This essay examines the pervasive influence of marketing and advertising on American consumer behavior, arguing that while marketers exploit societal tendencies toward status-seeking and envy, the root problem lies in cultural values rather than advertising itself. The paper critiques celebrity endorsers of questionable moral character, discusses the line between acceptable advertising and misleading claims, and draws on Stuart Ewen's analysis of public relations and spin. Ultimately, the essay contends that consumer education, personal accountability, and critical media literacy—rather than government regulation or censorship of advertising—are the most effective remedies for a manipulative marketing environment.
It is extremely clear that marketing pervades American society and has a heavy bearing on what people buy, why they buy it, and even who they vote for. Whether it be cars, watches, clothes, or other goods, people are strongly influenced—and perhaps even coerced—by the marketing they are exposed to. Then there is the varied cast of celebrities who endorse these products, some of whom are of questionable moral character. At the same time, concepts like self-responsibility, self-restraint, and self-accountability remain important. While advertising can make a product alluring and attractive, the responsibility to shop and buy wisely ultimately falls on the consumer, not the marketer.
There is a reason why people gravitate toward brand names like Cadillac, Gucci, and Coach. Not only are these products presented as attractive and flashy, they are also portrayed as status symbols. Beyond that, there are the dynamics of peer pressure, envy, and the general concept of "keeping up with the Joneses." Whether it involves a bigger house, a nicer car, or other luxury goods, far too many people are spending money they do not have in order to project an image of wealth, status, and popularity. Indeed, one telling example is a Cadillac Escalade—albeit an older one—spotted with a vanity plate reading "ENVY ME." While marketing can at times be somewhat unethical and pushy, the deeper problem lies in the societal trends that lead people to fixate on advertising and on the figures who serve as its face.
The prominence of figures like Miley Cyrus and the Kardashians as some of the more visible faces of their generation raises genuine concerns about cultural values. Casting aspersions on their moral character is not done lightly here—it is meant precisely and specifically. Consider the Kardashians as an example. Kim became famous largely due to a sex tape, not unlike Paris Hilton, another figure in the marketing sphere. Her marriage to Kanye West, a figure widely noted for his narcissistic public behavior, added further controversy. Kourtney has had children with a partner she never married, while that partner has continued to engage in reckless behavior despite his status as a father. Khloe's relationship history has included a man who struggled with substance abuse and another who publicly displayed firearms on social media. Kris Jenner, the matriarch of the family, has been widely criticized for openly celebrating excess alongside wealth. While all of this behavior is troubling enough in those who are held up as role models, the fact that these individuals serve as the face of numerous advertising campaigns is especially concerning. Whether promoting their own product lines or those of other companies, they command an enormous and fervent following, which is troubling given the values they appear to model.
This dynamic leads to the argument that society itself is the underlying issue when it comes to people making impulse purchases driven by what others will think of them, rather than by the utility of the item, whether it can actually be afforded, or whether the buyer genuinely wants it. While marketers actively exploit this condition, they did not create it. As such, the real fix involves addressing the cultural appetite that makes such manipulation effective in the first place. To be fair, not all advertisers rely on dubious spokespeople or questionable methods. Some focus on genuinely important qualities such as safety, durability, and improving people's lives. As for those that are more manipulative or unethical, simply outlawing what they do will not solve the underlying problem. Any calls for outright censorship of advertising should therefore be set aside.
"Where regulation is justified and where it overreaches"
"Ewen's PR history and its alignment with the thesis"
"Call for media literacy and societal awakening"
You’re 40% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.