Juul was introduced to the public in 2015, when there wasn’t a lot of knowledge about the effects of vaping on the human body. Because vaping was not yet confirmed to have harmful effects on the body, the e-cigarette company was able to release advertisements in mainstream media. These ads, dubbed the Vaporized campaign, took advantage of this situation and used a variety of rhetorical techniques to encourage viewers to purchase their product, including commonplaces and visual rhetoric. This is incredibly similar to cigarette advertisements put out before the ban on cigarette advertising in regular media, which employ similar visual rhetoric alongside the use of ethos and pathos in order to encourage their audience to buy their product.
Juul’s vibrant and color-packed advertisements in their “Vaporized” launch campaign work to stand out to their audience and grab attention. The ads are fun and colorful, and the model is attractive and posing with her juul. The bright and energetic colors help boost the idea that juuling is enjoyable, and the model has a smile on her face. The visual rhetoric employed here furthers the idea that people like juuling, and can make the audience feel like they could see themselves doing it.
Similarly, the Winston ad has another attractive woman posing with her cigarette. In contrast to the attractive man in the back, seemingly on a date with this girl, the lettering on the ad says “It’s what’s up front that counts”- implying that the cigarette she has on offer is even better than spending time with this man. She has her back turned to him in favor of showing the cigarette off to the viewer. If someone would choose the cigarette over the man, that’s a heavy indicator of the supposed quality of the cigarette.
Juul takes advantage of the situation where, unlike cigarette ads in the present day, the company was allowed to advertise in regular media. Similarly to the cigarette ad shown here, there wasn’t a lot of buzz about possible effects of the product on the human body. Because the specific Juul product was relatively new and unknown, there weren’t really restrictions on their advertising, so they were allowed to buy ad space wherever they liked. This included children’s shows sites Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network, where the typical viewership age was much different than their supposed targets of cigarette smokers looking to quit. Because their e-cigarette was supposed to be a helpful alternative to quitting smoking,
Cigarette smoking ads back in the day also did not yet face the restrictions they do today, with some advertisements, like those for Camel, even employing ethos by way of doctors supposedly recommending cigarettes and even smoking them themselves. They took advantage of this situation with massive marketing campaigns, with the Winston company even competing in NASCAR and having a dedicated cup. There had been some talk about cigarettes being unhealthy, but until 1970, when US President Reagan signed the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act, banning cigarette advertising on TV and radio, into law, there were still advertising opportunities.
Juul employed the implied commonplace of “everyone’s doing it” to appeal to the viewer’s sense of community. At heart, almost everyone wants to fit in with the world around them. If you see people like you or in your age group using Juul e-cigarettes, you might want to buy them to fit in with the people around you and be seen as “cool”. Peer pressure is also definitely something that can be applied here by impressionable teenagers.
The cigarette ad by Winston does something similar by having an attractive man in the background of the woman showing off her cigarette- while it’s not the main message, it gives the audience the idea that if they smoke the same cigarettes as the woman, maybe they will attract a partner as attractive as the man in the ad.
Overall, the commonplaces, visual rhetoric, and taking advantage of the situation by both of the ads make the two artifacts scarily similar. Both advertisements show off products that contain nicotine and later were stopped from advertising in different places (for now, Juul just has regulations against it on platforms like Instagram). While these artifacts were later cut off, they were extremely effective at targeting generations of young people and trapping them in nicotine addiction.
1. Identify the writer’s main claim about the rhetoric, ideology, lenses of analysis, or and subtext of the piece.
The rhetoric used in juul and cigarette ads are very similar and targetted an unknowing audience, making both products seem cool to a younger market.
2. Identify and comment on the writer’s introduction or “way in” for this piece of rhetoric. Name one thing that might be added, deleted, changed, or moved.
The introduction of the Vaporized campaign serves as an introduction for this piece of rhetoric. One thing that should be added is the specific audience these advertisements targeted, as it would better set up your body paragraphs.
3. Warning flags: check any of the following predominant themes this paper contains that might suggest a weak introduction or thesis:
Rhetoric is everywhere___
Artifacts try to persuade us_x_
Life really isn’t like what the artifact proclaims__
Rhetoric has many components_x_
Ads are deceptive_x_ T
The artifact did a great job_x_
The artifact catches your eye_x_
4. Find a strong analytical topic sentence and a weak one. Explain why you have identified them as such.
Strong: Juul takes advantage of the situation where, unlike cigarette ads in the present day, the company was allowed to advertise in regular media.
Does a really great job at introducing the rhetorical situation that you further delve into, and helps build up almost a shock factor within this paragraph.
Weak: The cigarette ad by Winston does something similar by having an attractive man in the background of the woman showing off her cigarette- while it’s not the main message, it gives the audience the idea that if they smoke the same cigarettes as the woman, maybe they will attract a partner as attractive as the man in the ad.
This is just a repetition of a prior statement and adds nothing to the previous analytical paragraph about peer pressure.
5. Comment on the organization of the piece. What other possible arrangement strategies might make more of the material and develop arguments more fully? How well is the second comparative piece of rhetoric incorporated?
I do like how you weaved each piece throughout the paper, however, your analysis of the Winston ads were somewhat weak and circumstantial when you compared them to the Juul ads. It almost got a bit repetitive especially when you essentially had two paragraphs about the Winston ads which discussed the same thing. You need to relate that second paragraph to the peer pressure theme.
6. You wanted to read more about….
How the Winston ads relate to the peer pressure of Juul ads, and the target audience of both advertisements.
Great job on your speech! You did really well in varying your tone and delivery, keeping your speech interesting and not falling into a monotone. I noticed a little bit of pausing where it seemed like you weren’t sure what to say next, but you did a great job keeping it steady and working through these moments of hesitation. 🙂