing of an advertising message [ 45 ]. When it comes to food advertising on social media, there is a plethora of messaging using both direct and indirect forms of persuasion [ 46 ].

Additionally, when it comes to eating healthfully, young adults have been found to be overwhelmed with contradictory nutrition information on social media [ 47 ]. The exposure to this potentially untrue and contradictory food and health information may cause cognitive conflicts and interrupt active decision making for healthy eating [ 47 ]. This is particularly problematic in social media advertising for food products where a majority of information or advertising is presented with simple claims and enticing visuals [ 48 ]. Unhealthy food advertisements have been shown to have a significantly more positive response by adolescents compared to healthy food and non-food-related advertisements [ 49 ]. The ability for EDNP food manufacturers to persuasively advertise their food products to young adults and create a digital environment which features EDNP foods presents a serious concern for public health and the diets of young adults. Therefore, it is important to understand what food related advertisements young adults are seeing and what effect these advertisements have on their attitudes and behaviours. Therefore, this study aims to understand young adults’ attitudes and experiences associated with food-related advertisements, particularly online and on social media.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. online conversations.

This study reports findings from the first Phase of the “Communicating Health Study” [ 50 ]. The Communicating Health study, which runs over four years, aims to apply social marketing techniques to understand how young adults engage with social media regarding both health and healthy eating in order to guide the development of effective social marketing messages that motivate and engage young adults. Communicating Health Phase 1a was a formative research stage which involved a four-week online conversation with young adults discussing a series of health-, social media-, and eating-related topics. Online conversations are a market research methodology that incorporate the principles of digital ethnography [ 51 , 52 ] and involve the use of an online community methodology which gathers rich insights into consumer behaviour [ 53 ]. Online conversations involve communities of participants who are able to discuss different topics over a longer period of time in comparison with other qualitative methods such as focus groups and interviews.

This study received ethics approval from the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology Business College Human Ethics Advisory Network (project number: 20489) and Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (project number: 7807).

2.2. Recruitment

The study aimed to recruit 200 young adults aged 18 to 24 years old. This target was based on previous work using a similar methodology [ 54 ] in order to achieve an extensive amount of data exploring the topic area. Participants were recruited by an Australian Market and Social Research Society-certified field house [ 55 ]. Young adults who had previously consented to participate in research with three research panels from across Australia (Survey Sampling International (SSI) https://www.surveysampling.com/ accessed on 27 March 2019, Pure Profile https://www.pureprofile.com/au/ accessed on 27 March 2019, and Student Edge https://studentedge.org/youth-research-insight-services accessed on 27 March 2019) were invited to participate in this study. Three panel partners were used to ensure a mix of participants from across Australia as well as to reach the target quotas which were to recruit a sample of participants that is approximately representative of the Australian population [ 56 ] on location (both Australian State or Territory and location type, i.e., metropolitan and regional locations) and gender. All panels were International Organization for Standardization (ISO)-accredited for the purpose of market and social research [ 57 ]. Participants in these panels voluntarily added their names to the field houses’ databases with the expectation they would then be invited to participate in different market research projects.

A screening survey which included demographic information, self-reported weight, height, interest in health, and social media use was sent to panel members to assess their eligibility [ 58 ]. Panel members were eligible if they were aged between 18 and 24 years old, self-reported using social media at least twice a day, and were currently residing in Australia. Completers of this survey who were eligible were sent a link to a profiling survey and were asked to register on the online communities’ website. Participants who registered ( n = 234) were assigned to one of four online communities on the basis of their age and interest in health (four approximately equal online communities based on age: 18–21 or 22–24, and self-rated interest in health: low or mid/high). Interest in health classification was based upon the median value for the following question from the profiling survey: “On a scale of 1–7 where 1 means ‘Strongly Disagree’ and 7 means ‘Strongly Agree’, please indicate how strongly you agree with the following statement—’I take an active interest in my health.’” Participants were separated into four online communities in order to create more homogenous groupings to encourage counterpart conversations; however, data from the four communities were analysed collectively.

Not all participants who completed the profiling survey responded to all of the forums throughout the online conversations. The dropout rate overall ( Figure 1 ) was large, possibly due to the age group and length of the study, which led to the implementation of a referral system, whereby participants could invite their friends (who were then screened and profiled in the same way). While having participants invite friends more closely mirrors social media it may produce some confounding issues, where friends with like views are part of the online conversations. However, the friend referrals were not necessarily placed in the same online community in terms of how they were profiled by their age and interest in health. For participating in the study, participants received an AUD 100 gift voucher as an incentive, and the 20 most comprehensive contributors (i.e., five participants per online community) received an additional AUD 100 voucher.

Communicating Health online conversations study flow diagram.

2.3. Data Collection

The online conversations were operated and moderated by an independent market research field house with topics and questions developed by the Communicating Health researchers. Topics and questions were presented through an online “lounge” hosted on a private website over four weeks (10 May to 6 of June 2017). The online conversations included 20 different topic forums and two challenges which took approximately five minutes each to complete (approximately 110 min total), three short polls, and a journal entry that required at least four contributions throughout the four weeks [ 58 ]. There were two moderators including both a male (MMgt Marketing/Finance) and female (BA Psych Sociol, MA Applied Social Research) moderator who both had extensive experience in consumer and social research. As moderators were unknown to participants, an introductory forum was used to build relationships between participants and moderators. Forums were opened and different questions were posed at different stages throughout the four-week period. All forums remained open for the four-week period and participants were able to post responses in any of the forums up until the final day. Data collected were in the form of digital text responses and uploaded images in response to the questions posed. For this paper, two of the forums from the online conversations were analysed (discussion guide for each forum found in Table 1 ). These specific forums were chosen on the basis of their discussion of food advertisements and were therefore the only ones that provided insight into the research question about attitudes and experiences relating to food advertising. Discussion guides for the remaining forums and challenges in the online conversations are available here [ 58 ]. Due to the forums running over different weeks, there were different completion rates, with n = 166 young adults completing Forum 3 “Ads about food” and n = 145 young adults completing Forum 12 “The health ads we notice”.

Discussion guide and logic of enquiry.

2.4. Data Analysis

Inductive thematic analysis [ 59 ] was used to analyse the verbatim online text responses from both forums. The analysis was conducted on the group of participants as a whole, as making comparisons between different groups based on their characteristics was not the aim of this study. To familiarise themselves with the forum text responses, the authors (W.Y.S. and A.M.) independently read through all 369 responses from Forum 3 and all 190 forum responses from Forum 12. Text responses included individual answers to the posed questions as well as interactions between moderators and other participants. The responses were manually inductively coded and grouped into categories of like responses. This process involved reading the data multiple times to gain an understanding of the overall dataset and then coding the data line by line into codes relating to the subject of that line. These individual codes were then grouped into categories of like responses in order to develop themes. The analysis from both forums were interpreted collectively in the development of overall themes despite the topics and forums themselves being discreet. Analysis was focussed on food products, both “healthy” and “unhealthy” mentioned across both forums in line with the aim of the analysis. Investigator triangulation was employed to enhance the rigor of the thematic analysis and as a form of validation [ 60 ] where two authors coded the forums separately and grouped their like codes before meeting to compare and contrast their coding and to come to a consensus before developing and refining themes. The analysis of all forum responses was conducted by two female authors with backgrounds in nutrition science (W.S. and A.M.). For anonymity, brand and identifying names are removed from participant quotes otherwise quotes are verbatim.

3.1. Participant Characteristics

The demographics for n = 166 participants who completed at least one of the forums analysed (Forum 3 or Forum 12) can be found in Table 2 . Overall, 60.8% of participants were female, 53.0% were of a healthy weight, and 74.7% spoke English as their primary language at home. Participants were generally residing in an Australian Metro location (80.1%), with 48.2% currently living with their parents. Many participants were currently studying (66.9%) and were primarily completing an undergraduate degree (48.2%). The average overall disposable weekly income was low with 39.2% of participants having less than AUD 40 a week.

Participant characteristics of those completing either Forum 3 or Forum 12 or both ( n = 166 participants).

* Location question: “Please confirm where you live: 1. Sydney metro area; 2. Other New South Wales (regional/rural); 3. Melbourne metro area; 4. Other Victoria (regional/rural); 5. Brisbane metro area; 6. Other Queensland (regional/rural); 7. Adelaide metro area; 8. Other South Australia (regional/rural); 9. Perth metro area; 10. Other Western Australia (regional/rural); 11. Hobart metro area; 12. Other Tasmania (regional/rural); 13. Australian Capital Territory (Metro); 14. Northern Territory (regional/rural)”. † Participants could choose more than one response. ‡ Dispensable weekly income question: ‘During a normal week, how much money do you have to spend on yourself for recreational purposes?’

3.2. Thematic Analysis

During triangulation of findings, the authors had similar themes related to the promotion of products and price. The authors believed these themes fit with the marketing mix or the 4Ps of marketing framework that is an established framework in marketing [ 61 ]. Therefore, the 4Ps framework was used to guide the discussion of the results from the participants. The four major themes represented therefore were: Theme 1—promotion, Theme 2—product, Theme 3—price, and Theme 4—place ( Table 3 ).

Summary of thematic analysis.

3.2.1. Theme 1: Promotion

Nearly all participants believed they were well aware of the products that were being promoted to them in their everyday lives. As they were aware that products promoted to them were targeted on the basis of their search history and interests, the advertisements they described were generally of products they were interested in. When asked about health-related advertisements, some participants knew they could not recall such advertisements as they are not interested in health products, so those companies would not be targeting promotions towards them.

“The ads on my social media are tailored to suit what I would like to see, and the internet knows I don’t want to see health ads. I mostly see ads for website creation tools, online stores that I frequent and video games.” (Forum 12: Male, 21 years old)

While many were seemingly aware of the advertising environment they were in, some did not realise the effects the advertisements were having on them, particularly those advertisements that were more covert. Some believed they could “tune out” any product promotions and therefore believed they never really saw advertisements. However, these participants who stated they did not really see advertisements were still able to remember and recall different advertisements when prompted in the forums.

“Hey Y’all, I also saw the new [Brand name removed] chocolate block—it really grabbed my attention. I think using bright colours will always get people’s attention and I don’t even fancy chocolate that much. I think of myself as ad- impenetrable. I often won’t buy products specifically because they are being advertised” (Forum 3: Male, 22 years old)

Some participants stated that they use ad-blocking services so they do not have to see the large amounts of advertising on online platforms. However, these individuals were still able to recall example promotions, indicating even with ad-blocking services they were still faced with advertisements at some point or on some platforms.

“It could be I’ve just grown to tune them out. Oh, something interesting to note also, I do have an adblocker installed, but I turn it off for sites I like (such as facebook and youtube), it’s there purely to protect me from annoying sites or ones which load slowly due to the amount of ads on it.” (Forum 3: Male, 23 years old)

Promotion Strategies That Worked

There were certain aspects of the food promotion that appeared to commonly grab and maintain the attention of these young adults. Frequency and repetition of an advertisement was effective in gaining the attention and sticking in the memory of these young adults.

“As many have already said, the [fast food brand name removed] ad comes to my mind first. The new [fast food product name removed] ad... has come on the many times that my mouth waters and I get the urge to go past [fast food brand name removed] hahaha.” (Forum 3: Female, 20 years old)

Participants were more likely to enjoy when promotions were of food products and services that were relevant to their needs and interests. Moreover, promotions for new products that were related to, or similar to, products they already liked were of interest and something they could see themselves consuming. A combination of high frequency and foods that were relevant and appealing to them was described as a catalyst for purchasing a particular food.

Promotions that were visually appealing, made the food look delicious, and used “happy” or bright colours were mentioned commonly.

“I think this was down to the colours. The ad used pastel colours which made it very easy on the eyes so it was eye catching and pleasant to look at—I wanted to stop and see what the ad was for” (Forum 3: Female, 21 years old)

Other promotion strategies that were attention-grabbing included interactive promotions such as competitions or opportunities to win a reward or voucher to save money on the food. Jokes, wit, slogans, and jingles were attention-grabbing and memorable parts of food promotions. Also mentioned was promotion by celebrities and influencers. Some participants indicated that, at times, this encouraged them to try the products or make changes to their current lifestyle to live up to the outcome advertised by this celebrity or influencer.

Promotion Strategies That Were Disliked

However, advertisements were not always received favourably. Participants stated that advertisements that promoted deals were sometimes viewed as deceptive rather than the good value for money that was intended. Some participants were sceptical that special deals actually saved money and believed it was more likely to lure them in but then they would spend more than intended.

“Creating ‘meal deals’ is one of the best things fast food places have done. It makes people feel as though they are getting a good deal, while walking away having spent more money and eating more calories than they initially planned.” (Forum 3: Female, 24 years old)

Participants wanted advertisements that were tailored to their interests, so when they did happen to see products being promoted to them that they had no interest in, this was seen as annoying. Some jingles and repetitive aspects of product promotion were also viewed as annoying, despite them being “catchy” and even, in some cases, influencing behaviour.

