Why did I get this question wrong?

Post Reply New Topic

In world lit my class is doing a study of advertising and media (no clue why)... We just got a major test back with grades, and I got an F, mainly because of one question I got wrong. The question asked how a certain commercial relied on creating discontent in the viewers and making them feel like they had to gave the product. I struggled with this question for half an hour, because relied means completely dependent on or mostly supported by, and the comercial in question was mostly founded on the health value of the food it sold. Finally I simply put that i didn't think it relied on the creation of discontent, because it did not. In response the teacher simply wrote on the test "all commercials do." I am very confused, why was my answer wrong, and what was the right answer. I answered the question truthfully and logically...

Insufficient data. Please provide link to commercial.

Commercials create discontent in the lack of whatever the commercial is selling. They're supposed to make you want what you see and feel like your life is incomplete or wrong without it.

In that particular case (basing the commercial on the food's health value) the commercial is trying to instill the idea that not having that food makes one unhealthy, which might create a sense of risk or danger to be alleviated by purchasing said food.

I find the majority of commercials to be banal declarations of blatant emotional manipulation. I find some to be entertaining declarations of blatant emotional manipulation, but they're still manipulative.

People need to not be satisfied so they feel the need to buy stuff in order to be satisfied. I disagree that all commercials create feelings of discontent though, and the wording might have thrown you off. Also, being autistic might give you a certain degree of immunity to commercials .

In tests like that you have to imagine the world that their question and answer are from. It might not be your world, but you have to play along to get the marks.

In this one they wanted you to say the advert made you feel unhealthy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpSJgY2-7AQ

The only thing I could see is creating the idea that even though the chocolate milk is loaded with sugar at least it's not high fructose corn syrup, which is the big bad no no lately, and if mom doesn't buy the milk her kid will be unhappy and she'd be a bad mean mother. Otherwise I'd be sitting there for half an hour too.

Exactly. They want you to answer the "spirit of the question" rather than the "letter of the question".

The way it is worded, I disagree with the premise of the test for 2 reasons. One, all commercials do not *create* discontent, some commercials rely on a discontent that is assumed to already be present in the viewer. And second, all commercials do not rely on a feeling of discontent to get the viewer to buy the product.

In my opinion, the commercial is an attempt to inspire primary discontent is not having what they call "A Truly Good Thing". Secondary discontent is inspired through the implication that you are not a good mother if you do not buy this product for your child, as the commercial also implies that the product will promote the child's good health.

Obviously this is all highly subjective. Perhaps it is the view of the instructor that want and discontent go hand in hand. For example, if one wants something, they are discontent in some way by not having it.

I would disagree with this based on my own personal definition of the concept of being discontent.

You should speak to the instructor about this but be careful not to present your views as an argument. Do not use definites such as phrases that assert your correctness. Use phrases such as "My perception is", "this is how I interpret the situation,", "how I understand it is". In other words, walk the instructor down your path of logic so they can see why you came to the conclusion you did, but at the same time, do it in a way that conveys you are open to corrections of misconceptions or misunderstanding you might have.

Sometimes instructors merely misunderstood what you were trying to say, or can see how your reasoning might be valid, and will be willing to give you points back. Other times, you are the one who has misunderstood something, for example, the point they were trying to get across, a definition, or what type of answer they were looking for.

Can NT's not see the shear amount of BS that commercials are made of? The attempted manipulation is so obvious.

Anyway you are discontented because you aren't healthy because you don't have moo milk or what ever that liquid crap was called. I don't care if you actually are, you are for the sake of the question.

And to answer the question in the topic, it's because you are autistic, you think differently than they want you to.

It is a sales technique that relies on the commercials ability to create discontent in the viewer in terms of what they do and do not have. That way the commercial can convince the viewer that they would be more 'content' or 'healthier' (in this case) if they purchased the product being sold. It is the sales technique behind the commercial that relies on creating discontent in the viewer. The actual content of the commercial (healthy food in this case) is not the main point in regards to this question, the main point is the sales techniques and psychological trickery that it uses in order to 'sell' the product that is being advertised.

It does so by using various filming techniques and making certain claims all aimed at convincing the viewer that they cannot be happy or healthy without this product.

Look beyond what appears to be...and ye shall find your answer (so to speak). Advertisers are sly...

ANY time you answer that you disagree with the basic premise of the question itself, you're going to get it wrong unless you create a very powerful counter-argument (and even then, only the kinds of teachers who like to see evidence of independent thought will give you points for that--the rest of them will be offended that you disagreed with their premise.)

The best thing to do is give a balanced critique of both the theory they agree with and your own. This means looking at all sides of both theories. Note your own theory as a possibility but do not sell it as the only right theory. Provide any arguments you have but do not argue that your theory is the only correct one. Remember you are working with theory, not fact. Also consider any other theories that might be out there and reference any studies that you use in your arguments. Try not to be biased if possible, do research and look at what the data has to say to you.

That is what I used to do and I usually got an A grade for my essays and was told that they were 'beautifully written and very well argued'. It is all in how you word it...

PN do not argue something if you have no data, studies, examples etc to back it up. Always double check your argument to make sure it is sound...do not stretch things (Ie argue a very weak point for which you do not have enough of an argument to support). You need your argument to be a strong one and you need to have evidence to back it up...do your research! Also remember to critique your own argument, even if it is your own there are still going to be good and bad points to it...find them and make note of them whilst doing your evaluation.

Also, do not use personal anecdotes if the field of study does not allow for them. Ie in science stick to the science not what aunt fanny went through last Thursday even if it does relate to the topic under discussion. In literature stay with the literature, although in that subject area you have a little more room for play but you will need to back your ideas up with good strong examples taken from the text (or relevant texts) that you are studying. Always provide good examples to support your ideas, this applies to any subject mostly.

Maybe the question would have been more clear if it asked "How does the commercial use a guilt trip to manipulate the viewer?"

One of the more annoying things I have learned about higher education is how self centered the teachers are. You pretty much have to respond to all assignments with how will the instructor view this, rather than what is the true correct answer. You need to remember that most teachers in higher education consider themselves the absolute expert on their subject, though they frequently are not.

Upon viewing the commercial, all I picked up on was guilting the viewer about high fructose corn syrup. I completely missed the part about implying she would be a bad mother if she didn't get it for her kid.