Lucky Strike Cigarette Advertising
Effective, or Not Picture this; an overweight man in a track suit struggling to make it over the same hurtle a younger, more athletic man, wearing the same suit, just hurtled with ease. The slogan “when tempted to over-indulge, reach for a Lucky instead” printed just below the picture. Chances are immediately the last food which was overindulged upon comes to mind, causing a reliving the guilt that followed. As the poster is viewed, it’s hard to ignore the feeling that abstaining from indulging and satisfying the craving with a Lucky Strike Cigarette instead would cause feeling healthier and more dapper than right now. This is an example of a clever and very successful advertisement. It appeals not only to emotions, but also to intellect, while providing a foundation on which to base these claims. This paper will examine how an ad for Lucky Strike Cigarettes from 1952 used ethos, pathos, and logos to cause desire, and therefore purchases, of their product. Pathos: an appeal to emotions. As previously touched on, this particular ad does a good job at appealing to human
…show more content…
Though the creator of the ad relies on the insecurities and repressed feelings of guilt the consumer has to drive home the emotional pull of this ad, it offers a solid foundation for it claims to be less irritating. In what would be a large scale test even by today’s standards, Lucky Strike claims to have polled at least 20,679 physicians and found that they all agree with this claim. This is a staggering number of physicians who either have experienced the irritation-free Lucky Strike Cigarette first hand or who have seen this proven true by studying smokers of the brand. This “proof” gives the consumer a sense of security. By putting this information on the ad, Lucky Strike gives substance to their claims. If all these physicians agree then it must be
Though the creator of the ad relies on the insecurities and repressed feelings of guilt the consumer has to drive home the emotional pull of this ad, it offers a solid foundation for it claims to be less irritating. In what would be a large scale test even by today’s standards, Lucky Strike claims to have polled at least 20,679 physicians and found that they all agree with this claim. This is a staggering number of physicians who either have experienced the irritation-free Lucky Strike Cigarette first hand or who have seen this proven true by studying smokers of the brand. This “proof” gives the consumer a sense of security. By putting this information on the ad, Lucky Strike gives substance to their claims. If all these physicians agree then it must be