“I guess that even if it’s annoying, the fact I remember it suggests that it worked. I even shop at [brand name removed], and recognise some of the specials.” (Forum 3: Male, 22 years old)

Mostly, seeing an advertisement very frequently was not viewed positively, despite it being successful in being remembered by participants. High frequency promotion was viewed as “annoying”, sometimes even considered “aggressive”, and generally decreased the likelihood that they would go and purchase the advertised food.

“It played sometimes 3 times an ad break. Once I saw it back-to-back twice. It was exhausting.” (Forum 3: Female, 24 years old)

3.2.2. Theme 2: Product

These young adults frequently described EDNP food products, with fewer participants recalling advertisements for healthy foods. Even when asked about health product advertising, participants often described unhealthy EDNP food or fast food instead. There was a sense of familiarity and affinity towards a lot of the foods being described, with participants stating they already ate and enjoy these foods. Knowing how the food tastes sometimes meant the participants were more enticed by the advertisement.

“I think it’s easier for food chains (especially the popular ones) to grab our attention because we already know what we’re getting, most of us would have tried their food before and know how delicious it is. so going back for a special deal or to try something new is motivating for us.” (Forum 3: Female, 22 years old)

Participants often discussed the perceived healthfulness of the foods being advertised to them. Some participants communicated their discontent with being constantly exposed to fast-food advertisements, as these advertisements also hindered their ability to make healthy choices.

“I’m trying to eat healthier and all I see is fast food around me. That really makes it difficult to stay motivated and to avoid derailing back into unhealthy takeaway option.” (Forum 3: Female, 18 years old)

The inability to consume a healthy diet, as the participants thought they should, often gave rise to feelings of guilt and shame as they mentioned they crave/could not resist “unhealthy” foods.

“Most of the food ads I get are for fast food or delivery services, and I try to hide them when I see them so that I can avoid temptation!” (Forum 12: Female, 24 years old)

Some participants indicated that having more healthier food choices advertised that satisfied their needs for convenience and price and less advertisements for EDNP food might ease the process of making healthy choices.

“I have to agree with the [EDNP food brand name removed] ad, that is the only ad I have really taken notice of as well. It’s a little bit disheartening when you think about it that unhealthy foods are the ones that get the spotlight. I’d love to see the 5&2 ads come back!” (Forum 3: Female, 22 years old)

3.2.3. Theme 3: Price

Participants often reported noticing advertisements that highlighted affordable deals, discounts, and special offers. These participants often described themselves as students or on a low income and therefore the affordability of food and budgeting were major factors in their purchasing behaviours.

“On a budget as a university student the only ads that catch my attention are either cheap or on a good deal, like ads about [fast food brand name removed], [fast food brand name removed], [fast food brand name removed] etc. I am not particularly happy with my food choices, but eating healthy can’t be achieved by comparatively expensive healthy options to unhealthy ones.” (Forum 3: Male, 19 years old)

Value for money often caught the eye of the participants as it was relevant to their needs. Price tempted participants to want whatever the advertisement was selling, and some participants stated price was the ultimate reason for them purchasing the advertised food. Even when specifically asked to recall advertisements about health, discounts and value for money of fast food and EDNP food were mentioned.

“With all the promos and deals that most junk food restaurants offer, they make it seems like a big bargain which sometimes it is, so it makes you want to go out and buy it.” (Forum 3: Male, 21 years old)

There were opposing opinions throughout the forums regarding the cost of convenience and takeaway foods in comparison to buying and preparing fresh foods from a supermarket. Some participants believed that buying and cooking their own food would work out cheaper, while others believed convenience and takeaway foods were cheaper, more readily available, and suitable for their busy lifestyles.

“I dislike these [fast food] ads because they are misleading and don’t offer anything positive. Often working class people feel as though these foods are all they can afford, due to dollar menus and $5 meals, however it is consistently shown that whole foods are cheaper in the end.” (Forum 3: Female, 24 years old)

While value advertising strategies were appealing, and initially sounded like a cost-saving purchase, participants described how they usually end up buying more. This was especially mentioned in relation to fast-food companies with “meal deal”-type promotions.

“The marketing they are using is to get people to visit the restaurants, people like myself are unlikely to spend only $3 because we concider this a good deal, it is likely that the more gullible of us (like myself) will spend more money than intended at the restaurant.” (Forum 3: Female, 24 years old)

The food products and services mentioned were most commonly of the convenient or ready-to-eat variety. Even the healthy food options mentioned were mostly convenient health foods or healthy food delivery services rather than whole foods. A perceived lack of time to prepare food drove participants’ desire for convenience foods. Some participants also stated they had no desire or know-how to cook food so instead opted for ready-made food or food delivery.

“Everyday I see this one [food delivery service brand name removed], first time I seen it got me interested for the convenience of the service. Ticked all my boxes healthy, easy, fast and not to much worry about planning.” (Forum 12: Female, 24 years old)

3.2.4. Theme 4: Place

When asked to recall an advertisement, most participants stated they see them passively when scrolling through social media. Participants rarely stated they were following the food brand of whose advertisement they were discussing. Facebook and YouTube were the most common social media platforms mentioned for seeing advertisements. Healthy food-related advertisements identified on social media were generally presented on Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube.

“I’ve seen the 2 fruit 5 veg ad on Facebook multiple times. Definitely something that I find intriguing and occasionally try to do, but not always successfully.” (Forum 12: Male, 23 years old)

Despite being asked about online and social media advertising, participants commonly mentioned advertisements seen on traditional media, particularly on television, radio, and billboards.

“I have recently seen many ads on [fast food brand name removed] mainly on facebook, i find it very annoying i also see it a lot on tv I never really see healthy food ads on tv or in any media i use daily.” (Forum 3: Female, 22 years old)

Some participants described the overt traditional media advertising as more likely to catch their attention as they were not able to “skip” past it. However, some participants described social media advertising as more persuasive and preferred this more covert advertising, for example how Instagram incorporates advertisement into the feed more naturally.

“One of things I like about advertising on Instagram is that is very non-intrusive. It blends in with the feed very nicely. I believe that ads that are placed in Instagram are generally more reputable mainly because they are often accompanied with abosultely amazing shots of the food. It gives you a reason to like it. Also the fact that it is disguised as a post, instead of an ad is quite nice.” (Forum 3: Male, 23 years old)

Also important to participants was the place in which the product advertised could be purchased. Products advertised that could be purchased in convenient locations, such as ordering online and having food delivered to you or picking food up on the way home or near university, were appealing to many participants. Convenience was key to grabbing the attention of many of these time-poor young adults.

“Yes [brand name removed] ads seems to really persuade you. I always get persuaded with the [brand name removed] though. It’s nice to know I can get my donuts near my home instead of driving miles away for it.” (Forum 3: Female, 22 years old)

4. Discussion

This qualitative analysis explored Australian young adults’ experiences related to food advertisements. Elements relating to the promotion, product, price, and place of food advertisements were often discussed as aspects that increased the appeal and recognition of the advertisement. The use of algorithms to target native advertisements that bypass ad blocking software was also prevalent, although our young adults were often able to assess when they are being advertised to. Advertisements that would increase product related intentions were those that promoted the cost (affordability), convenience, and relatability of the product or even the advertisement itself. Companies that used frequent advertising were easy to recall but at the cost of being considered aggressive and reducing the appeal to buy those foods. Participants also suggested that the ability to eat healthfully is very difficult and led to feelings of guilt, as the marketing environment limits the ability to avoid unhealthy alternatives.

4.1. The Marketing Mix

Advertising, whether digital or traditional, supports a combination of elements of a marketing mix [ 62 ]. The marketing mix is sometimes known as the 4Ps of marketing (product, price, place, and promotion). While there are arguably other elements in marketing [ 61 ], the 4Ps were used a framework for the results of this paper as they were evident within the participants’ responses. In the context of social media advertising, the product can be an idea or information as well as any tangible good. It is the object that is at the core of the exchange. Price is the cost associated with adopting the product. Costs can be non-monetary such as time, effort, and consequences, and includes issues such as affordability and accessibility. This was evident in the desire for convenience expressed by participants. Some of these young adults believed they did not have the time or skills to consume healthy food and therefore the cost of purchasing convenient EDNP foods was more appealing. Place is where individuals take up or access the product as well as how they will be reached or engaged. This definition goes beyond geographic location and logistics and includes the types of social media and traditional media platforms mentioned by participants. Promotion is anything associated with getting a message from a sender to a receiver and includes both covert and overt communication techniques.

An alternative application of the marketing mix than promotion of EDNP food is its application in social marketing to positively influence health-related behaviours [ 63 , 64 , 65 ]. Successful adaptation of the marketing mix in healthy eating social marketing interventions has been shown to affect positive behaviour change, particularly when compared to using just communication strategies alone [ 66 ]. In the current study, advertisements that implemented multiple components of the marketing mix were noticed by participants to a greater extent, particularly those used in EDNP food advertisements. This could be because health-related advertising tends to use single P marketing and rely heavily on information/appeal promotion [ 67 ]. EDNP food advertising, on the other hand, evokes an array of emotional, sensory, and appetitive appeals of the product to promote intentions to engage [ 68 ].

4.2. Advertising on Social Media

Participants were less likely to discuss seeing advertisements on social media, despite large amounts of advertising expenditure in Australia being devoted to online advertising [ 69 ]. This could be due to the covert nature of social media advertising or social media advertisements being ignored or blocked by participants. It may also be that attention is not paid to advertising on social media, which is different to seeing and then ignoring ads, especially in the fast-paced world of social media where scrolling and swiping are prevalent behaviours [ 70 ]. Participants reported passive consumption of social media advertising (i.e., seeing but not engaging with the advertisement); however, the constant exposure to food advertisements received primarily negative feedback. While the number of advertisements is intrusive, impressions, exposure, and reach remain key metrics for social media effectiveness [ 71 ]. Consequently, there is unlikely to be a decrease in advertising over the coming years. Furthermore, social media is used by food advertisers to normalise products and increase product attractiveness to consumers regardless of the health implications [ 17 , 72 ].

Automatically sourced content and user-generated content are widely used on social media platforms to influence consumer engagement by embedding and tailoring advertisements on the basis of consumer interests [ 8 , 73 , 74 ]. Participants stated that advertising through social media had a greater persuasive impact and initiated more positive intentions than television advertising, even though more attention was paid to television advertising. This is consistent with prior studies that have found that consumers are less aware of the persuasive intent behind social media advertising [ 75 ]. The results of this study also support the contention of Dunlop et al. [ 8 ] who found that consumers underestimate their degree of exposure to advertisements on social media and are less likely to view social media advertisements as a form of advertising. Marketers have taken to using the power of peer-to-peer transmission of content on social media as a form of persuasion to purchase their unhealthy products, which is generally not distinguishable by young people as advertising [ 76 ]. Most participants described more covert forms of advertising online, which may be due to the need for food marketing to be covert to pass regulatory guidelines [ 77 ].

4.3. Food Prices and Affordability

The results also show that the price of products is an important determining factor for food choices, with affordability limiting their ability to access healthy alternatives. Food affordability is a common concern for young adults [ 22 , 78 ], especially when they first gain financial and social independence [ 19 ]. Young adults are in a unique life stage where they are learning to budget on their own and are often studying with limited income to support consumption of healthy foods [ 78 ]. Previous research has identified affordability as a major driving force for dietary behaviours [ 79 , 80 ], with people often perceiving healthy food as more expensive than unhealthy food, and therefore not something that may be a reality for their lives [ 80 ]. However young adults have also indicated that takeaway food is both expensive and unhealthy and that they could improve self-care by reducing the consumption of these foods and consuming more healthy alternatives [ 81 ]. To achieve the reduction in takeaway food, they would require a food environment that is supportive to change and reduces their exposure to unhealthy food [ 81 ]. Social marketing campaigns or advertising that aim to encourage consumption of healthy food therefore must consider the cost of the healthy alternatives they are promoting and may benefit from drawing attention to the cost per nutrition weight of these foods compared to EDNP foods [ 80 ]. Young adults, particularly those in university, are known to prioritise affordability of food and have a focus on budgeting to afford all their living expenses [ 82 , 83 , 84 ]. Our results also show that price was a key driver of unhealthy food choices, with most participants suggesting that healthy food was unaffordable and therefore often relying on EDNP food, particularly fast food. The food environment and accessibility of healthy foods is a likely contributor to this reliance on EDNP. Living in a food desert or food swamp with limited access to nutritious fresh food and/or greater amounts of EDNP convenience and fast foods have been linked to poor dietary habits and poor health outcomes [ 85 , 86 ].

4.4. Covert and Overt Advertising

The inclusion of attractive visuals and audio have been shown to increase the noticeability and attention paid to advertisements by young adults [ 9 , 46 , 63 , 87 ]. Young adults are often aware of overt advertising and are able to discern marketing activities that are being directed towards them [ 17 ]. On the other hand, covert advertising removes the freedom of choice surrounding whether or not people want to engage with information about a brand or product, as people are not always aware that consumed content is advertising. For example, the majority of U.S. top-grossing movies over 25 years portrayed unhealthy food (73%) and beverages (90%), with branded products accounting for only 12% [ 88 ]. However, despite being aware that companies are advertising EDNP food products to them, participants often felt a sense of guilt for buying into such advertisements and not consuming the healthy foods that they “should” be. As health professionals, we should avoid tendencies to moralise the discussion around food and healthy eating, as these are often filled with shame, guilt, and fear tactics [ 89 ].

