September
11, 2001— everyone remembers where they were at the exact moment they heard the
news that America had been attacked. Specifically, I remember being in my third
grade classroom when my teacher told us that we were not allowed outside for
recess that day. I have a vague memory of her mentioning an attack in New York
City, but as an elementary school student I was more worried that I was missing
some solid time on the swing set, and it was not until I saw one of my teachers
crying in the hallway that I realized that something awful had happened. That
day holds a different memory for everyone but as Americans we all share the
sense of loss, tragedy, and heartbreak as a country. Within her book Tourists of History, Marita Sturken
reaches into these moments of tragedy and pulls out the reaction that typically
overlooked; how do these events affect our consumer culture?
By
looking at devastating American events such as the Oklahoma City Bombing which
occurred on April 19, 1995 and the September 11th attack, Sturken
brings to light how Americans continue to process and interact with the tragedy
through the purchase of mass produced goods. Beginning with the description of
two snow globes, one from Oklahoma City and the other from the 9/11 Memorial,
she describes the significance that seemingly cheap knick-knacks truly hold. Not
only are such trinkets evidence of a tourist’s visit to a site of importance
but a conscious effort to remember. While few realize the irony that their actions
as a consumer hold, Sturken enlightens us that many of the mementos we purchase
to memorialize an event we identify as unique to the United States are often
made in a foreign country, thus connecting our tragedy to the global market. In
this nuanced view of Americans’ relationship with tragedy, the ordinary becomes
pieces of a larger narrative that connects bombings to teddy bears, duct tape
to the Department of Homeland Security, and commercials to uplifting tales.
It
is evident within American society today that we are constantly overwhelmed
with advertising campaigns, media breaks, and an overall need to purchase. As a society we are faced with the pressures to buy at every turn.
 |
| Even Marilyn Mason feels the pressure sometimes |
The
argument that Sturken appears to make throughout her book is that in times of
crisis Americans require a great deal of retail therapy, even flooding to
places like Wal-Mart to seek solace in times of need. The pressure to buy then takes on a whole new meaning. To the untrained eye this
may appear as a nation just satisfying their consumer needs, but in a world
seeped in patriotism they are rather fulfilling a duty to their country. The
ability to purchase mass-produced goods can be viewed, according to Sturken, as
a motivational symbol that the American people will not be kept down even if
they are not aware of the movement they are taking part in. Advertisers are not
unaware of the opportunity to send a message in times of national crisis,
directing their campaigns to include a heartfelt message about the tragedy or a
political message to the nation. In efforts to ease and reassure the public
companies are marketing a sense of comfort rather than just goods to the people
in dire need.
There
is no other company that knows how to pull on the heartstrings of Americans
like Budweiser and their famous Clydesdale horses. Only two months after the
September 11th attack Budweiser released a Super Bowl commercial
that emoted solidarity to a nation torn by tragedy. The commercial follows the
Budweiser Clydesdale horses through New York City and into Battery Park where they
give a breath taking bow in honor of those who lost their lives. In a news
story aired on the 14th anniversary of 9/11, a Chicago news station
interviewed the creative brains behind the poignant commercial and revealed the
heartfelt process and the many hoops the team had to jump through that led to
its production. “The True Story behind the 9/11 Budweiser Commercial that Only Aired One Time,” details what it took to make such an iconic commercial that
touched all those who saw it during Super Bowl XXXVI. The full commercial was
aired only once during the 2002 Super Bowl with an edited version shown again
in 2011 for the 10th anniversary of the tragedy.
The original commercial, aired February 3,2002
 |
| Those Clydesdale horses hit you right in the feels :( |
As a company
based in St. Louis, Missouri, Anheuser-Busch’s tribute to an event in New York
City represents a connection that reaches across the country and ties together
Americans in times of crisis. The Budweiser brand is well-known for their
ability to create commercials that touch the hearts of its consumers while
simultaneously advertising their product. What makes the 9/11 commercial
different from all the others, however, is the absence of the brand name until
the very last seconds. This purposeful omission speaks to the true message of
the commercial. Rather than attempting to just market their product to a mass
audience, the Budweiser Clydesdale horses’ bow towards New York City is a sign of
strength among the American people in the wake of the detrimental attack. “Deemed
one of the most highly effective ads of all time,” the commercial created by
Anheuser-Busch establishes the link between consumerism and tragedy that
Sturken describes in her study. The ability for a beer company to help a
hurting city heal through such an advertisement portrays the deep connection
our country establishes between purchasing power and patriotism. As addressed
in Tourists of History, there are
times in our country’s history when the consumption of mass-produced goods is
seen as evidence that as Americans we will not be held down, and as in the
Budweiser commercial there is also the important message that “We’ll Never
Forget.” It is this connection that makes the Budweiser commercial so powerful.
