How Consumers Can Rationally Act Towards Advertisements

Every day, we can turn on the television, visit Hulu, or read the daily newspaper to find a myriad of advertisements. It is frequently argued by some people that most advertisements tend to impair consumers from making rational choices by luring them with impulsive sales. In certain areas, this argument clearly has validity.

Think about the last time you saw the advertisement for Allstate, the car insurance. This company likes to present the consumers with the situation - say, dropping of a tree branch into your windshield in the middle of thunderstorm. Or, maybe it will have a set-up of horrible accidents filled with firemen. The advertisements then tell the consumers to make the decision fast so they, the insurance companies, can prevent accidents from happening and resolve the cases if such incidents do occur (with the slogan, "Are you in good hands?").

But if the consumers simply go with the insurance company based on this advertisement, the decision is highly irrational. They should consider the types of benefits and premiums that the insurance company offers, testimonials from past and current members, and other relevant details. Unfortunately, many people fall for this trap because fear is one of the most powerful marketing strategies.

Interestingly, I do think that there are some situations where advertisements actually improve consumers' abilities in making rational choices. An odd example that people may not expect is the restaurants. While one may think that the advertisements by restaurants can lead to impulsive sales, I tend to think differently. Most people tend to debate quite a bit when the issue comes to, "What are we eating for supper today?" Usually, people end up going to their usual places because they've eaten there before several times and do not really know how to approach other unknown options.

Advertisements improve this decision-making by providing choices. In other words, if someone has been only going to Applebee's for steaks and sees an advertisement for Outback Steakhouse's new juicy Sirloin Steak for $8.99 (let's say the steak at the Applebee's was also $8.99, establishing ceteris paribus), then this person may break from the usual habit and try the steak from Outback. This is rational because the person is comparing and contrasting between the existing choice and the new choice. To a certain degree, I perceive this as a cost-benefit analysis, and such analysis is a critical tool for consumers to make rational choices.

Because of the commonly belief that advertisements tend to negatively influence the consumers in making proper decisions, it may seem unclear on whether the advertising is helpful or not helpful to people. In my opinion, the correct answer for this situation can be found by considering each advertisement in regards to eliminating or adding the choices. As in the case of car insurance commercials based on fear, such advertisements eliminate choices and only confront the consumers with one option: that company or dreadful (and possibly, morbid) future. This often leads to inefficient decision-making.

On the other hand, the restaurant advertisements simply add one more option to the choices that the consumers already had. The consumers have control because they have choices on what to do, and the presences of these multiple options promote the consumers to think through each option and make the best and rational choice.

Consumers should always keep in mind that anything they hear, see, or read can be deceptive and research - even just typing the word in the Google and reading the first thing that comes up - to prevent from making regretful decisions later.