Some critics of advertising have assumed that the creation of false needs in consumers is the principal mechanism underlying what these critics regard as its manipulative and hegemonic power. …
Marcuse supposed that we all have certain real needs, both physical and psychological. Advertising appropriates these needs for its own purposes, forging psychological associations between them and consumer items, e.g., between sex and perfume, thereby creating a false "need" for these items. Since the quest for fulfillment is thus displaced from its true objects to consumer items, the implicit promises of advertisements are never really fulfilled and the consumer remains at some level unsatisfied.
Unfortunately, the distinction between real and false needs upon which this critique depends is extremely problematic. If Marcusians are right, we cannot, with any assurance, separate our real needs from the alleged false needs we feel as a result of the manipulation of advertisers. For, in order to do so, it would be necessary to eliminate
But, in fact, Marcusians make a major mistake in assuming that the majority of consumers who respond to advertising do not do so autonomously. Advertising techniques are unable to induce unwilling behavior in rational, informed adults, and regulations prohibit misinformation in advertising claims. Moreover, evidence suggests that most adults understand and recognize the techniques used and are not merely passive instruments. If there is a real need for emotional fulfillment, and if we can freely and authentically choose our means of obtaining it, then free, informed individuals may choose to obtain it through the purchase of commodities or even through the enjoyment occasionally provided by advertisements themselves. …
The main function of the first paragraph is to
summarize the political and economic context from which Marcusian critiques of advertising arise
P1 doesn’t summarize the political and economic context. We don’t get any description of what political or economic conditions were like before Marcusian critiques arose. We only get in P1 a description of the critics’ views and Marcuse’s views.
outline the mechanisms by which false needs originate in mass market culture
The paragraph is concerned with describing the view of some critics and the Marcusian underpinnings of this view. That’s not what (B) says. Also, remember that we’re only getting the Marcusians’ view – in P1 the author doesn’t endorse the idea that advertising actually creates false needs.
evaluate the psychological processes by which the manipulative techniques of mass market advertising influence individuals
The paragraph is concerned with describing the view of some critics and the Marcusian underpinnings of this view. That’s not what (C) says. Also, the author doesn’t “evaluate” (express opinion or judgment about) anything in P1.
describe the prevailing views among contemporary critics of advertising and categorize Marcuse's theories in relation to those views
We don’t know that the views described in P1 are the “prevailing” views. And, the purpose isn’t to “categorize” Marcuse’s theories in relation to those views. Categorizing involves a concern with identifying similarities and differences and with grouping things together or separating things. That’s not what the author tries to do with Marcuse’s theories.
describe Marcusian views regarding mass market manipulation and indicate their role in certain criticisms of advertising
This is the best answer. P1 describes the Marcusian view regarding mass market manipulation (that advertising creates false needs). And P1 indicates how this view plays a role in certain criticisms of advertising (the Marcusian view is “central to this type of critique”).
Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.
It takes about five minutes.
Take the free diagnostic