Just Do It

The Nike advertisement pictured above promises the viewer that if they buy Nike products, they can do anything. This is shown in the hopscotch drawing on the side of a building. Anyone that has played or seen someone playing hopscotch knows that it would be virtually impossible to play on the side of a building. The slogan “Just Do It” in the lower right corner in combination with the picture of the hopscotch on the side of the building suggests that if you buy Nike products, you can play hopscotch on the side of a building which also means you can do anything.

The desire or need that the ad is appealing to is the need for escape as well as the need to satisfy curiosity. Without the notion of being able to play hopscotch on the side of a building, the setting of the photograph is not all that appealing. The bricks are run down, the grass is brown, and there doesn’t really look like there is anything to do nearby. Add the hopscotch and Nike emblem, and suddenly the whole world is your playground. This definitely makes the viewer feel as if Nike products will satisfy curiosity and help you escape from the confines of your current world. (i.e. gravity)

The intended audience for this advertisement is lower and middle class, 8 – 21 year olds. Hopscotch is a grammar school game, and the use of it is clearly aimed at those who still remember it and would be willing to play it again with a new twist (on the side of a wall). I think it is aimed at a poorer audience because it is based around the idea of creating something extraordinary out of nothing (except for a $50-$80 pair of shoes). I think that because the advertisement appeals to a sense of youthfulness, and a feeling of simpler times, that it is aimed at lower-middle class, young people.

drink of choice

I recently got into an argument with my friend Sam about which drink is the best to order from a bar. I argued that whiskey and diet coke are better and she argued that beer is better. I claimed that whiskey and diet coke is cheaper, less fattening and less filling. She claimed that beer was better because she could drink more without getting too drunk. The evidence I used to support my claim that whiskey and diet coke is cheaper was the fact that you only need to drink a few in order to get the same kind of buzz that would require 3-4 beers. Sam challenged that argument by saying that my reasoning was flawed because we are girls we aren’t paying for drinks the majority of the time anyway and so price shouldn’t be factored in to what makes a drink “the best”. She argued that it was better to drink beer because we work at a brewery and usually drink beer before we go out to the bar, and “liquor before beer, you’re in the clear.. beer before liquor never been sicker”. I see now that this is a logical fallacy because that is just something that people say and it appeals to tradition but in all reality probably doesn’t mean anything. I argued that no matter what it is less fattening to drink diet coke and whiskey than it is to drink beer, revealing that I value my body and the first thing I look for when choosing a cocktail is calorie content. Sam argued that she feels more in control when she is drinking beer and doesn’t black out, which shows that she values self control. We each had strengths and weaknesses to our arguments but we realized that we defined “the best” in very different ways, and held different values for cocktails.