There are things we wouldn’t let ourselves be told without rebelling. For example, if someone were to say to us, “whoever drinks this whisky is young, handsome, rich, and happy!” not only would we not believe it, but the whisky in question would become forever unlikable to us. Yet there are plenty of advertisements that say exactly this. But implicitly. In fact, what else does a video show when young, beautiful, wealthy, and happy people are drinking a certain brand of whisky? And what does a commercial convey when a housewife, who could model for Victoria’ Secret, is using a particular vacuum cleaner in a well-lit house in front of a husband smiling at her lovingly? Well, if the message is conveyed implicitly, we swallow it without question. And to some extent, it convinces us that things are indeed this way.
In short, soothing or solemn images and music convince us without us realizing it. But how do advertisers convince us when the message cannot be expressed with sounds and images because it requires linguistic formulation?
They formulate it IMPLICITLY. For example, Philips has invested a lot of money to spread this advertisement:
The implicit information is more important. Non-linguistic cues, such as the appearance of the couch and the presence of a plant, suggesting an elegant and spacious home, hence affluence; or the similarity between their hairstyles, implying a son following in his father’s footsteps. But also linguistic implicit information: the message is crafted to use the expression ‘my first Alfa,’ presupposing a series of subsequent Alfas. If the advertisement explicitly stated, ‘those who buy an Alfa then buy more,’ the target audience would realize it’s an unfounded claim. But in the form of implicit presupposition, we end up convincing ourselves sufficiently.
The Audi advertisement, aired thirty years later, using exactly the same expression, confirms the effectiveness of this strategy.
Political propaganda also often leverages the persuasive power of implicit messages.