(although it does a good job of selling itself)

Synaptic Branding 005: Sex Doesn’t Sell Products

This is a repost—with a new accompanying podcast—of one of our most popular blogs.

I have a long-standing vision of myself as the big advertising art director. I’m donning peg-leg Armanis with a tight crotch, and sporting a flowing Diesel Sevento shirt. My face is perfectly framed by Calvin Klein glasses. (Hey, I’ve already got those!) I’m directing a beautiful young model to take off more of her clothing. “Look honey, you’re not back in Kansas now, baby,” I would purr, “We’re in Florence, Massachusetts, and in Florence, sex sells.”

Contrary to conventional wisdom—and my fanciful dreams—sex doesn’t help sales, and can actually be a hindrance.

According to the 2005 book Sex in Advertising: Perspectives on the Erotic Appeal, about one-fifth of all ads employ sex in an attempt to sell. The problem is that studies have shown that subjects are no more likely to recall erotic ads than non-erotic ones. And women in particular are more likely to perceive too much sex in marketing as a negative.

A recent study found that nudity has no positive impact on movie popularity with viewers or critics. Top-grossing films, such as Spider-Man, typically have only mild sex or nudity. “Sex did not sell, whether in the domestic or international box office,” said Dean Keith Simonton, professor of psychology at the University of California–Davis. “Even among R movies, less graphic sex is better.”

The same goes for video gaming. Yes, you heard me, gaming, that world frequented mainly by sexually repressed and immature young men—or so goes the stereotype. Apparently, they aren’t impressed with straightforward sex. Playboy games have been met with indifference, and even cartoon adventurer Lara Croft has had her body “reduced to more anatomically feasible proportions” at the same time as her critical stock has risen.

Why is it that sex—something most of us think too much about—doesn’t do a better job of selling?

First, we are becoming more accustomed to sex. It is all around us and very accessible. Second, sex is blinding and doesn’t like to share the stage. People might recall a sexy ad, but they rarely remember what the ad was trying to sell. Chaste ads might not get the heart pounding, but they do a better job of getting the mind to focus on what advertisers want it to focus on—the product.

This doesn’t mean the end of trying to use sex to sell. As we are all exposed to more sex, our titillation level rises, so we will probably see an increase in sex in marketing before we see a decline. Unfortunately, companies will push the boundaries under the delusion that sex, if done right, will sell for them.

For the rest of us, this means:

• Choose models who look more like your customers, which probably means less sexy and more normal looking. Or set the standard a notch above your customer, offering a realistic aspiration. Extremely sexy/attractive is just too out-of-reach for most of us.

• Using realistic models will also help customers’ perception of you being authentic.

• Don’t advertise around sex, such as during sexy TV shows. Studies show that your ads are less likely to be remembered.

• If you are looking to tantalize your customer, studies show that men prefer to see 40 percent of a woman’s body. Less than that is seen as prudish; more suggests a woman might be unfaithful. (We’ve no idea what percentage of a man’s body women prefer to see, but co-workers suggest it has less to do with a percentage than with what is seen.)

• Don’t use sex to try to sell, unless you are trying to sell sex itself.

So much for my peg-leg photographic dream. The lesson here is that marketing is best grounded in what works; don’t get too wrapped up in what is just fantasy, however appealing.

(although it does a good job of selling itself)

Synaptic Branding 005: Sex Doesn’t Sell Products

I have a long-standing vision of myself as the big advertising art director. I’m donning peg-leg Armanis with a tight crotch, and sporting a flowing Diesel Sevento shirt. My face is perfectly framed by Calvin Klein glasses. (Hey, I’ve already got those!) I’m directing a beautiful young model to take off more of her clothing. “Look honey, you’re not back in Kansas now, baby,” I would purr, “We’re in Florence, Massachusetts, and in Florence, sex sells.”

Contrary to conventional wisdom—and my fanciful dreams—sex doesn’t help sales, and can actually be a hindrance.

According to the 2005 book Sex in Advertising: Perspectives on the Erotic Appeal, about one-fifth of all ads employ sex in an attempt to sell. The problem is that studies have shown that subjects are no more likely to recall erotic ads than non-erotic ones. And women in particular are more likely to perceive too much sex in marketing as a negative.

A recent study found that nudity has no positive impact on movie popularity with viewers or critics. Top-grossing films, such as Spider-Man, typically have only mild sex or nudity. “Sex did not sell, whether in the domestic or international box office,” said Dean Keith Simonton, professor of psychology at the University of California–Davis. “Even among R movies, less graphic sex is better.”

The same goes for video gaming. Yes, you heard me, gaming, that world frequented mainly by sexually repressed and immature young men—or so goes the stereotype. Apparently, they aren’t impressed with straightforward sex. Playboy games have been met with indifference, and even cartoon adventurer Lara Croft has had her body “reduced to more anatomically feasible proportions” at the same time as her critical stock has risen.

Why is it that sex—something most of us think too much about—doesn’t do a better job of selling?

First, we are becoming more accustomed to sex. It is all around us and very accessible. Second, sex is blinding and doesn’t like to share the stage. People might recall a sexy ad, but they rarely remember what the ad was trying to sell. Chaste ads might not get the heart pounding, but they do a better job of getting the mind to focus on what advertisers want it to focus on—the product.

