Opinion: Loud commercials alienate buyers, viewers

My question is prompted by screaming TV automobile commercials.

Never have I come across anyone willing to admit they were convinced by a screamer to run out and buy a car.

No, ask almost anyone, and they are likely to say they hit the mute button whenever a screamer comes on.

Yet, visit any city and you can see TV commercials from local car dealers who must believe the audience isn’t intelligent enough to listen to a message in conversational tones. Since these annoying ads continue to exist, they must sell cars. Why? A mystery, indeed.

Another question: How would you feel if someone were to say to you, “Hi,” and with no pause for a response, blurt out a message? If you are like me, you wouldn’t be impressed with the speaker or the message.

This strategy pops up in commercials, program promos and public service announcements, probably more so on radio than TV. The message, presented in an “I am reading this” voice, begins with “Hi, I’m ...” followed by the message.

If someone says “Hi,” to me, I want a chance to toss in a “Nice to meet you” before the conversation continues.

Allowing the producers of such spots some leeway, it could be that “Hi” is the spoken equivalent of “To Whom it May Concern.” How personal is that?

This breed of ad comes in a slightly different version, one that I really don’t understand. With no “Hi” at the beginning, the message races on. Somewhere prior to a closing appeal, the speaker adds the “Hi, I’m ...”

In the course of daily conversations, few of us introduce ourselves at the end of a message. Shouldn’t advertising give the impression of being at least somewhat reality-based?

If media advertising is actually supposed to be realistic, how can all cellular phone providers be better than all the others?

According to the ads, all are the best. All offer the best equipment, network, service and price. Go figure.

A similar question could be posed with respect to pickup trucks. In the world of TV ads, every pickup is better than all others in its class. All claim superior handling of payload. All are more reliable, tougher and more economical than the competition. It’s hard to know which is actually best because all are said to be the best.

Superiority claims don’t stop with the pickups themselves; they all suggest that the toughest men of all drive their trucks, also the toughest. One ad goes so far as to depict a driver of its pickup being so tough that when a rattlesnake bites him, the snake dies. Now that’s tough.

The motion picture industry has been singing an “Oh, woe is us” tune regarding slow box office returns. Like any business, it is profit-driven. Perhaps the complaining film moguls should take a critical look at the TV commercials they are producing for their movies.

Advertising is supposed to increase sales, right? Well, could slow sales be singing a tune about the caliber of the ads?

The content of a lot of movie ads focuses on appalling images of ghastly violence, the bizarre, the monstrous, the supernatural and the occult, and the ever-popular natural disaster. Let me tell you, there is little in these to persuade me to pay good money to see them.

Given the recent real hurricanes, earthquakes and floods, why consume creative talent on movies and TV shows about such disasters in the name of entertainment? Commercials promoting them only bring more death and destruction into our living rooms.

It seems to me that we have seen more than enough actual natural violence without more of it conjured up by the special effects experts in the name of entertainment.

That’s just my opinion; I’m probably wrong.

Joe McAdoo is former chairman of the communication department at Drury University.