4.5. Limitations

Several limitations of this current study include the method of recruitment, where only individuals from within market research panels were invited to participate. The sample of participants were likely to be completing tertiary education and were skewed towards those more educated. Participants were generally studying and living with their family. Although this is typically representative of the Australian population [ 90 ], this may have meant these young adults were not in full control of purchasing and cooking main meals and their discussion may have been more around convenience or snack foods. We did not ask participants whether they were primarily in control of shopping and cooking meals and did not measure dietary intake, and thus we were unable to determine the level of control these young adults had over their meals. Differences in opinions amongst those from different cultures were not explored. There was a large attrition rate across the four weeks the online conversations ran, which may suggest this length of study may not be suitable for this age group and may have led to a bias in those completing being more interested in health. As participants were able to communicate with each other within each of the forums, the likelihood of participants displaying features of groupthink may be higher. Rather than sharing their own unique thoughts and experiences, participants may have sought unanimity, limiting the experiences they shared.

4.6. Implications for Future Practice

Future work should focus on identifying strategies to overcome the persuasive nature of EDNP food advertising both online and in traditional media. Going beyond the current food advertising regulations, which mainly focus on children only [ 41 , 42 , 49 ], would reduce the frequency and nature of EDNP foods being promoted. Concurrently, there should be an increase in the marketing of healthy food and evidence-based nutrition advice, particularly online and on social media. Healthy food advertising could increase its persuasive power by utilising some of the marketing appeals that caught young adults’ attention in these findings.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, advertising of food products is widely prevalent in social media and traditional media for young adults. Commercial food advertising is noticed and often discounted because of its overt persuasion techniques. Young adults in this study were increasingly using protective measures such as ad-blockers to avoid covert advertising. However, the “weight” of covert advertising and persuasion is un-assessable because attention is not paid to natural, native, or embedded persuasion attempts. Young adults in this study were susceptible to advertising that appeals to pleasure-seeking (taste), cost, and convenience. Health professionals seeking to change food-related behaviours can consider widening the use of the marketing mix and advertising strategies to include appeals that are applicable to young adults’ lived experiences. For young adults to realise healthy eating behaviours, the online and in-person advertising environment must support the consumption of healthy foods.

Acknowledgments

We wish to acknowledge the contribution of Associate Professor Catherine Lombard (dec) for the planning and conceptualisation of the Communicating Health project. We would like to acknowledge Karen Klassen for her work on the online conversations. We would like to thank all the participants who took part in the online conversations and the market research field house and other members of the research team for their work on the online conversations.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, L.B., M.R., M.S.C.L. and T.A.M.; methodology, A.M., W.Y.S., L.B., M.R., M.S.C.L. and T.A.M.; software, A.M. and W.Y.S.; validation, L.B. and T.A.M.; formal analysis, A.M. and W.Y.S.; investigation, A.M. and W.Y.S.; resources, T.A.M.; data curation, L.B., M.R., M.S.C.L. and T.A.M.; writing—original draft preparation, A.M., W.Y.S. and L.B.; writing—review and editing, L.B., M.R., M.S.C.L. and T.A.M.; visualisation, A.M. and W.Y.S. supervision, L.B. and T.A.M.; project administration, T.A.M.; funding acquisition, L.B., M.R., M.S.C.L. and T.A.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

The Communicating Health project was funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (grant number GNT1115496).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology Business College Human Ethics Advisory Network (project number: 20489; date of approval 24th of November 2016) and Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (project number: 7807; date of approval 19th December 2016).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study and to publish this paper.

Data Availability Statement

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Contentious Politics and Political Violence
• Governance/Political Change
• Groups and Identities
• History and Politics
• International Political Economy
• Policy, Administration, and Bureaucracy
• Political Anthropology
• Political Behavior
• Political Communication
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Philosophy
• Political Psychology
• Political Sociology
• Political Values, Beliefs, and Ideologies
• Politics, Law, Judiciary
• Post Modern/Critical Politics
• Public Opinion
• Qualitative Political Methodology
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• World Politics
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

The effects of negative advertising.

• Conor M. Dowling Conor M. Dowling Department of Political Science, University of Mississippi
•  and  Yanna Krupnikov Yanna Krupnikov Department of Political Science, Stony Brook University, SUNY
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.51
• Published online: 22 November 2016

Since the 1960s there has been an increase in the amount of negative advertising in American campaigns. Although only 10% of advertisements aired in the 1960 campaign were negative, in the 2012 campaign only 14.3% of aired ads were positive . The increase in negative advertising has raised questions about the effects these types of ads may have on the electoral outcomes and the political process at large. Indeed, many voters and political actors have assumed and argued that negative advertising will have negative consequences for American politics. Although many news consumers and people interested in politics make many assumptions about the role of negativity in politics, the effect of campaign negativity on the political process is ambiguous. If there is a relationship between negativity and political outcomes, this relationship is nuanced and conditional. Although negativity may, under certain conditions, have powerful effects on political outcomes, under other conditions the effects of negativity are minimal. Moreover, while there is some research to suggest that this type of campaigning can produce negative consequences, other research suggests that negativity may—at times—be beneficial for the political process.

• negative advertising
• campaigning
• voter behavior
• public opinion
• political communication

Introduction

By many accounts, the use of negative campaigning in American elections has increased with each and every campaign cycle. During the 1960 campaign only 10% of all televised ads were negative (Mattes & Redlawsk, 2014 ). In contrast, in 2012 only 14.3% of all campaigns ads aired during 2012 could be classified as positive (Fowler & Ridout, 2012 ). Not only has the sheer volume of ads increased with each passing campaign, so too has the proportion of ads devoted to criticizing one’s opponent (Fowler & Ridout, 2012 ).

There is widespread criticism of this deluge of negativity. Polls show that American voters dislike campaign negativity. When asked if discouraging negative advertising would improve the campaign process, for example, 76% of survey respondents answered affirmatively. 1 Generally, politicians and journalists also have criticized negative campaigning. Former Senator Tom Daschle, for example, has described negative advertising as the “crack cocaine of politics.” 2 To this end, for example, it is not uncommon to hear a candidate criticize his or her opponent for relying on negativity.

The widespread criticism of negativity suggests that negative advertising may have adverse consequences for the political process. As a result, a vast body of work has focused on the empirical relationship between negativity and political outcomes. This scholarship is broad and diverse; most importantly, however, this research suggests that the effects of negativity are much more nuanced and conditional than the widespread criticisms of negativity would suggest. Taken as a whole, the political science literature points to some ambivalence about the role of negativity in the political process. Although some scholars have demonstrated that negative advertising can have negative consequences (see, e.g., Ansolabehere & Iyengar, 1995 ; Jamieson, 1992 ), others have suggested that negativity may actually be somewhat beneficial for the democratic process (see, e.g., Geer, 2006 ; Mattes & Redlawsk, 2014 ).

In this article we consider scholarship on campaign negativity, addressing both arguments that criticize its use and those that underscore its usefulness. We do so by considering the key questions scholars have asked about the relationship between campaign negativity and American politics:

What is a negative advertisement?

What do ordinary Americans think of negativity?

Do negative advertisements affect voter turnout?

Do negative advertisements change minds?

Does the sponsor of the negative advertisement matter?

Why and when do candidates turn to negativity?

Is negativity different when it is on the Internet?

We conclude with a discussion of the existing research on campaign negativity by turning to the remaining questions and explore avenues for future work.

What Is a Negative Advertisement?

When scholars discuss “negativity” or “negative campaigning,” they are typically referring to negative advertising. Although it is possible for candidates to rely on negative campaigning in their speeches, interviews, and websites (e.g., Druckman, Martin, Kifer, & Parkin, 2010 ), much of the existing empirical work on negativity focuses on televised advertising. In turn, research on negative advertising has pointed to multiple ways of defining the concept. One of the broadest definitions of negativity comes from Geer ( 2006 ), who defines negativity as “any criticism leveled by one candidate against another during a campaign” (p. 23). In contrast, a positive ad is one that “states why a candidate is worthy of your vote” (p. 23). As Geer ( 2006 ) argues, this definition leaves no “grey area”—an ad either has a criticism and is negative, or has no criticisms and is positive. What makes Geer’s definition particularly broad is that it does not distinguish between the substantive content of advertisements: under this definition both an advertisement that critiques an opponent’s voting record and one that critique’s the opponent’s personal life would be coded as equivalently negative.

Other definitions suggest a middle category between positive and negative advertising. A campaign advertisement, however brief (typically 30–60 seconds), can have more than one appeal. Within the same ad, for example, a candidate could promote his own issue positions and criticize an opponent’s voting record, which means that one advertisement has two different appeals for voter support. Some scholars have defined these types of ads as “contrast” ads because they contain both a criticism of the opposition and praise of one’s own candidacy (Fowler & Ridout, 2012 ).

Whereas the above definitions focus solely on tone , other scholars have also focused on the type of negativity and the substance of the criticisms. Although all negative ads have a similar tone (i.e., criticism), the very content of negativity may differ, and research suggests that these differences in content can play an important role on the effect of negativity. Some scholars have distinguished between negative ads that focus on issues and negative ads that focus on character (Freedman, Wood, & Lawton, 1999 ). Still others have suggested that “mudslinging” is a different type of negativity that may have particularly adverse consequences for politics (Kahn & Kenney, 1999 ). In defining mudslinging, Kahn and Kenney ( 1999 ) distinguish between what they term “‘legitimate’ negative information,” such as a candidate’s issue positions or voting record, and campaign ads that focus on information that voters will deem “irrelevant or inappropriate” (p. 878). These “inappropriate” mudslinging messages, Kahn and Kenney ( 1999 ) argue, are damaging to democracy.

Along with mudslinging, another potential consideration is incivility. Brooks and Geer ( 2007 ), for example, distinguish between negative messages that are civil and those that are delivered in a manner the voters may perceive to be uncivil. Brooks and Geer ( 2007 ) argue that campaign ads focusing on issues are fair; it is the negative ads that critique a candidate’s character that are viewed as unfair. Brooks and Geer suggest that voters respond better to negative ads that are about “the opponent’s stands on issues like education or military spending” but generally dislike negative ads that discuss topics like “the extramarital relationships of an opponent”( 2007 , p. 3).

Although these more fine-grained definitions offer a nuanced perspective to negativity, the umbrella definition of negativity as a criticism of the opponent is still relevant and useful. Even as Kahn and Kenney ( 1999 ) distinguish between types of negativity, they still retain the idea that at the most general level negativity is a critique—it is just that some types of critiques are more “appropriate” than others. Brooks and Geer ( 2007 ) too begin with the base definition of negativity as a criticism and from that point consider whether voters are more or less responsive to certain types of negativity. More importantly, even these more fine-grained definitions clearly distinguish negative ads from positive ads, and distinguishing “contrast” ads from “negative” ads still leaves the percentage of purely positive ads (currently at an all-time low) unchanged.

Suggesting that the positive–negative dichotomy can be a useful categorization in empirical research on advertising is not the same as suggesting that it is a consistently normatively useful distinction. Often, the positive–negative dichotomy is interpreted as a suggestion that positive ads are inherently “good” while negative ads are inherently “bad” for politics. This need not be the case. As Jamieson ( 2000 ) argues, positive ads may be deceptive, while certain negative attacks can be informative and important (see also Lau & Rovner, 2009 ). Indeed, as Mattes and Redlawsk ( 2014 ) note, there is nothing implicitly good about positive ads. Nonetheless, if the goal is to understand the effect of tone —rather than, for example, the effect of deceitfulness—distinguishing between ads that promote the candidate and ads that critique the opponent (or “target”) can be a useful empirical approach.

What Do Ordinary Americans Think of Negativity?

As noted in the introduction to this article, the public is not supportive of negative campaigning. As Geer ( 2006 ) writes, “a major part of the public’s unhappiness with elections [is] tied to negativity” (p. 2). Polls reinforce Geer’s point. For example, 55% of survey respondents “strongly agree” with the statement “negative attack-oriented campaigning is unethical,” 46% “strongly agree” that negative campaigning is “undermining and damaging our democracy,” and 57% believe that negativity is making people less likely to vote. 3 In contrast, only 13% of people viewed negative campaigning as “very effective.” 4

The negative response to negativity, however, may be at least in part a function of the questions many polls and surveys use to measure people’s responses to this type of advertising. Using a survey experiment, Mattes and Redlawsk ( 2014 ) randomly assign respondents to two different versions of a question about negative advertising. In one version, respondents are asked how they would feel if “a political candidate began to use negative campaigning, that is, began to run ads to give you information about what his opponent had done in office.” In the second version, the authors exclude the words “negative campaigning” but include the description of the type of ad. Mattes and Redlawsk ( 2014 ) find that the modal response to the question that describes the ads as “negative campaigning” is “somewhat angry.” In contrast, the modal response to the question that excludes those terms is “not at all angry” ( 2014 , p. 57).

