1 / 13

I am going to be analyzing this Dr. Pepper advertisement.

I am going to be analyzing this Dr. Pepper advertisement. By: Jessica Sharma. This ad was shared on Facebook by Dr. Pepper in September of 2012 and started an uproar of controversy. . One offended reader commented, “I ain’t no freaking chimp. No more Dr. Pepper for my household.”

kare
Télécharger la présentation

I am going to be analyzing this Dr. Pepper advertisement.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. I am going to be analyzing this Dr. Pepper advertisement. By: Jessica Sharma

  2. This ad was shared on Facebook by Dr. Pepper in September of 2012 and started an uproar of controversy. • One offended reader commented, “I ain’t no freaking chimp. No more Dr. Pepper for my household.” • Other readers thought that it was funny without taking offense.

  3. In the ad we see an ape on four legs (Pre-pepper), then we see a bent over person discovering the Dr. Pepper on a rock (Pepper Discovery), and then finally we see a healthy looking man drinking a Dr. Pepper (Post Pepper).

  4. HISTORY • This ad is a spin-off from the 1965 “March of Progress” by Rudolph Zallinger on evolution. • It shows that humans come from Neanderthals or apes. This infamous picture sparked a lot of debate and complaints.

  5. Many other ads have based off same picture such as this one which displays happy hour at a bar called Dros. In this ad, the rhetor uses humor to show that if you go to this happy hour you will slowly start acting like an animal.

  6. Exigence • According to Grant-Davie, the exigence is the answer to 3 questions: “what is the discourse about, why it is needed, and what it should accomplish” • “Bitzer defines rhetorical exigence as the rhetor’s sense that a situation both calls for discourse and might be resolved by discourse” (Grant-Davie 106). This is only a part of Grant-Davie’s 3-part definition. • This ad is about drinking Dr. Pepper to help you evolve into a human being. • This ad gives off the idea that you need Dr. Pepper to grow and evolve into a human. • It should make people want to buy and drink Dr. Pepper. Purpose • The purpose of a discourse community ties in with the third part of Grant-Davie’s definition of exigence: what it should accomplish • Its purpose is to get you to buy and drink Dr. Pepper.

  7. Audiences • “A discourse may have primary and secondary audiences, audiences that are present and those that have yet to form, audiences that act collaboratively or as individuals, audiences about whom the rhetor knows little, or audiences that exist only in the rheotr’s mind” (Grant-Davie 110). • Posted on Facebook on September 2012 • Primary- people who have a Facebook and understand the theory of evolution • Secondary- anyone else who may see it The audience is defined by Grant-Davie as those people, real or imagined, with whom rhetors negotiate through discourse to achieve the rhetorical objectives.

  8. Constraints According to Grant-Davie, “constraints are factors in the situation’s context that may affect the achievement of the rhetorical objectives.” Bitzer defines them as “persons, events, objects, and relations which are parts of the situation because they have the power to constrain decisionand action needed to modify the exigence.” Positive • People who like to learn about evolution Negative • Christians don’t believe in evolution • Others take offense to beginning as an ape

  9. Rhetors • Grant-Davie defines rhetors as “those people, real or imagined, responsible for the discourse and its authorial voice.” • “Rhetors need to consider who they are in a particular situation and be aware that their identity may vary from situation to situation” (Grant-Davie 108). • In this ad the rhetors are the human being, perceived as a healthy growing man, the person who made the ad, and “Dr. Pepper”(the person).

  10. Argument • Pathos-(the emotional appeal) feels like it is a necessity to drink Dr. Pepper; makes you look good and grow • Ethos- (the credibility appeal) healthy man; person who made ad has credibility • Logos-(the logical appeal) uses evolution-parody

  11. EVOLUTION OF FLAVOR • Bold and in caps so it stands out and is the first thing the audience reads • Flavor of the Dr. Pepper causes the evolution • “A one of a kind schematic brought to you by Dr. Pepper.” • Doctor Pepper- ethos appeals The fact that he’s a “doctor” gives off the impression that he knows what he’s talking about and has credibility as a rhetor.

  12. Color • The ad is primarily red which instantly catches the eye. • For example, in these 2 pictures you notice the red immediately. The first picture shows red lawn chairs which give the décor some flavor and pop. The second picture is a pair of Louboutinheels which are know for having red bottoms. They do this because it catches the eye.

  13. Sources • http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/dr-peppers-evolution-joke-facebook-riles-creationists-143776 • http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-h-word/2012/oct/03/history-science • http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/09/18/161342548/dr-peppers-evolution-ad-strikes-a-nerve-with-some-christians • Wardle, Elizabeth, and Downs Doug. Writing About Writing: A College Reader. Boston: Bedford's/St. Martin's, 2011. Print.

More Related