http://www.benlocker.co.uk/is-copywriting-evil/
With or Without Moral Dilemma: Rhetorical Strategies used in "Is Copywriting Evil?" By Tom Albrighton
There are many components that make up a system and the way it works, like a company, for example. This "system" needs people to create their item, others to keep order, and, of course, someone to advertise said product. Copywriters, defined as "a person who writes the text of advertisements or publicity material," is someone that is placed in the category of advertising. In Albrighton's article "Is Copywriting Evil?," he discusses different elements of copywriting and how much copywriters are to blame for consumers buying, or not buying, what they advertise. The placement of this blame is what causes such controversy and creates the question on whether or not copywriting is, in fact, "evil." In this elaborate and well written piece, Tom Albrighton is able to cover all ground and conclude, in the end, that copywriting isn't evil. In order to convince the audience of the same thing, he uses positioning and word choice, hypotheticals, and he also addresses the opposing opinions.
All throughout the piece, Albrighton brings up and addresses the elements of copywriting and how they may impact the given audience, and, to do that, he uses subtitles to organize the paper. These titles give a preview of what that given section is about, but they also are capable of giving an implication about copywriters based off the words he uses. For example, one of the subtitles used was "Just following orders." This phrase puts these writers in a place that can be compared to that of a soldier, as if everything they do is orders from someone else, and they are removed from the people who make the decisions. This would provide evidence to what Albrighton is trying to
prove, that copywriting is not evil, because they are just doing what they're suppose to for their clients. Soldiers aren't usually seen as "evil" because they're doing a job for something bigger than themselves, and copywriters are meant to be positioned in the same light.
Along with positioning them, Tom Albrighton positions certain situations, so that they're easier to understand, through hypotheticals. Though there can be a argument made about the molarity of this job, Albrighton uses a hypothetical "story" in order to show how some copywriters may try to avoid putting themselves in a position that goes against their morals and what they believe is right. In the article, he uses the idea of not eating meat, and says "Here's an example, I don't eat meat. I decided to bring that principal into my work, and turn down anything that involves killing animals for food... But should I promote a pie that contains meant?... Where do I draw the line and decide that, on this assignment, my keyboard is far enough removed from the abattoir to be in the clear?" This "story" shows that copywriters can make attempts to still do their job, but make it morally acceptable in their own standards. If they attempt to find a standard of working, then they care about being moral and, with that implication, he shows that copywriters are not "evil."
If the idea of copywriters making moral standards doesn’t seem reasonable enough, Albrighton also addresses the opinion of those that oppose his opinion, that copywriters are not evil. He comments on both sides of the mora coin by saying "on the one hand, a libertarian might argue that people are free to choose whether or not they buy things... And on the other, a sociologist might respond that the environment... plays a key role in shaping our behavior." Although Albrighton doesn't outright say one is
actually more correct than the other, he does look at both in a way that shows that opinions can be different. The fact that he is willing to voice reason to the other side shows that he understands all aspects of the subject. Because he shows knowledge, on both sides, what he says becomes more validated and people are more likely to lean towards what his article is essentially about; that is, proving that copywriting isn't evil.
Although it's something based off of opinion, Tom Albrigton is able to use different methods to persuade his audience that copywriters and their job is not all evil. There are many people that make up the process of advertising, so the complete blame should not be put on them, even if their job does have some "evil" to it.
Additional links: http://www.copyblogger.com/ethical-selling/
http://www.aef.com/on_campus/classroom/speaker_pres/data/6000
With or Without Moral Dilemma: Rhetorical Strategies used in "Is Copywriting Evil?" By Tom Albrighton
There are many components that make up a system and the way it works, like a company, for example. This "system" needs people to create their item, others to keep order, and, of course, someone to advertise said product. Copywriters, defined as "a person who writes the text of advertisements or publicity material," is someone that is placed in the category of advertising. In Albrighton's article "Is Copywriting Evil?," he discusses different elements of copywriting and how much copywriters are to blame for consumers buying, or not buying, what they advertise. The placement of this blame is what causes such controversy and creates the question on whether or not copywriting is, in fact, "evil." In this elaborate and well written piece, Tom Albrighton is able to cover all ground and conclude, in the end, that copywriting isn't evil. In order to convince the audience of the same thing, he uses positioning and word choice, hypotheticals, and he also addresses the opposing opinions.
All throughout the piece, Albrighton brings up and addresses the elements of copywriting and how they may impact the given audience, and, to do that, he uses subtitles to organize the paper. These titles give a preview of what that given section is about, but they also are capable of giving an implication about copywriters based off the words he uses. For example, one of the subtitles used was "Just following orders." This phrase puts these writers in a place that can be compared to that of a soldier, as if everything they do is orders from someone else, and they are removed from the people who make the decisions. This would provide evidence to what Albrighton is trying to
prove, that copywriting is not evil, because they are just doing what they're suppose to for their clients. Soldiers aren't usually seen as "evil" because they're doing a job for something bigger than themselves, and copywriters are meant to be positioned in the same light.
Along with positioning them, Tom Albrighton positions certain situations, so that they're easier to understand, through hypotheticals. Though there can be a argument made about the molarity of this job, Albrighton uses a hypothetical "story" in order to show how some copywriters may try to avoid putting themselves in a position that goes against their morals and what they believe is right. In the article, he uses the idea of not eating meat, and says "Here's an example, I don't eat meat. I decided to bring that principal into my work, and turn down anything that involves killing animals for food... But should I promote a pie that contains meant?... Where do I draw the line and decide that, on this assignment, my keyboard is far enough removed from the abattoir to be in the clear?" This "story" shows that copywriters can make attempts to still do their job, but make it morally acceptable in their own standards. If they attempt to find a standard of working, then they care about being moral and, with that implication, he shows that copywriters are not "evil."
If the idea of copywriters making moral standards doesn’t seem reasonable enough, Albrighton also addresses the opinion of those that oppose his opinion, that copywriters are not evil. He comments on both sides of the mora coin by saying "on the one hand, a libertarian might argue that people are free to choose whether or not they buy things... And on the other, a sociologist might respond that the environment... plays a key role in shaping our behavior." Although Albrighton doesn't outright say one is
actually more correct than the other, he does look at both in a way that shows that opinions can be different. The fact that he is willing to voice reason to the other side shows that he understands all aspects of the subject. Because he shows knowledge, on both sides, what he says becomes more validated and people are more likely to lean towards what his article is essentially about; that is, proving that copywriting isn't evil.
Although it's something based off of opinion, Tom Albrigton is able to use different methods to persuade his audience that copywriters and their job is not all evil. There are many people that make up the process of advertising, so the complete blame should not be put on them, even if their job does have some "evil" to it.
Additional links: http://www.copyblogger.com/ethical-selling/
http://www.aef.com/on_campus/classroom/speaker_pres/data/6000