Moreover, in another set of studies Mattes and Redlawsk ( 2014 ) find that people respond differently to actual ads when these ads are not explicitly described as negative. People are not universally anti-negativity, and people do not dislike the idea that a candidate might air an ad that describes his opponent’s behavior—especially if this ad focuses on issues. Rather, Mattes and Redlawsk conclude, “only when we actually tell voters that this behavior is in fact negative campaigning do respondents recoil against it” ( 2014 , p. 57).

This is not to suggest that people are supportive of all negative ads. Returning to the differences in the content of negativity, it appears that people can and do distinguish between different types of ads. Brooks and Geer, for example, note that 5% of people view a negative ad focusing on an issue as “unfair,” but 68% view an ad focusing on an “extramarital affair” as “unfair” ( 2007 , p. 3). 5 Similarly, Mattes and Redlawsk ( 2014 ) find that people easily distinguish between negative issue ads and negative ads about character. In turn, people reserve their anger for negative ads about character and are much more supportive when negative ads focus on issues.

In sum, it would be simple to follow polls as evidence that the public “hates” negativity, but public opinion on negativity is more nuanced. The vitriol against negative ads may be at least in part a function of question wording, for example. Moreover, to the extent that the public dislikes when candidates attack each other, the dislike is focused on ads that are considered “unfair.” Negative advertisements that focus their criticisms on issues are much less likely to rouse the ire of voters.

Do Negative Ads Affect Voter Turnout?

No other area of research on negativity has generated as much debate as research on the relationship between negativity and turnout. This work has been marked by three conflicting arguments. The first argument is that negativity demobilizes voters, the second argument is that negativity actually mobilizes voters, while the third argument is that negativity has no effect on voter turnout. Next, we consider the evidence in support of each of these arguments.

Typically termed the demobilization hypothesis, the first argument makes a causal connection between negative ads and declining voter turnout. Using both experimental and observational analyses, Ansolabehere, Iyengar, Simon, and Valentino ( 1994 ) and Ansolabehere and Iyengar ( 1995 ) demonstrate that increases in exposure to negative ads leave people less willing to vote. Ansolabehere and Iyengar ( 1995 ) suggest the mechanism underlying this effect is efficacy. More specifically, exposure to negativity leads people to be less politically efficacious, which makes them less likely to make it to the polls on election day.

Other scholars, however, suggest that the effect of negativity not only does not demobilize voters but actually mobilizes them. Using observational data, scholars have shown that people exposed to campaign negativity are actually more likely to turn out and vote (Goldstein & Freedman, 2002 ; Wattenberg & Brians, 1999 ). There are many mechanisms that could explain a possible positive connection between negativity and turnout. Negative ads, for example, can make politics more interesting and exciting, which may lead more people to participate (Goldstein & Freedman, 2002 ). Negative ads are also more memorable than positive ads (Geer & Geer, 2003 ). Moreover, research shows that people who are exposed to negative ads know more about politics, which again suggests a greater level of political involvement and interest (Franz, Freedman, Goldstein, & Ridout, 2007 ).

Finally, other work suggests that the relationship between negativity and turnout is largely null (Finkel & Geer, 1998 ; Krasno & Green, 2008 ). The null effect can also be quite logical—it is possible that negativity is simply a proxy for other types of campaign contexts and, on its own, has little effect on individuals’ propensity to turn out and vote.

Is there any way to unify these three conflicting sets of findings? Again, these different sets of results may be pointing to the idea that the effect of negativity on turnout is quite conditional. Brader ( 2006 ), for example, demonstrates that ads can affect individual emotions, and these emotions in turn lead to behavioral outcomes. Brader’s findings suggest that whether scholars observe any effects of negativity may be driven by the extent to which an ad evokes an emotional response—a hidden mechanism, given that most research on negativity and turnout does not measure emotional states. Following the same logic, it is also possible that only certain types of negative ads affect turnout. Kahn and Kenney ( 2004 ) show that negative issue ads and ads that are considered mudslinging have different effects on turnout. Again, the sets of conflicting findings could be in some part explained by differences in the types of ads used in experiments and the types of ads included in observational studies.

Still other research shows that the conflicting results may be explained by the timing of negativity. Krupnikov ( 2011 , 2014 ) shows that negative ads aired early in the campaign can have a different effect than negative ads aired at later points. Whereas early ads can mobilize voters by making them more confident in their candidate choices, ads aired late decrease confidence and turn people away from the polls. In short, negativity can have both a mobilizing and demobilizing effect depending on the point in time the negative ads are aired.

Do Negative Ads Change Minds?

In surveys and polls, very few respondents believe that negativity will be effective. This is in contrast to politicians and journalists, who argue that the continued use of negativity is its own evidence that these types of ads can work (Lau & Rovner, 2009 ). What does it mean for a negative ad to “work”? One possible definition of “working” is that negative ads affect relative support for candidates and ultimately voting decisions. The most logical way in which negative ads may affect a candidate’s fate is by lowering evaluations of the candidate critiqued in the ad—or the “target” of the ad. If the entire purpose of a negative ad is to highlight the negative attributes of one’s opponent, then certainly the hoped-for outcome would be a decrease in support for the target among voters exposed to the ad.

There is some evidence to suggest that negative ads can—under certain conditions—lower support for the target. Kahn and Kenney ( 2004 ), for example, demonstrate that—compared to positive ads—negative ads do lead people to like the target of the ad less. Their results are not unusual. In a meta-analysis of negativity scholarship, Lau, Sigelman, and Rovner ( 2007 ) find that the majority of studies that quantify the effect of negative ads on candidate evaluations do show that negativity decreases support for the target. As Lau and Rovner summarize, “we are reasonably confident that attacking a political opponent is generally likely to result in lower evaluations of that candidate” ( 2009 , p. 296). This is, however, not to suggest that negative ads will always affect the final electoral choices that people make. Indeed, in analyzing numerous studies of negativity and vote choice, Lau, Sigelman, and Rovner ( 2007 ) find little evidence that exposure to negativity caused people to vote for some candidates rather than others. In short, although the exposure to ads resulted in lower evaluations, these lower evaluations did not translate into changes in vote choice.

Even if negative ads do not determine the candidate voters choose on election day, it is possible negativity can affect the level of confidence individuals have in their candidate choices. Krupnikov ( 2012 ) shows that exposure to negativity early on in the campaign helps people be more certain about their candidate choices. Although people base their candidate preferences on a myriad of factors (the main one being partisanship), exposure to negativity helps people believe that they made better, more informed choices (Krupnikov, 2012 ). In turn, higher levels of confidence in political choices positively influence people’s level of political participation (Krupnikov, 2012 ).

Although it may be most logical to assume that negative ads should affect the level of support for the target, scholars have also suggested that negativity may affect support for the sponsor of the ad as well. While Kahn and Kenney ( 2004 ) show that negative ads lead to lower evaluations of the target, they demonstrate that negative ads lead to declining evaluations of the sponsor as well. Indeed, there are consistent findings that sponsoring negativity can lead to lower support for the ad’s sponsor—an outcome typically referred to as the “backlash” effect (Lau & Rovner, 2009 ). 6

Although the backlash effect has been replicated across numerous studies (Brooks & Murov, 2012 ; Dowling & Wichowsky, 2015 ; Garramone, 1985 ; Weber, Dunaway, & Johnson, 2012 ; see Lau et al., 2007 , for a summary), recent research suggests that there is conditionality to the size of the effect. The topic of the ad, for example, affects the extent to which the sponsor experiences a backlash effect. One might expect that voters are much more likely to punish the sponsor for an ad they deem unfair (Lau & Rovner, 2009 ), and indeed, Mattes and Redlawsk ( 2014 ) find that ad topics that voters deem “inappropriate”—such as a candidate’s family or religious views—are significantly more likely to generate backlash.

Another factor affecting the extent to which a candidate who sponsors negativity may experience a backlash is candidate characteristics. For instance, research suggests that a candidate’s gender and race can condition the way people respond to negative ads sponsored by the candidate. Turning first to gender, research has suggested that female candidates can be somewhat more likely to experience a backlash for going negative (Herrnson, Lay, & Stokes, 2003 ; Hitchon, Chang, & Harris, 1997 ). One possible reason for the disproportionate backlash for female candidates may be the fact that sponsoring negative ads breaks with traditional gender stereotypes (Krupnikov & Bauer, 2014 ). At the same time, there is also some research to suggest that female candidates are actually no more likely to experience a backlash effect than similar male candidates (Gordon, Schafie, & Crigler, 2003 ). Moreover, as Fridkin, Kenney, and Woodall ( 2009 ) demonstrate, women candidates may be better able to withstand negative attacks from male opponents. Most recently, however, experimental evidence suggests that the relationship between candidate gender and the backlash effect is highly conditional and heavily dependent on partisanship: people are more likely to disproportionately punish female candidates only when they are members of the opposing party who are seen as instigators of negativity (Krupnikov & Bauer, 2014 ). In short, party is more powerful than gender when it comes to negativity.

Though there is relatively less research on the intersection between the sponsorship of negativity and candidate race, existing work suggests that there are certain conditions under which minority candidates may experience a greater backlash for sponsoring negative ads. In particular, people with negative racial attitudes are significantly more likely to punish a minority candidate who sponsors negativity than a white candidate who does the same (Krupnikov & Piston, 2015 ).

Another factor that may either strengthen or weaken the backlash effect is the ordering of negativity. A sponsor who is seen as the instigator of negativity, for example, is more likely to experience a backlash than a sponsor who simply responds to already-existing negative ads (Peterson & Djupe, 2005 ). A candidate who is seen as going negative “without provocation” is more likely to suffer at the hands of the voters than a candidate who sponsors an ad to “[retaliate] against a negative attack” (Lau & Rovner, 2009 , p. 292).

In sum, there is some evidence that negative ads can change the way individuals feel about the candidates either by lowering evaluations of the target, lowering evaluations of the sponsor, or both. Nonetheless, this evidence is highly conditional and, in some cases, quite limited. Negativity, for example, is unlikely to change minds and, as Lau et al. ( 2007 ) conclude, somewhat more likely to cause a backlash effect. Even then, the backlash effect is not universal but rather confined to highly specific, almost limited conditions. Taking this argument a step further, as Mattes and Redlawsk ( 2014 ) suggest, candidates are quite aware of the potential for a backlash, and for this reason the types of ads that are actually highly likely to lead to backlash effects are very rare or are sponsored by other entities—a topic we consider in the next section.

Does the Sponsor of the Negative Ad Matter?

Much of the research on campaign negativity has focused on negative ads sponsored by the candidates themselves, but recent work has turned its focus to the financial sponsorship of advertising. This shift in focus is in response to changes in campaign law that now allow ad sponsorship by independent groups (an entity that is not a candidate or a party that can legally pay for a political ad, but not in concert with a candidate: see Fowler & Ridout, 2010 , 2012 , 2014 ). In 2012 and 2014 , for example, these types of groups accounted for approximately 26% of all campaign ads—more than the parties (17%), and more than double the amount groups were responsible for in 2008 and 2010 (Fowler & Ridout, 2014 ). This trend alone suggests that examining whether the sponsor of ads matters for how they are processed by citizens is worthwhile. Examining whether the sponsor of negative ads matters in particular, however, is especially important given the rate at which groups sponsor negative ads—in 2012 , 85% of ads sponsored by groups were negative, whereas approximately 50% of candidate- and party-sponsored ads were negative (Fowler & Ridout, 2012 ).

Most of the work in this area has used experiments to test whether a negative ad has a different effect depending on who the sponsor is. These experimental investigations have for the most part compared ads sponsored by candidates to ads sponsored by independent groups, but a few studies have also examined whether ads sponsored by political parties have different effects than candidate- or group-sponsored ads. The evidence for differential effects of ads by sponsorship is somewhat mixed, although the preponderance of evidence at this point suggests that negative ads sponsored by groups tend to be the most effective (see Dowling & Wichowsky, 2015 , for a summary). What the mechanism is that causes these different effects, however, is still somewhat undetermined.

For instance, Brooks and Murov ( 2012 ) conducted an experiment in which they compared the effect of a negative ad sponsored by a candidate to the same ad sponsored by an unfamiliar group. They find that the ad sponsored by the group resulted in less backlash for the candidate than the one in which the candidate sponsored the ad himself, a difference they attribute to the inability of people to link the group-sponsored ad back to the candidate. Weber, Dunaway, and Johnson ( 2012 ) performed a similar experiment, but added a comparison of an ad sponsored by a known group (in this case, the National Rifle Association). They find that negative ads sponsored by both unknown and known groups are more effective than the same negative ad sponsored by the candidate, but that the unknown group ad was effective regardless of the subject’s feelings about the NRA whereas the NRA-sponsored ad was only effective for those already favorable to the NRA. As a result, Weber et al. ( 2012 ) attribute the differential effect of ad sponsorship to differences in source credibility, as known (and liked) groups and unknown groups were viewed as more credible than candidates.