A company using their marketing power during the year’s biggest night for
advertising for a heartfelt message of condolence to the American people truly shows how emotionally intertwined we are as a country.
Reading Tourists of History as well as watching
the news story depicting the Anheuser-Busch 9/11 commercial brought me to question
many aspects of America’s consumer culture and the influence that commercials
have over our daily lives. We are all aware of the power that media and
advertisers have over the choices we make throughout our days but that makes me
wonder, what if this power could be used for good rather than evil? While we
have begun to see an increase in advertisements against smoking and bullying,
how else could positive and uplifting messages be utilized more often? Could social
problems facing today’s youth possibly be addressed more positively in the
media? Our country may not be ready for such an influx of moving commercials to
hit their televisions, but who says that positive messages are only needed
after a tragedy?
I remember where I was and what I was doing for both the Oklahoma City Bombing and the 9/11 attacks. Those are memories that I will carry with me forever and yet I have never thought about the significance of consumerism and tragedy. I have mixed emotions regarding Sturken's argument and am not completely convinced of its validity. I agree with her assessment that commercials can illicit a strong response out of individuals but I don't know if it is nation binding. I could tell you what songs were playing on the radio in the aftermath of 9/11 because every time I hear them I remember that day, but I have no idea what commercials were airing on television. Also, maybe it's because I'm a historian and feel a deeper connection to things like this, but I personally would not feel closer to a tragic event simply by visiting it and buying a souvenir. Struken makes a very interesting argument, but it left me wanting a bit more.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI found your conclusionary questions intriguing. Particularly about the influence of media through advertising. I thought about the tremendous amount of military advertising on television. I have always found it unsettling to find "commercials" or "advertising" to regards to serving in the United States military. Budweiser is selling a product by spending millions on advertising, so what role is the media playing in the military advertisement in general, or national policy in the larger picture? And to your larger question - what role does the media play in sending positive societal messages? Do they even have such an obligation? Or, what role does advertising play in national policy making?
Allison, I laughed out loud reading your post, very funny…entertaining and informative! I thought it was interesting how politicians kept saying the best thing to do for America is to buy, and continue on business as usual. Although I believe they are right, I think the advertisement companies did a better job in expressing that through their sympathetic commercials. They are getting the same message across…consume, but in a way that seems softer more subtle for sure then just outright saying it. That’s what I like about the Budweiser commercial, you know its cute, it gives you all types of feels and makes you want to buy with directly telling you to.
ReplyDeleteAs you said, Budweiser sure can pull those heartstrings with their post-tragedy commercials, just as the ubiquitous teddy bear and its outstretched, hugging arms can provide a sense of comfort in a similar situation. But the people in foreign factories making these also get a great deal of money from the sale of them to people who need a hug after their heartstrings have been pulled. There’s certainly no problem with that, especially since they could be behaving with much less tact like those late night infomercials for 9/11 coins, and everyone sort of wins in these situations: companies get profits and people get to feel. Which is where your question of advertisement’s being used for good rather than ill, because it is a very similar situation. Attention and good PR tends to follow ad campaigns that do a little more than soullessly sell your product, whether you’re decking things out in rainbows or expressing solidarity for some tragedy.
ReplyDeleteI read the first half of the post, watched the commercial, and finished reading. I went back to watch the commercial again, and despite having read Sturken and the post completely, I still choked up. Thing is, this is nothing new to American culture, it's essentially a propaganda tool. It's a sad truth that companies will utilize whatever national consciousness - usually fear or unity, or both - to make profits. And it's a dangerous tool; one could argue that the way Budweiser pulled at the country's heartstrings promoted patriotic mania as well, like "if you didn't tear up or appreciate or respect that commercial (regardless if you buy the beer) you're un-American!" I'd absolutely love to see the concepts of this book held up to other cultures. Does France commemorate the Charlie Hebdo attack, for instance? Or is it only in America where tragedy can be bought and sold under the guise of unity and patriotism? And what classifies as a "national tragedy"? Personally, I think the rates of child homelessness and starvation in supposedly the wealthiest country in the world is a national tragedy, one that's existed for years, why isn't there a snow globe with an Oliver Twist-like figurine out there somewhere? Rant over
ReplyDelete"Love fades away, but things...things are forever." - Tom Haverford
ReplyDeleteI just couldn't help but think of this quote when reading your post. Although it was clearly said in a joking context, Tom hits upon a very real, and very troubling aspect of American culture and that is our deep connection with material items, a connection that to some is often more meaningful than our connection with the abstract. For instance, in the wake of France's refusal to support the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, many found it difficult to adequately express the feelings of anger and betrayal that came about from such an action. It's not an easy thing to put into words after all. But everyone, on the other hand, understood the sentiment of renaming French Fries to Freedom Fries. That was a message that people could get behind. To me Budweiser's ad expresses an almost identical notion and that is that sadness in the wake of tragedy, as a concept, is hard to understand and somehow feels less than real. But beer, and the commercials that advertise it? Beer is real. Beer is touchable. And in this instance, beer doesn't just carry a message. No, in this case, beer is a message.
