False Advertising Essay

Ground rule #6: If you mimic the market leaders, you'll just add to their dominance.

Sue Jozui in her excerpt, she proclaims false advertising is wrong and that “we should boycott this type of advertising”. The author supports her statement by first stating what we should do, as in boycott and get rid of celebrities advertising for a large corporation. She continues by claiming that it is “insulting to the audience”. The authors purpose is to argue that celebrities advertising a product is unfair to smaller businesses so that consumers who see a bad product but see their favorite actor or celebrity using it they immediately want such product. The author Jozui uses a sarcastic but more serious tone in explaining why false advertising is a bad thing. The author uses a very well thought out argument because doing false advertising is wrong due to bad or unsturdy products that you could spend a lot of money on but will end up breaking in a couple weeks when it says it will last over a year.

Today, more than ever, teenage girls are influenced by magazines, billboards, television, movies, and most of all advertisements. While the advertisements of models that have been airbrushed to flawlessness may sell products, the effects on teen girls is undeniable. Over the past decade the numbers of depression, eating disorders, and hypersexuality in young girls has been steadily on the rise. False advertising in way of airbrushing, heavy editing, and photoshopping models has had negative effects on teen girls and according to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) policy, false advertisement is illegal. It may be stretching it calling photoshopping false advertising, but nonetheless manipulating young, impressionable girls into believing

Food matters in a sense that people should inform themselves of what is in their foods. People should not always entrust in the rules and regulations given to farms, factories, and supermarkets or trust that what they’ve purchased is healthy or safe. “If you bother to read the health claims closely (as food marketers make sure consumers seldom do), you will find that there is often less to them that meets the eye” (Pollan 14). Considering the idea that maybe people are to focus on the healthy promising labels; consequently, they’re not reading the fine print. Reading and truly understanding food labels is how food matters. People should research chemicals, ingredients, and products used in the foods they

The fallacies in this ad are that this pill will not get you the results that you see these have just by strictly taking these pills as directed on the bottle. We all know that you must no matter what these ad say have proper diet and exercise in order for these pill to work there is no miracle pill that will allow you eat what you want to eat and still get the results that you see in the ad.

Deceptive Practice, also known as False Advertising, is misleading consumers into making uninformed decisions, when buying a product. The effect Deceptive Practice has on Consumers, is they’re wasting money on a company's product that can’t provide what they’re looking for. False Advertising doesn’t just affect Consumers, it also affects Businesses and their employees. Financial Loss and broken trust is an example of what effects Deceptive Practice has on Companies. False Advertising cost the companies money, if the ad is pulled. Also the Business can be charged with a fine, for the current false advertisement and also future false advertisements.

But companies don’t care to show it, as long as there is still people paying for their products, so they keep on making us believe that what we eat is not so bad for our health. This takes very strategic marketing and we need to learn how to analyze labels and really think if what we eat straight out of a package is better than a fruit or a salad.

The advertisement inside the “FITNESSRX”, is advertising Hydroxycut, a product by MUSCLETECH. Hydroxycut is a dietary supplement that contains caffeine and plant extracts. The company states that it gives you extreme energy to improve performance in the gym with their so called “cutting edge” formula. This advertisement states that the product is not only for people who are overweight but for people that want the extra edge on getting cut like a pro bodybuilder. In the corner of the ad there is an article stating that studies show in 60 days you’ll lose 10.95 pounds, this message gives off the impression that if you take the pills you will lose that much weight, they didn't mention that you also have to diet and work hard. MUSCLETECH makes this product sound as if it’s the magic pill

The author of the article shows the reader how marketers try to persuade the consumer to buy the products or items. In the article, the author tries to make the reader feel comforted with his use of strong use of diction. Throughout the article, the author uses words like “sore-footed” “soothes” and “pseudoscience” to describe to

Commercials and ads showcase many products. They have one goal: to sell. This means that companies will do whatever they (legally) can to get customers. A The Onion article critiques how products are marketed to consumers falsely, with lies and deceit. To further explain, the author does this through the exaggeration of quotes from said “consumers,” as well as using providing sarcasm through the fake product “Magnasoles.”

We are sometimes manipulated into buying these products because it will work wonders or make us feel good about ourselves, well I could say that some products are good heck even amazing. However, there are those that are just plain wrong that are so egger to sell the product just to make profit off of us, not caring whether we are content with how it works. Have you ever wondered why the advertisements just keep repeating sometimes well it’s like they are just planting it in your head about this product that they are trying to sell you and that you must have according to the advertisers. According to writer Sienna Kossman she states how advertisers operate and how they get the consumers to buy the product she say that the way they get them

This article is the purest example of nutritional quackery. It provides readers with a third-person story of a woman named Kelly Smith, who lost 195lbs on a specific "special-ingredient" weight loss shake. The brand is mentioned numerous times and offered a 15% off code. Moreover, with the article obviously being an ad for this company, the author uses uncited, fake sources from ambiguous universities. The diet also insists that a person eats less than 1500 calories per day, with two of those meals being the liquid shakes that contain an appetite suppressant. This way of losing weight may be easy, but in no way, is it healthy. The article, "Kelly Lost 195lbs Using Special-Ingredient Shakes That Work Like Gastric Bypass!" by Woman's World, is an obvious example of nutritional quackery, and any advice from this article should be ignored or further consulted by a

Cases of false affirmation occurred where the buyer was convinced to buy something by the false statements of the seller;

Unethical marketing behaviors will cause legal troubles and a bad reputation. Here are some practices of unethical marketing, in which all should be avoided. First, Exploitation, which is using scare tactics or hard sells against vulnerable consumers. Second, Spamming which is the flooding a customer’s voicemail, mailbox, email or any other means of communication with unwanted messages. Third, bad mouthing the competition is talking down on values and benefits of your competion’s product or service . (Hunt, S. D., Chonko, L. B., & Wilcox, J. B., 1984) Forth, Misleading Advertisement and Information, which is any exaggerated claim or dishonest promise which will cause the customers to mistrust companies and spread that the product a failure.

Dist. LEXIS 41077 at *32-34 (in which a product falsely claims to be “Guacamole,” made with “All Natural” ingredients). Furthermore, a reasonable person might find an advertisement misleading or confusing if its design never identifies it for what it is or specifically omits pertinent information such as in Leoni v. State Bar, 39 Cal. 609, 627 (1985) (in which a law firm failed to include clarification that the advertisements were advertisements), or if it should describe itself numerous times as something that it is not (Williams, 552 F.3d at 938-939). However, a product which describes itself clearly or which makes ample effort to dispel any misunderstanding is not confusing to a reasonable person. McKinniss, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96108 at *10-11; Freeman, 68 F.3d at 289-290. Finally, a product which can be viewed on or through its packaging is especially subject to a reasonable consumer’s scrutiny. Thus, a depicted product that clearly does not contain an ingredient, as in Videtto, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43114 at *8, is not in danger of being deceptive. Henderson v. Gruma Corp., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41077 at *32-33 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 11,