Johanna Drucker in Humanities Approaches to Graphical Display talks about how digital visualization tools act as an “intellectual Trojan Horse,” or a “vehicle which assumptions about what makes up information swarms with form.” As I was reading this I realized that graphical displays are not the only forms that act as Trojan Horses. Advertisements have become just as sneaky, playing on consumer assumptions.
The advertisement that came to mind was the one below:
I saw this post float around Tumblr for a bit with the caption, “Who’s Alex? Billboard demonstrating gender stereotypes as most people automatically assume that Alex is the boy.”
I sure as hell did. I’m even sure the people reading this blog post even assumed that Alex was the boy. I even thought it was a clever advertisement, a company riding on the strongly rising movement of gender equality. It was clever that they were forcing people to face their stereotypes and their assumptions. It’s clever because we think that it’s doing exactly what Drucker has been saying. The advertisement is saying “Look, you assumed! That’s okay though. You can change. Buy our products.” Or something to that extent.
This is where it kind of gets Inception-like.
We’ve been fooled. We’ve made the assumption that this ad played off of our gender assumptions and stereotype, when in fact the advertisement actually just used advertising and design trick. Tumblr user, Urulokid demonstrates that Body Shop is catching us red-handed but because the little boy is the focal point, we immediately assume he’s Alex. Furthermore, Urulokid proves that the ad is fallacious because English readers’ eyesight scans from left to right. The first thing we read is “MEET ALEX” and then our eyes go immediate right of the words to the boy.
This is a fallacious confirmation bias, as anyone looking at it will assume Alex is the focal point (i.e. The Boy) and then if they’re perceptive they’ll notice the words at the bottom. Aha! Those damn gender stereotypes gotcha again! Except no, because the ad literally forces you to read it as “Alex is the boy” by the visual language and lines of sight.
She goes on to create a less deceiving advertisement using a stock photo. You can see it here.
Overall, the point is that Drucker was right that digital visualization tools present themselves as assertion and not interpretations which is deceiving. But what would she say about interpretive advertisements that are deceiving?
Johanna Drucker – Humanities Approaches to Graphical Display