Coca cola estimate that 94% of the world’s population
recognise their red and white coca cola logo. Although this statistic should not
be considered on face value, it does seem obvious that a high proportion of
citizens have come into contact with one of many coca cola’s advertising
schemes that have been distributed across the world. However, upon closer
inspection, the viewer realises that this advert embodies a rebellion against
businesses and corporations, such as coca cola which falsely sell us products
we do not need or that are bad for our health. The association created between coca cola and
this anti-advertising statement forces the viewer into a state of systematic,
effortful cognitive processing. This ingenious, paradoxical collaboration of
worlds is what makes this advertisement so powerful.
According to the mere exposure hypothesis, viewers report
higher levels of preference for something if they have been exposed to it
before (Hekkert et al, 2013). In Hekkert et al’s study, participants were presented
with either familiar or unfamiliar proportions of shapes. The familiar
rectangular proportioned shapes were rated as the most attractive. As the majority of us have inevitably been in
contact with the coca cola brand, we are likely to recognise the copycat nature
of coca cola’s trademark colours and font and therefore experience feelings of
positivity when the advert initially catches our eye.
The use of this favourable “pre-persuasion” environment is
quickly demolished as the viewer stumbles across the words “fuck that” in the
same font in which they would expect to read “coca cola”. The viewer is forced
to discard their heuristic processing of evaluating the advert favourably and instead
switch to a systematic processing style where they feel inclined to actually
read the writing. The “hidden truth” which the message presents is likely to
lead to an attitude change as the way in which an argument is labelled directly
influences the viewer’s thoughts (Pratkanis, 2007). Human beings are known to
try to avoid losses. The losses the viewer may feel uncomfortable with after
reading the small print in their loss of dignity, intellect and freedom to
living a life without a façade as the article rightly states that we are being
controlled. These thoughts should make the viewer feel motivated to avoid the
loss of obliging to corporate schemes. Research supports this claim, for
example, Yechiam and Hochman (2013),
in a series of 5 studies found that when participants were presented with
choice alternative tasks where they had to choose a strategy of loss or gains
based on various consequences, participants were more likely to cognitively
evaluate their performance in order to increase their gains. Participants
delegated more attention to understanding why they were experiencing losses. The
use of a coca cola theme has therefore acted as a catalyst for Banksy to spread
his message as the viewer’s instant attraction to the advert has accelerated
their interested and processing of the advert.
Banksy has acquired
a reputation over the years as a respected graffiti artist portraying corruption
in Western society. The viewer can conclude that the message in the coke bottle
silhouette is credible as Banksy is considered to be an expert in his field of
work. Coca cola is also a credible source as it is a well-established drinks
company with a reputable quality of taste. The combination of these credible
sources are likely to lead to attitude change and shape future interactions of
the viewer to not comply or strive to materialistic ideologies as well as
questioning the reasons behind advertising. Research into credible sources and
attitude change is vast. Lucassen et al (2013)’s concluded that exposure to a trustworthy
and positive cue was likely to lead to an attitude change. This was discovered
by participants being shown a piece of familiar and unfamiliar information
(both of high quality and low quality), either in the style of it having been
written from Wikipedia or in Microsoft word. The findings suggested that half
of the participants trusted Wikipedia as a source of information whereas a lot
of the participants did not because of its open editing ability. Lack of trust
regarding Wikipedia’s credibility was due to its open editing capability.
So there you have
it. A combination of two worlds for one message. However, it still has not put
me off drinking coke… Are you put off?
Hekkert, P., Thurgood, C., & Whitfield, A. (2013).
The mere exposure effect for consumer products as a consequence of existing
familiarity and controlled exposure. Acta
Psychologica, 144, 411 – 417.
Lucassen, T., & Schraagen, J. M. (2013). The
influence of source cues and topic familiarity on credibility evaluation. Computers in Human Behaviour, 29, 1837 –
1392.
Pratkanis, A. R. (2007).The science
of social influence: Advances and future progress. New York: Psychology
Press.
Yechiam, E., & Hochman, G. (2013). Loss-aversion or
loss-attention: The impact of losses on cognitive performance. Cognitive Psychology, 66, 212 – 231.
Very well written and analysed Nim!
ReplyDelete