Dowling and Wichowsky ( 2015 ) compared the effect of negative ads across three sponsorship conditions: candidate, party, and group. The results of their experimental studies suggest that negative ads sponsored by groups and sometimes parties (in one of two experiments the effect of party sponsorship is statistically distinguishable from the effect of candidate sponsorship) are more effective, primarily because they produce less backlash (consistent with Brooks & Murov, 2012 ). They also show that the effect of group sponsorship and party sponsorship varies by the type of ad—in one experiment the group-sponsored ad and the party-sponsored ad were equally effective, in another (using a different ad) the group-sponsored ad was more effective. Much like the other topics we have discussed, a finding from Dowling and Wichowsky ( 2015 ) illustrates another way in which the effect of negativity is often conditional. Specifically, they find that when an attack ad is not obviously partisan/ideological, a party-sponsored ad polarizes partisans. However, the same ad sponsored by an unknown group does not, most likely because of voters’ unfamiliarity with the group.

Given the relatively consistent finding that group-sponsored ads, particularly those sponsored by relatively unknown groups, permit (would-be) attacking candidates to escape backlash, recent work has also begun to address the question of whether more information about the groups alters the effectiveness of the ad. Both Dowling and Wichowsky ( 2013 ) and Ridout, Franz, and Fowler ( 2015 ) find that the disclosure of the largest donors (their names, occupations, and amount donated) to groups after the ad (either in a newspaper write-up or as a list) can limit the influence of group advertising. Although this finding has important implications for campaign strategy and campaign finance law, more work on donor disclosure is needed to determine the generalizability of the experimental findings to the real-world, campaign context.

In sum, there is an accumulating body of evidence that the effect of negative advertising does depend on ad sponsor type. It is less clear, however, what mechanism accounts for this difference. Likely explanations are differences in source credibility across sponsors and the ability of candidates to escape backlash when a group (and, to a lesser extent, party) is the sponsor, but more work is needed to disentangle these mechanisms from one another.

Why and When Do Candidates Turn to Negativity?

Using a negative ad does not guarantee success. Rather, there is a possible backlash to using negativity—a backlash that can be escaped, at least somewhat, if the candidate is not the sponsor—and the effects of negativity are somewhat ambiguous. Why, then, would a candidate ever be willing to sponsor a negative advertisement? Research on the strategic use of negativity suggests that candidates do not turn to negativity when their campaigns are going well. Rather, reliance on negativity is, in some sense, a strategy of desperation.

Using a formal model, Skaperdas and Grofman ( 1995 ) show that a candidate who is ahead in the polls is less likely to turn to negativity than a candidate who is trailing. Although some have criticized the Skaperdas and Grofman model (see, e.g., Buell & Sigelman, 2008 ; Harrington & Hess, 1996 ), there is some empirical research to suggest that their predictions do bear out (Theilmann & Wilhite, 1998 ). The idea that a trailing candidate might be more likely to risk going negative in a last-ditch attempt to undermine the front-runner would also follow from the idea that negativity may cause a backlash. The front-runner may not want to risk criticism in return for the possibility that a negative ad may in some way decrease support for his or her opponent. Indeed, Buell and Sigelman ( 2008 ) find that the trailing candidate is most likely to go negative when the campaign can be described as a “blowout,” which reinforces at least some desperation in the use of negativity by the losing candidate.

Aside from the Skaperdas and Grofman model, other scholars have attempted to consider the strategic use of negativity through observational data. One of the most consistent findings, for example, is that negativity is more likely to appear in more competitive races (Hale, Fox, & Farmer, 1996 ; Kahn & Kenney, 1999 ). Controlling for several other explanatory factors, Lau and Pomper ( 2001 ) show that candidates are also much more likely to go negative when they have less money than their opponents and when they have already been attacked. Thus, the more negativity there is early on in a campaign, the more likely it is the race will take on an overall negative tone (Kahn & Kenney, 1999 ).

Focusing on another candidate characteristic, Peterson and Djupe ( 2005 ) argue that incumbency status underlies the decision to turn to negativity, with challengers being more likely to rely on negative ads than incumbents. Although not all research has found similar support for the idea that a challenger is more likely to rely on negativity than an incumbent (Lau & Pomper, 2001 ), negativity may still be a more critical component of a challenger’s strategy than an incumbent’s strategy. As Mattes and Redlawsk note:

The most likely effect of banning negativity would be eliminating the ability of challengers to effectively campaign against incumbents. If a challenger cannot talk about her opponent, cannot describe what a miserable failure he is, and cannot explain to voters why they should not vote for him again, what is left for the challenger to do? ( 2014 , p. 203)

In sum, several factors emerge as pivotal to the tone of the campaign: (1) closeness of the race, (2) incumbency status, (3) funding, and (4) being attacked. This is not to argue that the sheer presence of these four factors will produce a negative campaign. Certainly, each campaign has its own nuances and particularities, and as a result, “a multitude of factors … figure importantly in candidates’ decisions to go negative” (Buell & Sigelman, 2008 , p. 442). Nonetheless, these four factors at the very least increase the chance that a candidate becomes more likely to consider the possibility of going negative.

While the above research focuses on the American case, Walter, van den Brug, and van Praag ( 2014 ) consider the conditions under which candidates turn to negativity in a comparative prospective. Focusing on Britain, Germany, and the Netherlands, the authors consider what leads different parties to rely on negative ads. Looking beyond America, the study considers both electoral institutions and party characteristics, suggesting that it is party characteristics—such as governmental experience—that matter most in the emergence of negativity. This research provides an important extension to the factors that lead political actors to negative campaigning.

Is Negativity Different When It Is on the Internet?

The previous sections have largely considered televised negativity. More and more, however, candidates have turned to the Internet as an additional medium by which to reach voters. Indeed, most modern campaigns include a large web-based component, utilizing not only candidate websites but also social media sites such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.

There are a number of benefits to web-based campaigning. Internet campaigning is lower cost, allows candidates to respond much more quickly, allows candidates to interact with voters, and provides candidates with unlimited space to transmit their message (Kaid, 2002 , 2006 ). This last point is important: since televised ads are time-limited, candidates have to choose precisely which messages they want to transmit in the short amount of time they have. On the Internet, candidates can launch negative attacks on opponents without limiting the amount of time they have to promote themselves (Druckman et al., 2010 ).

Pinpointing exactly how the use of web-based advertising techniques has affected the role of negativity in politics is difficult. Some suggest the effects of web and televised advertising will naturally differ due to powerful differences in the media. This effect has generally been termed the “innovation hypothesis.” Others suggest that we are unlikely to observe strong differences—over time, web campaigning should become quite similar to televised campaigning. This effect falls under the “normalization hypothesis.”

Recent research suggests more evidence for the normalization hypothesis. Druckman et al. ( 2010 ), for example, conducted a thorough study of candidate websites, comparing the rates of negativity on websites to the rates of televised negativity. They find that the rates are largely equivalent: candidates are just as likely to go negative on websites as they are to go negative on television. Such a similarity suggests that we have not seen the marked changes in campaign styles that the innovation hypothesis would predict.

What is more, the forces that appear to drive candidates to go negative in televised campaigns are the same forces that appear to lead candidates to go negative on the web. Challengers, candidates in competitive races, and candidates in open seat races are more likely to rely on televised negative ads, and the very same types of candidates are also more likely to engage in negativity online (Druckman et al., 2010 ).

If candidates rely on similar negative campaigning strategies online as they do on television, is online negative campaigning having a different effect when exposure is via the Internet? To date, there have been few studies that have empirically tested the potential differences in the power of online and televised negative ads.

Remaining Questions

Research on campaign negativity has produced a set of rich, empirically diverse findings. What this broad set of results suggests is that negative campaigning has a highly nuanced effect on American politics. Although criticisms of negativity by the mainstream media, politicians, and even voters may suggest that this type of campaigning has consistent deleterious effects on the political process, empirical research shows this is not the case. Although negativity can influence political outcomes, it only does so for certain candidates and under specific campaign conditions. Moreover, while the overall negative tone is in itself important, the very content of the ad—i.e., what, in particular, is being criticized—also plays a key role in the extent to which negativity is influential. Voters, for example, do not dislike all negative ads, just as not all negative ads produce a backlash against the sponsor.

Although existing research has tackled numerous questions about the role of negativity in politics, additional questions remain, and these questions can set the foundation for a fruitful future research agenda on negativity. People, for example, do not receive negative ads in a vacuum. Negativity comes within the context of a particular campaign or even within the broader context of other American political events. Do people respond differently to negativity during a campaign that has been particularly contentious? Moreover, research on framing suggests that people take cues from elites and respond to frames differently under conditions of strong elite polarization (Druckman, Peterson, & Slothuus, 2013 ). Can polarization also affect responses to negativity? In particular, could polarization increase the likelihood of backlash against the sponsor and thereby decrease the effectiveness of negative advertising?

Existing empirical research suggests that candidate characteristics affect the extent to which they benefit from relying on negativity. Candidate race and gender, for example, can limit their advertising strategy. Although there is a good deal of work on the intersection of gender and campaign advertising, there is less work on candidate race. Future work, then, can further explore how the race of the candidate affects people’s responsiveness to negative advertising sponsored by this candidate and whether minority candidates are differentially effected by campaign negativity.

Next, existing research shows that the sponsor of the ad does matter. People respond differently to negative ads sponsored by the candidate than to negative ads sponsored by independent groups. Less clear, however, are the mechanisms underlying these differences. Future research, then, may focus on understanding why differences in sponsorship produce this variation in response, exploring individual understanding of ad sponsorship in greater depth.

The bulk of the existing research on campaign negativity focuses on advertising. At the same time, however, a good deal of negativity stems from sources such as candidate speeches, debates, and media discussions. People, research suggests, respond quite strongly to conflict and disagreements they see on news programs (Mutz, 2015 ), and future research could consider whether criticisms levied in speeches and interviews have a more powerful effect than criticisms presented through sponsored ads. Alternatively, criticisms may be viewed as more “fair” and “honest” when they are brought up as part of a public speech by a candidate than when they are part of an advertisement.

Finally, people are now receiving more and more negativity via the web. Although Druckman et al. ( 2010 ) document the use of negativity on candidate websites, research has yet to consider whether campaign negativity transmitted via the web affects people differently than televised campaign advertising. On the one hand, Internet negativity may have no distinguishable effect from more “traditional” forms of negative advertising. As Druckman et al. ( 2010 ) find, candidates turn to negativity on their websites under conditions strikingly similar to those under which candidates turn to negative advertising on television. This overlap in strategy suggests that although the mode may be different, the effects of web-based negativity may mimic those of televised negativity. On the other hand, negativity on the web may come in forms that are different from traditional televised negativity. Negative web ads may be embedded in websites that have little to do with politics, and it is possible that (at least for the next several election cycles) web ads may take more people by surprise than televised ads. Furthermore, it is possible that web-based negative ads may come with commentary and could be shared by people via social media. As a result, the change in mode from television to the Internet may also result in a change of effect, and web-based negative ads may lead to different outcomes than televised ads. This is, of course, an empirical question and one that scholars have yet to explore fully.

In sum, existing literature on campaign negativity has highlighted important debates (e.g., the relationship between negativity and turnout) and important areas for consideration (e.g., the role of ad sponsorship). In doing so, this research has set a strong foundation for future work. As of this writing, modern campaigns show no signs of growing more positive, more groups are sponsoring advertising, and campaigns are becoming more and more focused on the web. If the campaign process continues in this direction, it is likely that campaign negativity will continue to be a crucial factor and scholarship on negativity will continue apace.

