CULTURAL TABOO IN ADVERTISING. DIFFERENCES IN THE TRANSMISSIONS OF AUDIOVISUAL ADVERTISING IN AMERICAN AND HINDU MARKET

• Authors: Hensoldt-Fyda Magdalena
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

The aim of this article is to examine differences between the transmissions of advertising content in the low and high context culture where the content contains subjects that are widely recognized as taboo. In order to do this, the analysis of audiovisual advertisements broadcast in the USA and India was used. These adverts introduce the problem of gender discrimination (particularly important in Hindu society) and different approach to gender stereotypes in both cultures (in American culture this subject is not suppressed). There are contrasting ways of presenting these difficult subjects in American and Hindu cultures. The things that are taboo in one culture become a stereotype in the other. And so, the question arises: do the cultural differences determining transmission of advertising content in the countries with cultural taboo of a product on sale still exist?

Keywords

EN

cultural taboo; culture of low and high context; communication style; transmission of advertising content

• Publisher: Wyższa Szkoła Informatyki i Zarządzania z siedzibą w Rzeszowie
• Journal: Social Communication. Online Journal
• Year: 2018
• Issue: 1 (17)
• Pages: 88-100

Contributors

author

Hensoldt-Fyda Magdalena

• Wyższa Szkoła Informatyki i Zarządzania z siedzibą w Rzeszowie

References

• AFEK J. (2013), Kulturowe i językowe uwarunkowania chińskich przesądów i tabu, Poznań, UAM.
• ALWAYS.COM (2017) [online: April 7, 2018], https://always.com/en-us/about-us/likeagirl-how-it-all-started;
• BBDO India (2015) [online: April 7, 2018], http://www.bbdoindia.com/#!&pageid=0&itemid=37;
• BBDO India (2016) [online: April 7, 2018], http://www.bbdoindia.com/#!&pageid=0&subsection=3&itemid=49;
• BIENIAS M. (2016), Reklama w Indiach nadrabia zaległości [online: April 7, 2018], https://marketingprzykawie.pl/artykuly/reklama-w-indiach-nadrabia-zaleglosci/;
• BOSKI P. (2009), Kulturowe ramy zachowań społecznych. Podręcznik psychologii międzykulturowej, Warszawa.
• BRALCZYK J. (2004), Język na sprzedaż, Gdańsk, Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.
• BRETT J. M. (2009), Negotiating globally, San Francisco.Cause Marketing (2016), P&G ‘Thank You, Mom’ Campaign Ad: “Strong” (Rio 2016 Olympics) [online: April 5,2018], https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdQrwBVRzEg;
• CISMAS S. C. (2010), The impact of American culture on other cultures: Language and cultural identity,
• AIKED’10 Proceedings of the 9th WSEAS international conference on Artificial intelligence, knowledge engineeringand data bases.
• CivitasAssocation (2014), Stereotypes in Commercials: Household Goods: [online: April 5, 2018], https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ake1x_qP5AU;
• COHEN R. (1997), Negotiating Across Cultures: International Communication in an Interdependent World,Washington D. C., United States Institute of Peace Press.
• DĄBROWSKA, A. (2008), Zmiany obszarów podlegających tabu we współczesnej kulturze, „Język a kultura”tom 20, Wrocław.
• DUDA A. (2005), Reklama w teorii kultury – przegląd wybranych stanowisk, „Kultura i Edukacja”, nr 1.
• FERSHTMAN CH., GNEEZY U., HOFFMAN M. (2011), Taboos and Identity: Considering the Unthinkable,”American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 3”.
• FISKE A. P,TETLOCK P. E., (1997), Taboo Trade-offs: Reactions to Transactions that Transgress the Spheres ofJustice, “Political Psychology”, 18(2).
• Guarian Fashion (2011), Benetton’s most controversial adverts [online: May 6, 2018], https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/gallery/2011/nov/17/benettons-most-controversial-adverts;
• HALL E. T. & HALL M. R. (1987), Understanding Cultural Differences, New York.
• LEŚNIAK-MOCZUK K. (2015), Kobieto, kim jesteś we współczesnym świecie?, „Nierówności Społeczne a WzrostGospodarczy”, nr 43.
• MACH Z. (2002), Tabu, [in:] Encyklopedia socjologii, tom 4, Warszawa, Oficyna Naukowa.
• NISHIMURA S., NEVGI A. SEPPO TELLA S. (2008), Communication Style and Cultural Features in High/LowContext Communication Cultures: A Case Study of Finland, Japan and India. Proceddings of a subject-didacticsymposium in Helsinki on Feb 2, part 2, Research Report 2009.
• PANASIUK I. (2009), Kulturowe aspekty tabu (na przykładzie tłumaczeń tekstów literackich rosyjskiego post-modernizmu), [in:]Dąbrowska A. (ed.), Język a kultura 21: Tabu w języku i kulturze, Warszawa.
• Procter & Gamble (2017), Love Over Bias [online: April 5, 2018], https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSWyr-R4gXkw;
• Procter & Gamble (2017a), 2017 Citizenship Report Released [online: April 5, 2018, ]https://us.pg.com/who-weare/citizenship/2017-citizenship-report;
• Procter & Gamble(2017b), 2017 Citizenship Report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [online: April 5, 2018]www.pg.com/citizenship; Rothermund D. (2010), Indie. Nowa azjatycka potęga, Warszawa.
• RUSSEL T., LANE R. (2000), Reklama według Ottona Kleppnera, Warszawa, Felberg SJA.
• SALLEH M. L. (2005), High/Low Context Communication: The Malaysian Malay Style, Association for BusinessCommunication Annual Convention.
• SZTOMPKA P. (2012), Socjologia. Analizaspołeczeństwa, Kraków, Znak.Victor D. A. (1992), International BusinessCommunication, New York, N. Y.: HarperCollins.
• WASILEWSKI J. S. (2010), Tabu, Warszawa, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
• WEIDER D. L., PRATT, S. (1990), On Being a Recognizable Indian Among Indians, in: D. Carbaugh (Ed.), CulturalCommunication and Intercultural Contact, New York.
• WishperIndia (2014) [online: April 5, 2018], https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s8SD83ILJY;
• ZIĘBA A., (2008), Język a kultura. Komunikacja werbalna w wybranych polskich, brytyjskich i amerykańskich programach telewizyjnych, „InvestigationesLinguisticae”, Vol. XVI, Poznań.