This doesn’t mean the end of trying to use sex to sell. As we are all exposed to more sex, our titillation level rises, so we will probably see an increase in sex in marketing before we see a decline. Unfortunately, companies will push the boundaries under the delusion that sex, if done right, will sell for them.

For the rest of us, this means:

• Choose models who look more like your customers, which probably means less sexy and more normal looking. Or set the standard a notch above your customer, offering a realistic aspiration. Extremely sexy/attractive is just too out-of-reach for most of us.

• Using realistic models will also help customers’ perception of you being authentic.

• Don’t advertise around sex, such as during sexy TV shows. Studies show that your ads are less likely to be remembered.

• If you are looking to tantalize your customer, studies show that men prefer to see 40 percent of a woman’s body. Less than that is seen as prudish; more suggests a woman might be unfaithful. (We’ve no idea what percentage of a man’s body women prefer to see, but co-workers suggest it has less to do with a percentage than with what is seen.)

• Don’t use sex to try to sell, unless you are trying to sell sex itself.

So much for my peg-leg photographic dream. The lesson here is that marketing is best grounded in what works; don’t get too wrapped up in what is just fantasy, however appealing.

Subliminal Messaging Moves Beyond Sex

After my last blog two people asked me the same question. “Just curious,” they said, “but how effective is subliminal advertising?” Good question. It’s an ongoing debate. Some camps debunk it totally, but recent research is keeping the discussion alive.

The Skeptic’s Dictionary and Snopes say that there is no evidence subliminal messaging works. Early “evidence” turned out to be a hoax and has never been verifiable, most notably a 50s study that said subliminal messaging increased popcorn and Coke sales.

But for decades the discussion about subliminal advertising has not been about junk food; it has centered on the twin obsessions of sex and selling. The unproven assumption has been that hidden sexual messages trick us into buying. Culture sleuths point out that sex riddles advertising. It is represented in titillating photos (check out any New York Times Magazine). Supposedly, the word “sex” is even hidden in an ad for the (gasp!) United Methodist Church.

Still I have to ask, why even bother with the subliminal in this way? Many ads are so explicit that they hardly need a subliminal sexual reference. And I see the hidden word “sex” as a Rorschach inkblot test. You will find what you want to find. It says more about who is looking at the ad than the Mad Men (and women) of Madison Avenue.

Recent studies are finally moving beyond sex and selling. There is growing evidence that subliminal messaging does influence people. It is just subtler than we thought. And this is where I think it gets more interesting (okay, sex and selling is still kind of interesting).

In a recent experiment, Duke University wanted to see if subliminal exposure to well-known logos influenced future behavior. They found the people exposed to the Apple logo were more creative on a future test than people exposed to the IBM logo. The idea here is that subliminal exposure to a brand’s identity influenced behavior associated with that brand identity. Apparently, you are what you are exposed to.

Subliminal messaging does have advantages. Faced with an ever-growing number of messages, we are developing defense mechanisms to marketing. But subliminal messages don’t trigger these defense mechanisms. Furthermore, we usually think our own thoughts are the best. The subliminal can trick us into thinking a thought is actually ours (as the bumper sticker I saw last week warned: you don’t have to believe everything you think).

But one thing is needed for subliminal messaging to work on any level, as a University College London study found. You must be paying attention. The subliminal doesn’t stand a chance of influencing you unless you are tuned in to what is hiding the subliminal. This is why product placement is popular. You pay attention to movies and TV shows. You follow the story, and you don’t tune out the background as products glide by.

Is subliminal advertising effective? You better believe marketers are experimenting. Be careful what you are paying attention to. You may be seeing more than you know.

Is Subliminal Marketing for You?

It was 1981 when I discovered sex in photos of ice cubes and Ritz crackers. I was a high school junior and I was desperate. This was back when finding anything about sex was difficult.

Dr. Wilson Bryan Key and his books Media Sexploitation and Subliminal Seduction changed that. He revealed how ad men hid sexual content in all their work, subconsciously steering us to consume.

As the titles of Key’s books suggest, he was concerned, but he wasn’t alone. Newsday called the technique “the most alarming invention since the atom bomb.”(Brainwash by Dominic Streatfeild). The books opened my eyes. I didn’t have to search for sex anymore! It was in the ads of every issue of my parents’ Christian Science Monitor!

The first physiological evidence that subliminal images grab the attention of the subconscious brain finally came in 2007. Dr. Bahador Bahrami of the University of College London said that their study didn’t prove that the subliminal influenced you, but the there was no doubt that the brain registered the messages unconsciously. Bahrami concluded, “subliminal advertising may affect our decisions.”

He wasn’t the only Englishman delving into the subliminal. A year earlier, magician and mentalist Derren Victor Brown performed a Brit-styled Punk’d switcharoo on a marketing firm showing the power of unconscious persuasion. This may not be science, but it is enlightening.

There are laws against subliminal messaging, but by its nature evidence is elusive, and laws are vague. Little action has ever been taken even when incidents are recorded.

As a result, what are the ethical issues of such potential power? Nudge authors Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein adopt the rule of transparency, meaning an organization is banned from doing something they are not able or willing to defend publicly. You can be subliminal as long as you are open about it.

I agree with this simple, but powerful test. If a company can’t comfortably defend its marketing techniques in public, it should not pursue those techniques at all.