• Ansolabehere, S. , & Iyengar, S. (1995). Going negative: How political advertisements shrink & polarize the electorate . New York: Free Press.
• Ansolabehere, S. , Iyengar, S. , Simon, A. , & Valentino, N. (1994). Does attack advertising demobilize the electorate? American Political Science Review , 88 (4), 829–838.
• Brader, T. (2006). Campaigning for hearts and minds . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Brooks, D. J. , & Geer, J. G. (2007). Beyond negativity: The effects of incivility on the electorate. American Journal of Political Science , 51 (1), 1–16.
• Brooks, D. J. , & Murov, M. (2012). Assessing accountability in a post- Citizens United era: The effects of attack ad sponsorship by unknown independent groups. American Politics Research , 40 (3), 383–418.
• Buell, E. , & Sigelman, L. (2008). Attack politics: Negativity in presidential campaigns since 1960 . Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
• Dowling, C. M. , & Wichowsky, A. (2013). Does it matter who’s behind the curtain? Anonymity in political advertising and the effects of campaign finance disclosure. American Politics Research , 41 (6), 965–996.
• Dowling, C. M. , & Wichowsky, A. (2015). Attacks without consequence? Candidates, parties, groups and the changing face of negative advertising. American Journal of Political Science , 59 (1), 19–36.
• Druckman, J. N. , Martin J. Kifer, M. J. , & Parkin, M. (2010). Timeless strategy meets new medium: Going negative on congressional campaign web sites, 2002–2006. Political Communication, 27 (1), 88–103.
• Druckman, J. N. , Peterson, E. , & Slothuus, R. (2013). How elite polarization affects public opinion formation. American Political Science Review, 107 (1), 57–79.
• Finkel, S. E. , & Geer, J. G. (1998). A spot check: Casting doubt on the demobilizing effect of attack advertising. American Journal of Political Science , 42 (2), 573–595.
• Fowler, E. F. , & Ridout, T. N. (2010). Advertising trends in 2010. The Forum , 8 (4), Article 4, 16.
• Fowler, E. F. , & Ridout, T. N. (2012). Negative, angry and ubiquitous: Political advertising in 2012. The Forum , 10 (4), 51–61.
• Fowler, E. F. , & Ridout, T. N. (2014). Political advertising in 2014: The year of the outside group. The Forum , 12 (4), 663–684.
• Freedman, P. , Wood, W. , & Lawton, D. (1999). Do’s and don’ts of negative ads: what voters say. Campaigns & Elections, 20 (October/November), 20–25.
• Franz, M. , Freedman, P. , Goldstein, K. M. , & Ridout, T. N. (2007). Campaign advertising and american democracy . Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
• Fridkin, K. L. , Kenney, P. J. , & Woodall, G. S. (2009). Bad for men, better for women: The impact of stereotypes during political campaigns. Political Behavior, 31 , 53–77.
• Garramone, G. M. (1985). Effects of negative political advertising: Clarifying sponsor effects. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media , 29 (2), 147–159.
• Geer, J. G. (2006). In defense of negativity: Attack ads in presidential campaigns . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Geer, J. G. , & Geer, J. H. (2003). Remembering attack ads: An experimental investigation of radio. Political Behavior , 25 (1), 69–95.
• Goldstein, K. , & Freedman, P. (2002). Campaign advertising and voter turnout: New evidence for a stimulation effect. Journal of Politics , 64 (3), 721–740.
• Gordon, A. , Shafie, D. M. , & Crigler, A. N. (2003). Is negative advertising effective for female candidates?: An experiment in voters’ uses of gender stereotypes. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics , 8 , 35–53.
• Hale, J. , Fox, J. C. , & Farmer, R. (1996). Negative advertisements in US senate campaigns: The influence of campaign context. Social Science Quarterly , 77 (2), 329–343.
• Harrington, J. E., Jr. , & Hess, G. (1996). A spatial theory of positive and negative campaigning. Games and Economic Behavior, 17 (2), 209–229.
• Herrnson, P. S. , Lay, J. C. , & Stokes, A. K. (2003). Women running as women: Candidate gender, campaign issues, and voter-targeting strategies. Journal of Politics , 65 (1), 244–255.
• Hitchon, J. C. , Chang, C. , & Harris, R. (1997). Should women emote? Perceptual bias and opinion change in response to political ads for candidates of different genders. Political Communication , 14 (1), 49–69.
• Jamieson, K. H. (1992). Dirty politics: Deception, distraction and democracy . New York: Oxford University Press.
• Jamieson, K. H. (2000). Everything you think you know about politics…and why you’re wrong . New York: Basic Books.
• Kahn, K. F. , & Kenney, P. (1999). Do negative campaigns mobilize or suppress turnout? Clarifying the relationship between negativity and participation. American Political Science Review , 93 (4), 877–889.
• Kahn, K. F. , & Kenney, P. (2004). No holds barred: Negativity in U.S. senate campaigns . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
• Kaid, L. L. (2002). Political advertising and information seeking: Comparing exposure via traditional and internet channels. Journal of Advertising, 31 (1), 27–35.
• Kaid, L. L. (2006). Political web wars: The use of the Internet for political advertising. In A. P. Williams & J. C. Tedesco (Eds.), The Internet election (pp. 67–82). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Krasno, J. , & Green, D. (2008). Do televised presidential ads increase voter turnout? Evidence from a natural experiment. Journal of Politics , 70 (1), 245–261.
• Krupnikov, Y. (2011). When does negativity demobilize? Tracing the conditional effect of negative campaigning on voter turnout. American Journal of Political Science , 55 (4), 797–813.
• Krupnikov, Y. (2012). Negative advertising and voter choice: The role of ads in candidate selection. Political Communication , 29 (4), 387–413.
• Krupnikov, Y. (2014). How negativity can increase and decrease voter turnout: The effect of timing. Political Communication , 31 (3), 446–466.
• Krupnikov, Y. , & Bauer, N. (2014). The relationship between campaign negativity, gender and campaign context. Political Behavior , 36 (1), 167–188.
• Krupnikov, Y. , & Piston, S. (2015). Accentuating the negative: Candidate race and campaign strategy. Political Communication , 32 (1), 152–173.
• Lau, R. , & Pomper, G. (2001). Negative campaigning by U.S. Senate candidates Party Politics , 7 , 69–87.
• Lau, R. , & Rovner, I. B. (2009). Negative campaigning. Annual Review of Political Science , 12 , 285–306.
• Lau, R. , Sigelman, L. , & Rovner, I. B. (2007). The effects of negative political campaigns: A meta-analytic reassessment. Journal of Politics , 69 (4), 1176–1209.
• Mattes, K. , & Redlawsk, D. P. (2014). The positive case for negative campaigning . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Mutz, D. C. (2015). In-your-face politics: The consequences of uncivil media . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Peterson, D. A. M. , & Djupe, P. A. (2005). When primary campaigns go negative: The determinants of campaign negativity. Political Research Quarterly , 58 (1), 45–54.
• Ridout, T. N. , Franz, M. M. , & Fowler, E. F. (2015). Sponsorship, disclosure, and donors: Limiting the impact of outside group ads. Political Research Quarterly, 68 (1), 154–166.
• Skaperdas, S. , & Grofman, B. (1995). Modeling negative campaigning. American Political Science Review , 89 (1), 49–61.
• Theilmann, J. , & Alan Wilhite, A. (1998). Campaign tactics and the decision to attack. Journal of Politics , 60 (4), 1050–1062.
• Walter, A. , van der Brug, W. , & van Praag, P. (2014). When the stakes are high: Party competition and negative campaigning. Comparative Political Studie s, 47 (4), 550–573.
• Wattenberg, M. P. , & Brians, C. L. (1999). Negative campaign advertising: Demobilizer or mobilizer? American Political Science Review , 93 (4), 891–899.
• Weber, C. , Dunaway, J. , & Johnson, T. (2012). It’s all in the name: Source cue ambiguity and the persuasive appeal of campaign ads. Political Behavior , 34 (3), 561–584.

1. AARP Political Campaign Process Survey, October 20–26, 2011. N = 1027, national adult sample.

2. As cited in Geer ( 2006 ).

3. Campaign Conduct Survey, Lake, Snell, Perry & Associates, June 6 to June 11, 2002; 800 interviews with likely voters.

4. Ipsos-Public Affairs, October 9 to October 13, 2008. N = 1,131, national adult sample.

5. Brooks and Geer ( 2007 ) rely on data from a 2000 Gallup poll.

6. Some have also called this the “boomerang effect.”

Related Articles

• Using Experiments to Understand How Agency Influences Media Effects
• Real-Time Responses to Campaign Communication
• The Content and Effect of Political Advertising in U.S. Campaigns

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Politics. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 23 August 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [195.190.12.77]
• 195.190.12.77

Character limit 500 /500

Positive and Negative Effects of Advertisement

This is the age of digitalization and globalization. Because of this, the entire world seems to be just a very large village. There are also many private and public businesses these days than ever. And because of that more companies are investing in marketing or advertising about their products and services than ever. Before proceeding any further it is important to understand what advertising really is. And according to different experts, an advertisement can be defined as a type of marketing conversation which consists of a calculated approach through which a company notifies its target audience regarding its products and services in a very proactive and strategic manner. The importance of advertising has grown so much over the years that now it is considered to be one of the most essential factors to the growth and success of any particular business or company. However, just like anything else in life, there are bound to be positive and negative effects of advertising. And in this academic writing piece, readers will be able to learn about positive advertising, negative advertising, positive and negative effects of advertising, and the effects of advertising to children.

An Introduction to Advertisement and its Types

Advertising can be defined as the process of effectively notifying the target audience of a business or a company regarding its products and services. According to various experts, there are different key components of advertising. And some of those key components of advertising are

• Studies on the demographic
• Targeting marketing identification
• Creating advertising and marketing campaigns
• Developing and implementing various publicity and promotional campaigns
• Development of different social media accounts, advertisements, branding strategies, and websites
• Targeting various community outreach programs and handling campaigns of public relations

These are the major components of advertisements. It is also important for readers to remember that there are majorly two different types of advertisements. And those two different types of advertisements are mentioned below.

• Positive Advertising

According to experts, positive advertising is more appealing to an average individual than negative advertising techniques. Positive advertising can be defined as some sort of marketing strategies which show the target audience all the positive effects which one can receive due to any particular product or service. Positive advertising techniques are optimistic and persuade customers to switch to the desired product or services. Positive advertising is also more common than negative advertising. Positive advertising techniques allow customers to trust the company in question more easily.

• Negative Advertising

Negative advertising, on the other hand, is the advertisements which work by warning the consumers about the negative consequences of some habit or behavior. A good example of negative advertising could be smoking advertisements. It is important for readers to remember that even negative advertising strategies have many positive elements in it.

These are the two main types of advertisements. It is also vital for the readers to keep in mind that with the advancement of science and technology, there is also a growth in the number of different forms or mediums of advertisements. And some of the common forms of advertisements are social media advertisements, print media advertisements, television advertisements, radio advertisements, direct mail advertisements, electronic mail advertisements, and many other forms of advertisements. There have also been a number of debates which tend to judge the effectiveness of each of these forms of advertisements. However, it is important for one to note that no form of advertisements is simply better than the rest but instead, the selection of the most effective form of advertisement depends upon the company and the target audience of that company.

Most Effective Techniques of Advertisement

In this section, the readers will be able to learn about the important techniques of effective advertising. And some of those techniques are mentioned below.

• Bolder Headline

It is important to remember that it is the headline of an advertisement which is the main point of contact between any particular business and its target audience. Hence, the headline should be intriguing and informative. It should also be ideally able to generate an emotional response.

• Cross Promotions

One of the most effective ways of promoting your business is by collaborating with other businesses. If companies engage in a very well thought out cross promotional strategy than that can be beneficial for both the parties involved.

• Using Humor

Using humor content is one of the most fantastic ways of gaining more customers as it tends to be one of the most memorable forms of advertisements.

• Internet Marketing

There are millions of internet users all across the globe. And because of that companies and business can tap into the large spectrum of internet marketing to experience possible an exponential growth.

These are some of the most effective strategies of advertising. In the next sections, readers will be able to learn about the effects for advertising and the effects of advertising to children.

The Positive Effects of Advertisement

There are many positive effects of advertising both for the company and the consumers. And some of those positive effects are mentioned below.

• Social Benefits

There are many social benefits which advertisements can provide. For example, advertisements can highlight various social issues and promote free speech in nations where it might still be suppressed. This is a very important effect of advertisement. It is also important to remember that it is the freedom of speech and advertising-supported content which are the promoters of various social changes.

• Economic Benefits

According to research, advertisements can make companies and businesses compete to provide higher quality products and services. This ensures that more high-quality products and services are available in the markets which are able to meet the needs and requirements of all customers. This is a very important positive effect of advertisement.

• Free Entertainment

Another important effect of advertisement is that it provides all viewers with a free form of entertainment without getting anything back as a guarantee.

• Mass Communication

The most important effect of advertisement is that it has enabled the various forms of mass media to exist in the form which it does today.

These are the biggest positive effects of advertising.

The Negative Effects of Advertisement

In this last section, readers will be able to learn about the negative effects of advertisements. And some of those negative effects of advertisements are mentioned below.

• Misrepresentation

All advertisements tend to display the products and services in the best possible light. And many advertisements often tend to cross the line of a little exaggeration to utterly falsely representing the product or the service. There are many government organization which charges hefty fines for misrepresentation.

• False Image

Advertisements tend to invade all possible spheres and because of that one can often develop a false image. This false image also often tends to make an individual feel bad about himself or herself. This is also one of the negative effects of advertising to children.

• Unrealistic Expectation

This negative effect is common in case products which tend to exaggerate regarding its effectiveness. It sets unrealistic expectations which are hard to meet.

These are the major negative effects of advertising.

The Conclusion:

Advertising is a form of marketing communication through which a business or an organization informs the target audience about its products and services. There are two major types of advertisements. And those are positive and negative advertisements. There are also many forms of advertisements. There are also many negative and positive effects of advertisements like the unrealistic expectations, false image, and the social and economic benefits of advertisements.

