Ads and Discourse Analysis
Ads and Discourse Analysis
Ads and Discourse Analysis
Advertising &
Discourse Analysis
GROUP 11
NOVA SALSABILLA E1D021111
UZLY
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
It highlights the persistence of advertising discourse over time, noting that although
contemporary advertisements may look more sophisticated, the fundamental nature of
advertising discourse remains relatively consistent. Advertising discourse is analyzed in the
context of its impact on society, with a discussion of the authenticity of the social concerns
portrayed in advertisements.
Examining ads in context
A meaningful analysis of advertising discourse should include non-linguistic elements:
Images and sounds, which play an important role in conveying emotion and subjectivity.
Print ads, for example, rely on linguistic components to convey factual messages, while
images introduce uncertainty and ambiguity, which create layers of interpretation.
Pictorial metaphors, which combine visual and textual elements, contribute to achieving the
desired interpretation.
Television commercials provide unique challenges for discourse analysis due to their
dynamic nature.
Lack of clear discourse boundaries
A possible way to conduct such a campaign analysis is to keep in mind a number of
developmental tasks and discourse analysis questions that are at stake when we assess a sample
of 'language in use': such questions relate to
(1) the significance that a particular situation can give and how this occurs; and
(2) what situations created by this piece of language are created in such a way that they can be recognized by
others.
It is worth considering that ads, despite the belief of manufacturers and advertisers that they
exist solely to promote goods, may do many other things as well, and that these other activities are
extremely revealing about the needs of contemporary society. Debate about the morality of ads tends
to focus on the use of time and space to sell. This, however, may be only a small part of ads’ function
and attractiveness.
(Cook, 1992:
225)
Thankyou!