Introduction
Language is central to human interactions. It is at the heart of influencing people to take actions. Advertisements make some of the most carefully selected use of language to influence people into making purchases of items that at times they do not need or those that are not a priority. Three readings “It’s All in the Details” by Jennifer Baumgartner, “The Language of Advertising” by Charles O’Neill and “With These Words, I Can Sell You Anything” by William Lutz show that indeed the language used in advertising is meant to quench a psychological desire and show buyers that they need products being offered at the market.
The three readings show that there is extensive use of influential language to make people purchase things. According to Lutz, “advertisers make use of weasel words to appear to be making a claim for a product” (Lutz, 2008). He compares the action of advertising to the tricky sucking of the insides of an egg by a weasel which leaves a hollow but almost intact egg in a nest. According to O’Neill advertisements are edited thoroughly to ensure that the words used are involving, purposeful and rich yet they emphasize on the simplicity of language. In the first chapter of her book “You are what you wear” Jennifer J. Baumgartner notes that one of the reasons why people find themselves buying more than they need is because they fall prey to the sweet and carefully crafted words in advertisements. As such, all the authors agree than advertisements bear carefully crafted, yet simple words to draw consumers to make purchases of things that they may not need or those that are not a priority.
The three pieces state that what we use or consume is a reflection of who we are. According to Baumgartner “"Our clothing is a reflection of what we are thinking and what we are feeling”. She adds that often wardrobe mishaps are a reflection of inner conflicts that happen to bubble to the surface. All the words used in Lutz’s article which he notes to be commonly used to sell things are those that touch on the human emotions. They are words that reflect who people are at their very core. For instance people like to obtain “help”, people like new things and hence the use if “new and improved”, and they like to make little effort to achieve great results which means that they would like to use products such as cleaning detergents that make things “virtually spotless”. O’Neill acknowledges that advertisements make use of what appeals most to people and in this case sex comes in handy to most advertisements. He acknowledges that the desire to be sexually attracted to others is an ancient instinct in human beings and that few drives are more powerful.
There are some differences between the purposes for which the articles were written. For instance, Lutz wrote his article to show that all advertisers select from a certain common pool of words that can be used over many different products and they are bound to have deep impacts on the consumers. His article outlines these words to be “help”, “virtually spotless”, “new and improved”, “acts fact” and “works like anything else” among several others. As such Lutz’s intention of writing the article is clear that he wanted to warn or inform people about these words so that they may take caution and become keener in believing all they hear in advertisements.
O’Neill write his article with the intention of clarifying that advertisers have to do what that do and that they have to use the words that they do. He acknowledges that the language used in advertisements is carefully engineered and ruthlessly purposeful. He defends the position that advertisers are simply doing what that need to do in order to sell. He was responding to Lutz who was against the ‘deception” employed by the advertisers. On his part, O’Neill justifies the tactic and the language used by many employers.
The biggest contradiction comes in between Baumgartner and the other two authors- Lutz and O’Neill. Baumgartner states that a person’s clothing is a reflection of what a person inner life. She asserts that every item in a person’s closet results from some deeper and unconscious choices. If indeed what people wear results from deeper and unconscious choices it follows that people are less likely to be influenced by advertisements in matter of what they choose to wear. It follows that Baumgartner seems to be negating the stand taken by Lutz and O’Neill who assert that advertisements have immense power to trigger purchasing decisions through their language.
The three pieces concern the influences that cause people to make purchases and use certain products. Lutz and O’Neill concentrate on the use of language to influence to buyers through selection of words that have deep impacts. Baumgartner concentrates on the fashion sense of why people dress the way they do and she acknowledges that there are deeper motivations that cause people to do some of the things they do. In all the three pieces show that people act usually act under some external influence through advertising or use of language.
References
Baumgartner, J. J. (2012). You are what you wear: What your clothes reveal about you. Boston: Da Capo Press.
Goshgarian, G., & Krueger, K. (2006). Dialogues: An argument rhetoric and reader. New York: Pearson/Longman. O’Neill, C. A. The Language of Advertising
Mary R. Harmon, Marilyn J. Wilson (2012). Beyond Grammar: Language, Power, and the Classroom: Resources for Teachers. Lutz, W. “With These Words, I Can Sell You Anything”
