This week's class discussion about meanings and interpretations that viewers make reminded me of a very controversial Starbucks ad that came out in the summer of 2002. The poster above, was meant to promote new Tazo Ice Blended Tea, but instead it created a social disturbance. If you look carefully, the image imitates the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The two beverages are sitting next to each other as the dragonfly flies directly towards them. However, the punctum of this picture is hidden within the caption. The key word Collapse is what makes this otherwise pretty summery picture depicting cool drinks, grass and butterflies, shocking.
While, many would never recognize the negative connotation of this ad ("Some images strongly interpellate viewers, some do not" Practices of Looking (pg 50)), its decryption exemplifies a typical case where the three key elements to the production of meaning are collectively utilized. While the codes and conventions alone - included in this image - would not necessarily produce the meaning, the viewers with particular previous experiences and social backgrounds identified the context in which this ad was presented, and therefore, made the corresponding meaning. As it is stated in our textbook, "for viewer interpellation by an image to be effective, the viewer must implicitly understand himself or herself as being a member of a social group that shares codes and conventions through which the image becomes meaningful." (pg 50) If this ad was spread for example, in Finland or Zimbabwe, the probability of its decryption would have been much lower. Keep in mind also, that this ad came out after the 9/11 attacks, not before, in which case the punctum, codes and convention as well as the context would have carried different meanings.
Despite the number of clues suggesting the cruelty of this ad, one may still think it was an unfortunate coincidence. Perhaps, the intention of Starbucks was not 'capitalizing on the misfortunes of others', as it was widely accused of intending. The excerpt of the Starbucks statement regarding this issue is as follows: ... "the overall concept of the poster was to create a somewhat magical place using bright colors and fun, whimsical elements such as palm, trees, dragonflies, butterflies and pinwheels. The headline 'Collapse into cool, Try a new Tazo Citrus with tangerine, orange and lime' was meant to conjure up feelings of cooling off on a hot summer day. " (Notice how they composed this explanatory statement in a way that it still promotes the drinks.)
But if, on the other hand, the negative connotation in this ad was intentional, then it presents itself to me as counterintuitive. As I was writing about this poster, I could not help but sneak into Chapter 7 and read the Envy, Desire and Belonging section, where it is stated that, "advertising functions largely to create consumer relationships to brands and to establish brands as familiar, essential, even lovable." (pg 276) I particularly want to underline the last word, 'lovable', and connect it to the Starbucks ad example. Basically, the question that comes to my mind is: What were they thinking? If their ad was intentional, then they definitely considered the risky consequences it could bring, however they still spread it. Maybe it is an advertising technique that is currently unknown to me, but for now the negative results that it created remain evident.
The source: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/cool.asp
No comments:
Post a Comment