The References

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertising

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/advertisement-ad.html

https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/best-advertisements

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/definition/advertising

https://smallbusiness.chron.com/top-five-advertising-techniques-21367.html

https://smallbusiness.chron.com/5-common-advertising-techniques-15273.html

https://www.weidert.com/whole_brain_marketing_blog/bid/108524/top-10-most-effective-marketing-strategies

https://medium.com/@James.Ashley/negative-positive-effects-of-advertising-9242650ae767

https://smallbusiness.chron.com/positive-effects-advertising-24688.html

• Argumentative
• Ecocriticism
• Informative
• Explicatory
• Illustrative
• Problem Solution
• Interpretive
• Music Analysis
• All Essay Examples
• Entertainment
• Law, Crime & Punishment
• Artificial Intelligence
• Environment
• Geography & Travel
• Government & Politics
• Nursing & Health
• Information Science and Technology
• All Essay Topics

Effects of Advertising on Positive and Negative

Advertising is a powerful tool in the modern world, influencing individuals and society as a whole in both positive and negative ways. On the positive side, advertising plays a crucial role in informing consumers about new products and services, helping them make informed purchasing decisions. Additionally, advertising often serves as a source of entertainment through creative and engaging content. However, the negative effects of advertising cannot be ignored, as it can perpetuate unrealistic beauty standards, promote materialism, and manipulate consumer behavior.

One of the most significant positive effects of advertising is its ability to provide valuable information to consumers. Through advertisements, people become aware of new products, services, and innovations in the market. This awareness empowers consumers to make informed choices, compare products, and select the best options suited to their needs. For instance, a person looking to purchase a new smartphone can learn about the latest features and specifications through advertisements, enabling them to make a well-informed decision. Thus, advertising contributes to a more knowledgeable and empowered consumer base.

Moreover, advertising has evolved beyond just conveying product information; it has become a form of entertainment in itself. Creative and visually appealing advertisements have the potential to captivate audiences and leave a lasting impression. Whether it's a clever commercial, a humorous print ad, or an emotionally compelling video, advertising has the power to evoke various emotions and engage consumers on a deeper level. This entertainment aspect of advertising not only makes it more enjoyable for the audience but also elevates brand recognition and affinity.

On the flip side, advertising has its negative effects, with one of the most prominent being the perpetuation of unrealistic beauty standards. In many advertisements, especially those related to beauty and fashion, there is a tendency to portray unattainable ideals of physical perfection. This can lead to body image issues, low self-esteem, and a distorted perception of beauty among individuals, especially young people. As a result, the pressure to conform to these unrealistic standards can have detrimental effects on mental and emotional well-being.

Additionally, advertising has been criticized for promoting materialism and excessive consumerism. The constant exposure to advertisements showcasing luxurious lifestyles, status symbols, and the latest trends can fuel a culture of consumption, where people are driven to acquire more and more material possessions. This consumerist mindset not only contributes to environmental issues and resource depletion but also fosters a sense of dissatisfaction and inadequacy when individuals are unable to attain the lifestyle portrayed in advertisements.

Furthermore, advertising has the potential to manipulate consumer behavior through persuasive techniques and subliminal messaging. By leveraging psychological tactics and emotional triggers, advertisers can influence people's choices and preferences, sometimes without their conscious awareness. This manipulation of consumer behavior raises ethical concerns about the boundaries of advertising and the impact it has on individuals' autonomy and decision-making.

In conclusion, advertising has a dual nature, with both positive and negative effects on individuals and society. While it serves as a source of information and entertainment, empowering consumers and boosting economic activity, it also has the capacity to perpetuate harmful stereotypes, foster materialism, and manipulate consumer behavior. As advertising continues to evolve in the digital age, it is essential to critically evaluate its impact and advocate for responsible and ethical advertising practices.

Related Essays

• Positive And Negative Effects Of Advertising
• The Positive and Negative Effects of Advertising on Consumer Behavior
• Positive And Negative Effects Of Advertising On Social Media
• Positive And Negative Effects Of Smartphones
• Positive And Negative Effects Of Listening To Music

Popularity In Adolescence Is A Positive Or Negative Effects Of Popularity Research

Popularity in Adolescence: A Double-Edged Sword Popularity in adolescence is a topic that often invokes a mix of envy, admiration, and curiosity. For many, being popular is seen as the pinnacle of social success, a status that promises acceptance, validation, and influence. However, the reality is far more nuanced, with popularity in adolescence often resembling a double-edged sword, bringing both benefits and drawbacks to those who wield it. On one hand, popularity can offer numerous advantages to adolescents. It can provide them with a sense of belonging and acceptance within their peer group, fostering positive self-esteem and confidence. Popular individuals may enjoy greater social opportunities, such as invitations to parties, events, and gatherings, which can enhance their social skills and networks. Moreover, popularity can sometimes translate into leadership roles, where influential adolescents may exert a positive influence on their peers, promoting cooperation, inclusion, and positive behaviors within their social circles. However, the pursuit and maintenance of popularity can also exact a toll on adolescents, both psychologically and emotionally. The pressure to conform to societal norms and expectations of popularity can lead to identity struggles and a loss of authenticity as adolescents may prioritize fitting in over staying true to themselves. Additionally, the competitive nature of popularity dynamics can foster exclusionary behaviors, cliques, and social hierarchies, leaving many adolescents feeling marginalized or left out. Moreover, the quest for popularity can sometimes lead adolescents down risky paths, as they may engage in behaviors aimed at boosting their social status, such as substance use, bullying, or compromising their values to gain acceptance. This can have detrimental effects on their well-being and future prospects, potentially leading to academic difficulties, mental health issues, or even legal consequences. In conclusion, while popularity in adolescence may offer certain advantages, it is essential to recognize the complexities and potential pitfalls associated with it. Rather than viewing popularity as a definitive measure of social success, adolescents and those who support them should prioritize cultivating authentic relationships, self-confidence, and personal values. By fostering environments that celebrate diversity, inclusivity, and individuality, we can help adolescents navigate the complexities of adolescence with resilience and integrity, ensuring that popularity remains but one aspect of their multifaceted social experience....

• Social Issues
• Human Rights
• Social Movements
• Social Inequality

positives and negative effects of the fashion

Fashion is a powerful form of self-expression that has the ability to influence individuals and society as a whole. From the latest trends on the runway to street style, fashion plays a significant role in shaping our culture and identity. However, like any other aspect of society, fashion has its positives and negatives effects. On the positive side, fashion allows individuals to express their creativity and personality. Through clothing choices, people can showcase their unique style and make a statement about who they are. Fashion can be empowering, giving individuals the confidence to express themselves in a way that feels authentic and true to their identity. Additionally, fashion can be a form of art, with designers creating beautiful and innovative pieces that push the boundaries of creativity. Furthermore, fashion can also have a positive economic impact. The fashion industry is a multi-billion dollar industry that creates jobs and drives economic growth. From designers and models to manufacturers and retailers, the fashion industry employs millions of people around the world. Fashion shows and events also attract tourists and generate revenue for cities and countries. On the other hand, fashion can also have negative effects. One of the biggest criticisms of the fashion industry is its impact on the environment. The production of clothing often involves the use of harmful chemicals and excessive water consumption, leading to pollution and environmental degradation. Additionally, the fast fashion industry promotes a culture of overconsumption and waste, as trends change rapidly and clothing is often discarded after only a few wears. Moreover, the pressure to conform to societal beauty standards perpetuated by the fashion industry can have negative effects on individuals' self-esteem and body image. The promotion of unrealistic and unattainable beauty ideals can lead to feelings of inadequacy and low self-worth. This can contribute to mental health issues such as anxiety and depression, as individuals strive to meet these impossible standards. In conclusion, while fashion can be a powerful form of self-expression and creativity, it also has its drawbacks. It is important for individuals to be mindful of the impact of their fashion choices and for the industry to work towards more sustainable and ethical practices. By being conscious consumers and supporting brands that prioritize social and environmental responsibility, we can help mitigate the negative effects of the fashion industry and promote a more positive and inclusive fashion culture....

• Fashion and Dress
• Technology Companies
• E-commerce Trends and Challenges

Positive And Negative Effects Of The Central Valley

The centralization of power and decision-making can have both positive and negative effects on a society. On one hand, centralization can lead to more efficient governance and decision-making processes. When power is concentrated in the hands of a few individuals or a single entity, it can be easier to implement policies and enact changes quickly. This can be especially beneficial in times of crisis or emergency when swift action is necessary. Centralization can also help to streamline processes and reduce bureaucracy, leading to cost savings and increased productivity. However, centralization can also have negative consequences. One of the main drawbacks of centralization is the potential for abuse of power. When power is concentrated in the hands of a few, there is a risk that those individuals may act in their own self-interest rather than in the best interest of the society as a whole. This can lead to corruption, nepotism, and favoritism, which can undermine the legitimacy of the government and erode public trust. Centralization can also stifle innovation and creativity, as decision-making is limited to a small group of individuals who may not have the diverse perspectives and expertise needed to address complex issues. Another negative effect of centralization is the potential for inequality and marginalization. When power is concentrated in the hands of a few, marginalized groups may be excluded from the decision-making process and their needs and concerns may be overlooked. This can exacerbate existing social inequalities and lead to further marginalization of vulnerable populations. Centralization can also limit the ability of local communities to govern themselves and make decisions that are in their best interest, leading to a loss of autonomy and self-determination. In conclusion, the centralization of power and decision-making can have both positive and negative effects on a society. While centralization can lead to more efficient governance and decision-making processes, it can also result in abuse of power, inequality, and marginalization. It is important for societies to strike a balance between centralization and decentralization, ensuring that power is distributed in a way that promotes transparency, accountability, and inclusivity. By carefully considering the potential consequences of centralization, societies can work towards creating a more just and equitable system of governance....

• Political Science & Theory
• Global Economy

The Positive And Negative Effects Of Schools Influences On Individuals

Schools play a pivotal role in shaping the future of individuals and societies. On one hand, they offer numerous benefits such as providing education, fostering socialization, and promoting personal development. However, schools also have their drawbacks, including issues like academic pressure, social hierarchies, and conformity. In this essay, we will explore both the positive and negative effects of schools. One of the most significant positive effects of schools is the opportunity they provide for education. Schools serve as institutions where individuals can acquire knowledge, skills, and competencies that are essential for personal and professional success. Through structured curricula and qualified educators, students gain a broad understanding of various subjects ranging from mathematics to literature. This educational foundation equips them with the tools needed to navigate the complexities of the modern world and contribute meaningfully to society. Moreover, schools facilitate socialization, which is crucial for personal development. Interacting with peers and teachers in a classroom setting enables students to learn important social skills such as communication, cooperation, and empathy. These interpersonal relationships not only enrich their educational experience but also prepare them for future interactions in the workplace and beyond. Additionally, schools often organize extracurricular activities and events that foster camaraderie and a sense of belonging among students, further enhancing their social development. Despite these positive aspects, schools also have their share of negative effects. One notable drawback is the pressure to perform academically. In today's competitive educational landscape, students often feel overwhelmed by the demands of exams, assignments, and expectations from parents and teachers. This academic pressure can lead to stress, anxiety, and even burnout, adversely affecting students' mental health and well-being. Moreover, the emphasis on standardized testing may limit creativity and critical thinking, as students are incentivized to memorize information rather than engage in deep learning. Another negative effect of schools is the perpetuation of social hierarchies and peer pressure. Within the school environment, students may experience bullying, exclusion, or discrimination based on factors such as gender, race, or socioeconomic status. This can have profound negative effects on their self-esteem and sense of belonging, leading to feelings of alienation and isolation. Furthermore, schools may inadvertently reinforce societal norms and stereotypes, constraining individuality and diversity. In conclusion, schools have both positive and negative effects on individuals and society. While they provide invaluable opportunities for education and socialization, they also pose challenges such as academic pressure and social hierarchies. By recognizing and addressing these issues, educators and policymakers can strive to create school environments that maximize the benefits while mitigating the drawbacks, ensuring that every student has the opportunity to thrive and fulfill their potential....

The Positive And Negative Effects Of Urbanization And Developing Countries

Urbanization, the process of population concentration in cities and towns, has both positive and negative effects on societies and the environment. On one hand, urbanization facilitates economic growth, technological advancement, and cultural exchange. On the other hand, it can lead to environmental degradation, social inequality, and public health challenges. This essay examines the positive and negative impacts of urbanization, highlighting the complexities of this ongoing global phenomenon. One of the significant positive effects of urbanization is economic development. Cities serve as hubs for commerce, industry, and innovation, attracting investment and fostering entrepreneurial activities. Urban areas offer employment opportunities in various sectors, ranging from manufacturing and services to information technology and finance. As a result, urbanization drives economic growth, increases productivity, and improves living standards for many people. Moreover, urban centers often provide access to better infrastructure, including transportation networks, healthcare facilities, and educational institutions, further enhancing economic opportunities and quality of life. Furthermore, urbanization facilitates cultural exchange and social interaction, leading to cultural diversity and creativity. Cities are melting pots of different cultures, languages, and traditions, where people from diverse backgrounds come together, share ideas, and collaborate on artistic, educational, and social projects. Cultural diversity enriches urban life, promotes tolerance and understanding, and fosters creativity and innovation. Urban centers often host cultural events, festivals, and exhibitions that celebrate diversity and contribute to the cultural vibrancy of societies. However, urbanization also brings about negative consequences, including environmental degradation and resource depletion. Rapid urban growth leads to increased demand for land, water, and energy, resulting in habitat loss, air and water pollution, and deforestation. Urban areas generate large amounts of waste and emissions, contributing to climate change and environmental degradation. Moreover, urban sprawl and inadequate urban planning can exacerbate environmental problems, leading to traffic congestion, loss of biodiversity, and degradation of natural ecosystems. Another significant negative effect of urbanization is social inequality and exclusion. While cities offer economic opportunities and social mobility for some, they also perpetuate disparities and marginalization for others. Urban poverty, homelessness, and unemployment are prevalent in many cities, leading to social unrest and political instability. Moreover, unequal access to essential services such as housing, healthcare, education, and sanitation exacerbates social inequalities and undermines social cohesion. Addressing these challenges requires comprehensive urban policies that promote inclusive growth, equitable distribution of resources, and social justice. In conclusion, urbanization has both positive and negative effects on societies and the environment. While urbanization drives economic growth, cultural exchange, and social interaction, it also poses challenges such as environmental degradation, social inequality, and public health risks. To maximize the benefits of urbanization and mitigate its negative impacts, policymakers, urban planners, and communities must adopt sustainable development strategies that promote economic prosperity, social inclusion, and environmental stewardship. By addressing these challenges, cities can become engines of sustainable development and improve the quality of life for present and future generations....

