Sue Jozui Argument Summary

Celebrities are good for lots of different things: entertainment, being well known, making money. In Sue Jozui argument, she discusses how celebrities might advertise something and not even use it that insults some of the audience's. The author supports her claim by first giving an example of misleading advertisements. The authors purpose is to convince the audience to boycott advertisements and legislate rules and guidelines in order that the consumer won’t get taken advantage of with misleading ads. Even that the author might think it’s wrong for celebrities to endorse products; however business have the right to promote products if they please. The fault should not go towards the companie because the consumer is making the decision to buy it.

People who might agree with the author might say that ads should be about the quality of the product rather than a celebrity promoting it. Even tho the celebrity is advertising the product, he/she is still explaining what the product is good for and what it can help you with. Like when you see Shaq do his commercials about gold bond he is telling you how it helps you smooth your skin. If you just advertise a commercial …show more content…
Another reason why I disagree with the author Is that it is the consumer's responsibility to research the product's background. Is it really a company's fault is someone is stupid enough to buy something solely due to a celebrity. The company is not taking advantage of the consumer, the consumer is taking advantage of him or herself. The purpose of an ad is to make money, you’re taking that away from them if they can’t use celebrity to promote products. The sells of a product will most likely drop simply due to not using celebrities to create more buzz. All these reasons are more effective than the author's argument of consumers being