The Magic of Advertising

By: Raymond Williams

Advertising

The

Magic

System

Excerpt from The Long Revolution, Chapter 29

RAYMOND WILLIAMS’S ESSAY was originally written as a chapter in his 1961 book The Long Revolution, but was published only later and as an essay. It belongs to an older form of British-orientated cultural studies than the other essays collected here, but one that it is important not to forget. It stands apart in two main ways: first, for Williams, cultural studies moves unproblematically back into cultural history. For him, telling the story of advertising’s development allows one to grasp the forces which condition it now, and also, thus, to begin to be able to conceive of a different contemporary function for advertising. Second, Williams writes as a committed socialist; for him private sector capitalism cannot fulfill the needs of society as a whole. Today it is, perhaps, harder to promote state socialism than to insist that cultural studies requires historical narratives. But it is not as though these two strands of Williams’s essay are quite separate. For him, the history of advertising shows a minor mode of communication becoming a major one – a vital component in the organization and reproduction of capital. In a metaphor which goes back to Marx’s belief that capitalism makes commodities fetishes, for Williams advertising is magic because it transforms commodities into glamorous signifiers (turning a car into a sign of masculinity, for instance) and these signifiers present an imaginary, in the sense of unreal, world. Most of all, capitalism makes us forget how much work and suffering went into the production of commodities. Williams’s history aims to dis-enchant capitalism: to show us what it really is. It might be objected, of course, that advertising’s magic (like many magics) actually works: that, today, the use-value of many commodities is their signifying-function. But that objection (and others) which may occur to readers does not spoil the essay’s power to defamiliarize the current advertising industry through erudite narrative history.

That excellent and by all Physicians, approved, China drink, called by the Chineans Tcha, by other nations Tay alias Tee, is sold at the Sultaness Head Coffee-House, in Sweetings Rents, by the Royal Exchange, London.” “Coffee, chocolate, and a kind of drink called tee, sold in almost every street in 1659.

— Thomas Garraway

Mention of the physicians begins that process of extension from the conventional recommendations of books as ‘excellent’ or ‘admirable’ and the conventional branding, packaging and a good ‘selling line’. I remember being told by a man I knew at university (he had previously explained how useful, to his profession as an advertiser, had been his training in the practical criticism of advertisements) that advertisements you booked and paid for were really old stuff; the real thing was what got through as ordinary news. This seems to happen now with goods: ‘product centenaries’, for example. But with persons it is even more extensive. It began in entertainment, particularly with film actors, and it is still in this field that it does most of its work. It is very difficult to pin down, because the borderline between the item or photograph picked up in the ordinary course of journalism and broadcasting, and the similar item or photograph that has been arranged and paid for, either directly or through special hospitality by a publicity agent, is obviously difficult to draw. Enough stories get through, and are even boasted about, to indicate that the paid practice is extensive, though payment, except to the agent, is usually in hospitality (if that word can be used) or in kind. Certainly, readers of newspapers should be aware that the ‘personality’ items, presented as ordinary news stories or gossip, will often have been paid for, in one way or another, in a system that makes straightforward advertising, by comparison, look respectable. Nor is this confined to what is called ‘show business’; it has certainly entered literature, and it has probably entered politics. The extension is natural, in a society where selling, by any effective means, has become a primary ethic. The spectacular growth of advertising, and then its extension to apparently independent reporting, has behind it not a mere pressure group, as in the days of the quacks, but the whole impetus of a society. It can then be agreed that we have come a long way from the papyrus of the runaway slave and the shouts of the town-crier: that what we have to look at is an organized and extending system, at the centre of our national life.


Reading Response

IN THIS ESSAY, Raymond William explores the history of advertising, and how it evolved from a simple means of spreading information into the major cornerstone of capitalism today; shaping consumer behaviors, perceptions about each other, and prioritizing profit over the collective and social responsibility. William’s use of the word magic to describe modern advertising can be closely associated with user experience and interaction design. Both having the end goal of designing an engaging user experience for the customer, often building a unified narrative around the product. An example would be how Mercedes Benz commercials and their digital presence create a feeling of luxury, sophistication, and class to their products. The function of the car comes second to the way it’s supposed to make you feel.

Even though this essay was written in 1961, many of his ideas hold true today. His belief that modern advertising practices focus on profit over social responsibility and even the end customer are true today more than ever. Multinational companies that engage in ethically questionable business practices often purposefully hide those facts in their advertisements or simply ignore them all together. They only highlight the product themselves, and the status you will have when you own that item.

Furthermore, the rise of influencers in recent years has continued to exacerbate the problem of late-stage capitalism and its effects on the end consumer.

Companies today are paying exorbitant fees to netizens with large followings (within the companies target audience) to promote their products. These influencers are given the products for free and usually have to hit certain key talking points to satisfy their contract requirements. These are essentially paid advertisements, disguised as organic reviews from a neutral third party. Consumers are easily tricked into buying these products (many of which they don’t need) simply because someone they trust has promoted them. If you scroll through any social media app, you will see paid, organic, and sponsored advertisements flooding your feed. I understand that companies and people need to make money, but there has to be a more ethical way of spreading your brand/product to the consumer.

Having read this essay and reflected on the current stage of advertising in my own professional career and personal life, I agree with Raymond Williams on many points. Advertising’s only goal today is to grab as many eyeballs as possible. This is why we see them on every site imaginable, including social media apps (Facebook, Instagram, TikTok), video sharing platforms (YouTube, Twitch), mobile games, and even news sites. The saturation of advertisements in the digital space has undoubtedly changed the way consumers buy products, connect with products, and view themselves. Having said all that, I do disagree with William’s claim that capitalism is unable to fill the needs of the society. Advertisements and user experience designs can/have informed and empowered consumers about products in their lives. Modern user experience design especially, has progressed to include ethical considerations such as accessibility, inclusive design and user empowerment, remedying some of the capitalist beliefs that Williams mentioned. As a marketer and designer, I aim to balance the need for advertisements in today’s society with the ethical considerations that go along with it, ensuring the end user’s needs are met without creating superficial consumerist desires.

Manuscript response by: Jonathan Chiang

Back to top