Positive And Negative Effects Of Urbanization

Urbanization, the process of population concentration in cities and towns, has both positive and negative effects on society, the economy, and the environment. One of the main positive impacts of urbanization is economic growth. Cities serve as hubs for commerce, innovation, and employment opportunities, attracting businesses and skilled workers. This concentration of resources and talent can lead to increased productivity and economic development, driving overall prosperity. Moreover, urbanization often brings improved infrastructure and services to urban areas. As populations grow in cities, there is a greater demand for amenities such as transportation systems, healthcare facilities, and educational institutions. This can result in better access to essential services for residents, enhancing their quality of life and well-being. Additionally, urban areas tend to offer a wider range of cultural and recreational activities, contributing to a more vibrant and diverse social environment. On the other hand, urbanization also has negative consequences that need to be addressed. One of the most significant challenges is the strain on infrastructure and resources. Rapid urban growth can lead to overcrowding, traffic congestion, and increased pollution levels. This puts pressure on existing systems for water, energy, and waste management, potentially leading to environmental degradation and public health issues if not managed effectively. Another downside of urbanization is the phenomenon of urban poverty and inequality. While cities attract job opportunities, not everyone benefits equally from urban development. Many urban areas face issues of homelessness, unemployment, and inadequate housing, creating social disparities and marginalized communities. Addressing these social inequalities is crucial for sustainable urban development and inclusive growth. In conclusion, urbanization is a complex phenomenon with both positive and negative effects. While it can drive economic growth, improve infrastructure, and enhance social opportunities, it also poses challenges related to sustainability, resource management, and social equity. By adopting comprehensive urban planning strategies that prioritize environmental sustainability, social inclusion, and efficient resource management, societies can harness the benefits of urbanization while mitigating its negative impacts for a more sustainable and equitable future....

• Branches of Psychology
• Legal Cases

Analyze Positive And Negative Effects Of The Columbian Exchange

The emergence of the sharing economy represents a transformative shift in the way goods and services are exchanged, facilitated by digital platforms and collaborative consumption models. This essay provides a comprehensive analysis of the positive and negative effects of the sharing economy, examining its impacts on various stakeholders, economic dynamics, and societal norms within the context of technological innovation, sustainability, and social equity. On the positive side, the sharing economy offers a host of benefits, including increased access to goods and services, cost savings, and environmental sustainability. By leveraging underutilized assets and resources, such as vacant rooms, idle cars, and unused tools, sharing economy platforms enable individuals and businesses to monetize their excess capacity and generate additional income. This can be particularly advantageous for marginalized communities and low-income households, providing them with opportunities for economic empowerment and financial resilience. Furthermore, the sharing economy promotes resource efficiency and environmental sustainability by encouraging the reuse, repurposing, and sharing of goods and services. By facilitating peer-to-peer exchanges and collaborative consumption, sharing economy platforms help to reduce waste, carbon emissions, and resource depletion associated with traditional consumption patterns. This aligns with broader efforts to transition towards a circular economy model that prioritizes the efficient use of resources and the minimization of environmental impact. Moreover, the sharing economy fosters social connections, trust, and community resilience by facilitating interactions and exchanges between individuals from diverse backgrounds and perspectives. Through shared experiences and collaborative endeavors, participants in the sharing economy can forge meaningful relationships, build social capital, and strengthen community ties. This sense of belonging and solidarity can contribute to social cohesion, civic engagement, and collective action, enhancing the overall quality of life and well-being. However, the sharing economy is not without its drawbacks and challenges. One of the primary concerns is the potential for exploitation and precarity among workers in the gig economy, who often lack job security, benefits, and labor protections. As independent contractors or freelancers, gig workers may face unpredictable income streams, long hours, and limited access to social safety nets, exacerbating inequalities and vulnerabilities in the labor market. Furthermore, the sharing economy has been criticized for its role in exacerbating housing affordability and gentrification in urban areas. Platforms such as Airbnb have been accused of contributing to the displacement of long-term residents, driving up rents, and commodifying housing as a speculative asset. This has raised questions about the social and economic impacts of short-term rentals on local communities, affordable housing initiatives, and urban development strategies. Additionally, the sharing economy presents challenges related to regulatory oversight, consumer protection, and data privacy. The decentralized and peer-to-peer nature of sharing economy platforms can make it difficult to enforce existing regulations and ensure compliance with standards of safety, fairness, and accountability. Moreover, concerns have been raised about the collection, use, and security of personal data by sharing economy platforms, raising issues of privacy, consent, and surveillance. In conclusion, the sharing economy represents a double-edged sword, offering both opportunities and challenges for individuals, communities, and societies at large. While it holds the potential to promote economic efficiency, social inclusion, and environmental sustainability, it also poses risks related to labor exploitation, housing affordability, and regulatory oversight. As the sharing economy continues to evolve and expand, it is imperative to address these complex issues through evidence-based policymaking, stakeholder engagement, and ethical considerations, in order to harness its potential for positive social change and equitable development....

• Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

Positive And Negative Effects Of Electromagnetic Radiation

Electromagnetic radiation is a form of energy that is all around us, coming from various sources such as the sun, electronic devices, and even the earth itself. While it plays a crucial role in our daily lives, there are both positive and negative effects associated with exposure to electromagnetic radiation. On the positive side, electromagnetic radiation is essential for various technologies that have revolutionized the way we live. For example, radio waves are used for communication, allowing us to stay connected with loved ones and access information from around the world. Additionally, microwaves are used in cooking, making meal preparation faster and more convenient. Without electromagnetic radiation, many of the conveniences we take for granted today would not be possible. However, there are also negative effects of electromagnetic radiation that cannot be ignored. Prolonged exposure to high levels of electromagnetic radiation, such as that emitted by cell phones and Wi-Fi routers, has been linked to health issues such as headaches, fatigue, and even cancer. Furthermore, some studies suggest that electromagnetic radiation may disrupt sleep patterns and contribute to anxiety and depression. As our reliance on technology continues to grow, so does our exposure to electromagnetic radiation, raising concerns about its long-term effects on our health. In conclusion, while electromagnetic radiation has brought about many benefits in terms of technological advancements, it is important to be aware of the potential negative effects it can have on our health. By taking steps to limit our exposure to sources of electromagnetic radiation, such as using devices at a safe distance and turning them off when not in use, we can mitigate some of the risks associated with this form of energy. Ultimately, striking a balance between reaping the benefits of electromagnetic radiation and protecting ourselves from its harmful effects is key to maintaining a healthy and sustainable lifestyle in our modern, technology-driven world....

• Environmental Sustainability
• Renewable Energy Sources
• Climate & Weather
• Environmental Protection

Can't find the essay examples you need?

Use the search box below to find your desired essay examples.

• DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.51
• Corpus ID: 157768480

The Effects of Negative Advertising

• C. Dowling , Yanna Krupnikov
• Published 22 November 2016

7 Citations

Positive spillovers from negative campaigning, electoral campaign attacks: theory and evidence, facebook political ads and accountability: outside groups are most negative, especially when hiding donors, facebook political ads and accountability: outside groups are most negative, especially when microtargeting or hiding donors, rebuilding civil civics in museums, political communication and campaigning in india: opportunities for future research, can term limits reduce political sabotage evidence from negative campaigning in gubernatorial races, 51 references, does attack advertising demobilize the electorate, campaign advertising and voter turnout: new evidence for a stimulation effect, political advertising in 2014: the year of the outside group, advertising trends in 2010, negative, angry, and ubiquitous: political advertising in 2012.

• Highly Influential

Negative Campaign Advertising: Demobilizer or Mobilizer?

A spatial theory of positive and negative campaigning, is negative advertising effective for female candidates, do televised presidential ads increase voter turnout evidence from a natural experiment, political advertising and information seeking: comparing exposure via traditional and internet channels, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Some feel that the effects of advertising are positive for individuals and businesses, while others think they are negative. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Fully explain your ideas

To get an excellent score in the IELTS Task 2 writing section, one of the easiest and most effective tips is structuring your writing in the most solid format. A great argument essay structure may be divided to four paragraphs, in which comprises of four sentences (excluding the conclusion paragraph, which comprises of three sentences).

For we to consider an essay structure a great one, it should be looking like this:

• Paragraph 1 - Introduction
• Sentence 1 - Background statement
• Sentence 2 - Detailed background statement
• Sentence 3 - Thesis
• Sentence 4 - Outline sentence
• Paragraph 2 - First supporting paragraph
• Sentence 1 - Topic sentence
• Sentence 2 - Example
• Sentence 3 - Discussion
• Sentence 4 - Conclusion
• Paragraph 3 - Second supporting paragraph
• Paragraph 4 - Conclusion
• Sentence 1 - Summary
• Sentence 2 - Restatement of thesis
• Sentence 3 - Prediction or recommendation

Our recommended essay structure above comprises of fifteen (15) sentences, which will make your essay approximately 250 to 275 words.

Discover more tips in The Ultimate Guide to Get a Target Band Score of 7+ » — a book that's free for 🚀 Premium users.

• advertising
• positive effects
• negative effects
• individuals
• information
• entertainment
• job opportunities
• increased sales
• brand visibility
• recognition
• competitive advantage
• product diversification
• service diversification
• consumer behavior
• unrealistic standards
• invasion of privacy
• financial pressure
• misleading practices
• deceptive practices
• negative publicity
• reputation damage
• increased competition
• ethical advertising
• responsible advertising
• Check your IELTS essay »
• Find essays with the same topic
• View collections of IELTS Writing Samples
• Show IELTS Writing Task 2 Topics

These days a growing number of people with health problems are trying alternative medicines and treatments instead of visiting their usual doctor. Do you think this is a positive or a negative development? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples form your own knowledge or experience.

You work at home and have a problem with a piece of equipment that you for your job. write a letter to the shop or company to witch supplied the equipment. in your letter -describe the problem with the equipment -explain how this problem is affecting your work -say what to want the shop or the company to do, q. some people think that parents should teach their children how to be good members of society. others, however, believe that school is the best place to learn this. discuss both views and give your own opinion., nowadays, more and more foreign students are going to english-speaking countries to learn the “international language – english". it is undoubtedly true that studying english in an english-speaking country is the best way, but it is not the only way to learn it. do you agree or disagree with the above statement., many people like to wear fashionable clothes. why do you think is the case is this a good or a bad thing.

24/7 writing help on your phone

To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”

Negative Impact of Advertisement

Save to my list

Remove from my list

Negative Impact of Advertisement. (2016, May 10). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/negative-impact-of-advertisement-essay

"Negative Impact of Advertisement." StudyMoose , 10 May 2016, https://studymoose.com/negative-impact-of-advertisement-essay

StudyMoose. (2016). Negative Impact of Advertisement . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/negative-impact-of-advertisement-essay [Accessed: 23 Aug. 2024]

"Negative Impact of Advertisement." StudyMoose, May 10, 2016. Accessed August 23, 2024. https://studymoose.com/negative-impact-of-advertisement-essay

"Negative Impact of Advertisement," StudyMoose , 10-May-2016. [Online]. Available: https://studymoose.com/negative-impact-of-advertisement-essay. [Accessed: 23-Aug-2024]

StudyMoose. (2016). Negative Impact of Advertisement . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/negative-impact-of-advertisement-essay [Accessed: 23-Aug-2024]

• Commercial. An effective advertisement Pages: 4 (972 words)
• Effectiveness Of Anti-Smoking Advertisement Pages: 12 (3370 words)
• McDonalds Video Advertisement Pages: 5 (1449 words)
• English Language Advertisement Pages: 7 (1883 words)
• Deconstruction of an Advertisement Pages: 8 (2372 words)
• Analysis of John Smith's Advertisement Pages: 6 (1617 words)
• How to Analyze an Advertisement? Pages: 5 (1490 words)
• The Effects Of Advertisement and Consumer Buying Behaviour Pages: 4 (1006 words)
• Rhetorical Advertisement Analysis Pages: 4 (1165 words)
• Informative Essay About Advertisement and Slogans Pages: 2 (490 words)

👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!

Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.