Fallacies In Advertising Analysis

Manipulation had always been a toolset created and used primarily by the socially disadvantaged. For example, women in 18th century England, who often times could not depend solely on brute strength or their physical prowess to thrive in a social landscape, used strategic thinking, decision analysis, and other cognitive tools that gave them at worst, a level playing field, and at best, an advantage (Dubner, B. S., 2013, "Jane Austen, Game Theorist”). The original intent of manipulation was one of self-preservation; to court a husband with a suitable income that would provide for a decent living for example. However, this intent has since changed with the creation of advertisement. The advertising industry has exploited the toolset that was …show more content…
The Department is primarily focused with promoting and protecting the city’s health; in the context of this essay, protecting the constituents of New York City from the perceived dangers of sugary drinks. However, the methods used by the DOHMH to promote its stance on public health through advertisements are ethically questionable at best. Their advertisements use various fallacies to manipulate the public into reducing their consumption of sugary drinks; a fallacy of single cause disguised as fact or an appeal to authority and emotion in place of evidence and data. These underhanded tactics violate the major underpinning and inherent value of a plural and just society, the freedom of choice. The autonomy to make your own decisions, free of any external pressures, which results in meaningful lives and a society that is comprised of individuals who are able to grow and develop both characteristically and morally is taken away once advertisements manipulate and influence our decisions without our …show more content…
There is no evidence or data backing up their statement anywhere on the advertisements. Consequently, their statement is just a fallacy of single cause, attempting to manipulate their audience into believing that sugary drinks is the only or primary cause of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. However, this is not the case, and rarely is for any cause and effect scenario. Complex sequences are often misunderstood or oversimplified by the general public into one cause or one effect. Unscrupulous arguers, who cannot support their position fully with evidence or data, such as the DOHMH in this case, recognize this behavior and take advantage of it by presenting complex situations as straightforward to steer the public their way, when in reality there are many variables that are involved and various outcomes that can be produced (Beach, 2013, ch 11, para. 29). For example, the Mayo Clinic cites genetics, inactivity, prior medical conditions, age, and family history and lifestyle all as risk factors that contribute to obesity, diabetes, and heart disease (Mayo Clinic). But this easily researchable evidence notwithstanding, the advertisements resort to the fallacy of single cause in order to manipulate the public into accepting that sugary drinks are the sole cause of those conditions. Thus, violating our freedom of choice by not presenting all of the facts and information necessary to make an informed and autonomous