2002
DOI: 10.1080/103503302760212087
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Looking Good on Whose Terms? Ambiguity in Two Kellogg's Special K ® Print Advertisements

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
7
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…] Similarly, Americans Goldman and Papson (1996) and McHa‰e (1997) have maintained that advertisers now intermix all sorts of signs as they rapidly develop new campaigns, constantly seeking to fracture existing codes in order to di¤erentiate their brands. For example, Pedersen's (2002) analysis of the multi-layered meanings of breakfast cereal ads suggests that advertisers are playing with verbal and visual signs in more unexpected and aggressive ways, presumably to keep consumers from being as readily defensive or uncooperative in perceiving brand meanings that the marketer prefers and seeks to potentiate. As a result, a crisis in sign value is alleged to have risen in which the bind between signifier and signified has disintegrated to the point where connections to any real and identifiable referent have been severed (see also Chébat and Marchand 1998;Urbancic 1998).…”
Section: Advertisingmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…] Similarly, Americans Goldman and Papson (1996) and McHa‰e (1997) have maintained that advertisers now intermix all sorts of signs as they rapidly develop new campaigns, constantly seeking to fracture existing codes in order to di¤erentiate their brands. For example, Pedersen's (2002) analysis of the multi-layered meanings of breakfast cereal ads suggests that advertisers are playing with verbal and visual signs in more unexpected and aggressive ways, presumably to keep consumers from being as readily defensive or uncooperative in perceiving brand meanings that the marketer prefers and seeks to potentiate. As a result, a crisis in sign value is alleged to have risen in which the bind between signifier and signified has disintegrated to the point where connections to any real and identifiable referent have been severed (see also Chébat and Marchand 1998;Urbancic 1998).…”
Section: Advertisingmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Daugiaprasmiškumas ir nekonkretumas dominuoja daugelyje kalbos sričių ir stilių, tad patarlės -ne išimtis. Nors daugybė lingvistų, logikų ir filosofų (Tanaka 1994, Varzi 2001, Pedersen 2002, Keefe 2003, Kennedy 2011, Löbner 2013 tyrinėjo šiuos fenomenus, atsakymas į klausimą, kaip jie funkcionuoja kalboje, ypač patarlėse, dar nerastas. Šiuo tyrimu siekiama aptarti lingvistinio daugiaprasmiškumo ir nekonkretumo vartojimą britiškose patarlėse.…”
Section: Santraukaunclassified
“…A considerable amount of literature has been published on these phenomena (Tanaka 1994, Varzi 2001, Pedersen 2002, Keefe 2003, Kennedy 2011, however, it remains unclear how they operate in the case of specific linguistic items such as proverbs.…”
Section: Introductory Remarksmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…On the other hand, it could be said that Dove's models are still above average in facial attractiveness, just as Peck and Loken (2004) found in their study of larger‐sized models in magazine advertisements. Furthermore, it could be argued—as did Pederson (2002) about Kellogg's print advertisements with atypical models—that this sophisticated semiotic strategy of empathy gains advertisers a double profit. In the words of Pederson (2002:169), “They look like champions and oust the competition by outselling and making others look bad” (or worse than them).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%