Appendix: Content Analysis of Critical Test Items
Statement 1: Unlike Aquafresh Whitening, both Colgate and Rembrandt toothpastes use bleach and peroxide to whiten teeth.
The Aquafresh commercial begins with, “To get whiter teeth, do I have to use a toothpaste with bleach and peroxide?” We can assume the advertiser intentionally uses this rhetorical question to impose a negative connotation regarding the use of bleach and peroxide. The advertiser then immediately asserts that these ingredients are not part of the Aquafresh formula. The Colgate and Rembrandt brands are then introduced into the ad and vague comparisons are made concerning those products’ whitening abilities. The advertiser does not assert that Colgate and Rembrandt include bleach and peroxide in their formulas, but this is strongly implied through the use of visual images and linguistic structure.
Statement 3: Brushing with Arm & Hammer Extra Whitening will whiten your teeth in two weeks.
As in the Aquafresh commercial, the first line of the advertisement is a rhetorical question: “Want whiter teeth in just two weeks?” This implies a positive whitening effect for the toothpaste brand and may cause an unsuspecting viewer to generate an unsubstantiated inference that is represented by this test statement. But nowhere within the text or visuals of the advertisement does the advertiser assert that this product will actually whiten your teeth in two weeks. Claims are made concerning “clinically proven” trials of the “baking soda formula,” but the specifics of these tests are left to the imagination of the viewer.
Statement 4: Maximum Strength RID leaves no residue behind.
A thorough examination of the script reveals the statement, “And RID leaves no active residue behind,” but the he use of the modifier “active” suggests to a critical viewer or reader that an inactive residue may very well be present following use of this product. Interestingly, the visual image that accompanies this statement -- a mother hugging her daughter as she boards a schoolbus -- evokes a sense of concern for safety on the part of the parent and implies a similar concern on the part of the manufacturer.
Statement 6: In just the first treatment, Maximum Strength RID kills all lice completely.
During the television commercial, the statement, “In just the first treatment, it kills lice completely,” is made. At the same time, a message rolls across the screen silently in a very small font, stating that two treatments are needed to eradicate the lice problem. If this is noticed at all, it appears totally irreconcilable with the accompanying spoken statement. However, a closer inspection of the verbal message reveals its ambiguity. The word completely is an inappropriate modifier for the verb to kill, since nothing can be killed incompletely. The viewer or reader is easily misled by this phrase to inaccurately infer total lice eradication in one treatment.
Statement 8: Most hard-working police forces in the U.S. use Castrol GTX.
Visual images accompanying the script of this commercial strongly portray police forces as hard working and serve to distract the viewer from a closer inspection of the advertisements linguistic elements. Nowhere within the text are statistics of product use with regard to nationwide police forces provided. However, the combination of visual images and a provocative lexicon strongly implies that most police forces use this brand of motor oil.
Statement 10: Under extreme conditions, the viscosity of Castrol GTX will not break down.
Advertisers often use complex technical terms to imply scientific expertise. The use of the terms viscosity and thermal breakdown in this commercial may serve that purpose here, and distract the viewer or reader from the meaning of the commercial. Words such as tougher, leading, and maximum, also used in this commercial, are judgmental language expressions rather than statements of fact, but invariably they are meant to be inferred as fact. Also, the use of the modal verb can implies a possibility but does not assert a guarantee of total effectiveness. A close inspection of the script reveals that the advertiser asserts “maximum protection,” rather than complete protection, against viscosity and thermal breakdown.
From “From a Semiotic Perspective: Inference Formation and the Critical Comprehension of Television Advertising” by Don Langrehr.
Reading Online, www.readingonline.org
Posted May 2003