After reading "Tourists of History," I find my myself viewing tourism in a very different fashion. I can also experience first hand how stores and companies are advertising in the moment or for anniversary. For the last seven years, I have worked at Tops Markets on the weekends, and I agree that companies love to grab the emotions of their customers. Working with my bosses and hundreds of vendors from Nabisco, Coors, Kellogg's, General Mills etc, they create their sales based on the holidays, or anniversaries. While is may not be up to the standards of the Clydesdale horses for Budweiser, they still have an impact on society.
ReplyDeleteI agree that companies advertise to instill fear or lack of confidence or pride. The Marilyn Mason picture Allison used is perfect. I also like what Matt brought up in that Budweiser makes you feel "un-American" if you do not purchase their product. They are instilling that lack of pride of their customers in their commercial to increase sales. While these are the basic foundations of American advertising, do we see other countries do this to their citizens, or is just another part of american society? Did our American ancestors advertise their products in a similar fashion for the American Revolution, War of 1812, the gold rush, etc?
Fantastic blog post Allison! I'm too young to remember Oklahoma City, but I do remember where i was when September 11th, on the school bus in 4th grade, the news came in over the radio. I had no idea what the World Trade Center was or even where it was, but I could tell it was big by the way the radio DJs were talking about it. One of my idols, sportswriter Rick Reilly, has described consumerism as "you don't want to just keep up with the Jonses, you want to kick the Joneses' ass." This concept of fear driving is an interesting one, whether that fear is from a national crisis, having bad breath and pimples, or simply being outpaced by your neighbors.
ReplyDeleteThe commercialization and mass commercial culture of America has become an increasingly huge part of American society. When you watch a football game (one of the last things large swathes of Americans do together) you get inundated with commercials for beer, Viagra, and countless other sundry items.
ReplyDeleteIts interesting that the big advertisers this year were Fanduel and Draft Kings, two 'Daily Fantasy' websites. After week 4 they had aired over 50k ad spots, which is just insane. However, this has backfired as many people have been calling for them to be shut down for gambling violations almost solely because how pervasive their ad campaign has been.
Its clear that the media has great power, but also must wield it carefully like Budweiser does to make commercials that don't repel people but make people feel good (an aspect that the anti-smoking commercials fail at).
But you are also right that if done correctly advertisement can be used to push a positive agenda. Take milk for instance. While done by the Dairy Farmers to sell more milk, milk is an important nutritious drink that was under-consumed but their "Got Milk" campaign succeeded in getting more kids to drink it, so there is potential for positive messaging campaigns.
Perhaps I'm just less sentimental, but I didn't see the ad as memorializing so much as using a tragedy to sell beer. It wasn't tasteless or tactless, but I do feel that it failed as an ad because it didn't tell me anything about the product. The most basic purpose of an ad is to tell the viewer why X product is superior. This ad told me nothing about Budweiser the beer. It told me to buy Budweiser beer because Budweiser as a company is patriotic. I prefer to buy my products based on their quality.
ReplyDeleteAs Matt and Ryan both discussed, the impression one gets from the ad is that you are "un-American" if you don't buy Budweiser. I like to think I'm a smart consumer and I refuse to let a company blackmail me with threats of being un-American if I don't buy their beer. But maybe I just watch too much Mad Men and get too into the nitty-gritty concepts of advertising.
I agree with you when you said that everyone probably remembers where they were when the September 11th attacks to took place. I can recall being in school and how before lunch about half of my class had left early, and eventually. I would be picked up too. As far as advertisers trying to pull on viewers heartstrings, I have no doubt that they are trying to sell their product. But despite this, I still believe that the companies behind the ads recognize the impact of tragedy when it takes place, in this case the terrorist attacks of 9/11. I don't think it can be said definitely which takes priority for a company, the comforting of a nation or the selling of a product. This is because within a company all employees are individuals with different priorities. I do agree with your point that positive messages shouldn't just be presented after a tragedy.
ReplyDelete