Tricks, Dirty Tricks, and Tony
Its no contest, really, between what the advertising/marketing industry knows on the one hand, and what Universities know. The advertising industry runs an ad with millions of viewers or recipients as their test sample, then carefully measure the effect of the ad. On the other hand, a University researcher hires a few dozen students that are lied to about the purpose of the experiment, paid $5.00, and the experiment is monitored by a grad student, desperately trying to please the researcher, sometimes the grad student's Professor/Faculty advisor.
Despite the above, there is virtually universal consensus between industry and academia that:
- many decisions, if not most or all, are made by the nonconscious mind1
- the nonconscious mind is affected by messages that the conscious mind is not aware of2
- the nonconscious mind is orders of magnitude faster than the conscious mind
- the nonconscious mind decides what to present to the conscious mind
- the nonconscious mind is NOT the proverbial deeper layer of an onion that the conscious mind can directly tap into
- the nonconscious mind attaches emotions, and sensory input such as smell, touch, sound, etc.. to symbols stored in memory
- the nonconscious mind processes symbols and makes associations between symbols and their attached emotion/sensory input .
- some messages are more effectively delivered by hiding them from the conscious mind by many means including the subliminal.
- since a brand consists of stored memories, the brand can be strengthened by reinforcing the desired stored memories, and introducing new memories, especially by invoking the nonconscious mind
- messages can trigger behavior without the individual consciously perceiving the message and therefore not knowing that the message triggered the behavior. This is called priming 3.
- appealing to the conscious mind can backfire, because the message can be questioned, which is NOT the case for the nonconscious mind .
To illustrate the previous point, consider an advertisement for Cadbury chocolate. In the old days, a talking head would describe how delicious Cadbury chocolate is, especially compared to competing brands. But that doesn't work as well as this one, one of the most succesful ads of all time:
Applying the above points, it should be obvious why there is no mention of how good Cadbury chocolate tastes. If the talking head told the viewer facts about Cadbury chocolate, the viewer would be thinking" "Ya, and it has a ton of calories, fat, and sugar, which will make me fat and rot my teeth, if it doesn't kill me first." Surprisingly enough, the lyrics do imply how great a moment it is to presumably taste a Cadbury. The marketing genius Rober Heath said this4:
the drum-playing Cadbury's Gorilla triggers the concept of liberation;...emotionally competent associations, exposed repeatedly, condition us to feel the brand being advertised has these same emotional values. Just occasionally we become actively aware of these conceptual emotional associations (e.g., when someone from a market research company asks us what we associate with puppies). In most cases they remain hidden away in our subconscious. There they act in the same way as Damasio's somatic markers: when we come to make a decision, they are able to covertly influence how we make that decision. They also operate as a subconscious gatekeeper if we try to make a decision that goes against them. And, if we are in a hurry to make the decision, they can drive our intuition, and effectively make the decision for us.
It should also be noted that Cadbury uses the finest chocolate for children's products during the holidays. This gets the children hooked on the taste of Cadbury, and allows causes adults to associate the fond feelings of the Holidays with Cadbury. 5
A good overall description about how to place embedded subliminal material into the visual field:
Moving on to Drive, the video below applies some of the principles set forth above to strengthen Brand Jew (in a negative way of course).
Try to notice how many of the bullet principles above are implemented illustrated in the video above.
Here is a question. Did Refn choose Carey Mulligan for the role of Irene because she played the victim of a Kike, David Goldman, in the film, An Education? If so, this would be consistent with the principle that Brand Jew can be strenghtened in a negative way because the mind stores associations and repitition of associations only strenthen the negative memories that comprise Brand Jew. Before you think that this is too far fetched, remember Drive's director Refn is a genius, and he employs the nonconscious in text book style.
For example, the conventional thinking is that subliminal erotic images have more of an effect on women than on men. 6 Consistent with that, here is a frame from Refn's Manifesto ad:
Here is Carey Mulligan in An Education:
And in Drive:
It does not matter if you believe in the nonconscious, or priming, or that the earth is flat. The important point is that Refn applied the principles of modern advertising to a message promoting Jew hatred.
TONY SCHWARTZ, MARSHALL McLUHAN
And now for two of the greatest media figures of all times: Tony Schwartz and Marshall Mcluhan. Both of these giants understood that the power of media must be tempered with a conscience and responsibility.
- 1. Mlodinow, Leonard (2012-04-24). Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior (p. 34). Random House, Inc.
- 2. http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199233151.0...
- 3. Use of Nonconscious Priming to Promote Self-Disclosure, Grecco et al, Clinical Psychological Science July 2013 vol. 1 no. 3 311-315
- 4. Heath, Robert (2012-03-21). Seducing the Subconscious: The Psychology of Emotional Influence in Advertising (Kindle Locations 3499-3500). Wiley. Kindle Edition.
- 5. Steidl, Peter (2012-09-15). Neurobranding (p. 54)Kindle edition.
- 6. Does subliminal exposure to sexual stimuli have the same effects on men and women? Omri Gillath, Mario Mikulincer, Gurit E Birnbaum, Phillip R Shaver Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis, CA, USA. The Journal of Sex Research (impact factor: 2.53). 06/2007; 44(2):111-21