response to 2/2 comment

Yeah, the paradoxical positions was an interesting point in Ewen's text and it's difficult for me to separate that topic and the Neiman Marcus add (or think of a more modern example) because of personal pre-conceived notions that 1) that paradox doesn't even make sense to have in the same add (like most of the 'emotion-first' advertising we discussed today; most of those ads that I find laughable) and 2) the 1980's seems to boast or at least heighten an 'intellectual' style regardless of how logical the ideas are. A modern political example off the top of my head would be George W. Bush's 'compassionate conservative' 2000 U.S. presidential campaign, and what a paradox that is. An important point I'd like to make is that I would disagree with the citing of Walter Lippmann on xxxi in "Introduction to the new Edition" when he says, "the process by which general opinions are brought into cooperation consists of an intensification of feeling and a degradation of significance.” The general public saw what a blasé attitude had done to their country (Bush White House and Iraq War), and they therefore were ready to listen to what was being said with a critical ear. The Obama U.S. presidential campaign would have failed if it was based on emotion instead of on ideas. But who knows, it might just be the blind eyes of modernity speaking.
P.S.
Mass produced media doesn't necessarily do a 'better' job than original work. For example we talked about how word of mouth was still the best form of media. Any media, especially mass media, reflects the scale the society it serves. What makes the two (mass and un-mass? media) different is with reproduced, translated, or copied media (like the bible) the message undergoes another gradation from reality. It's a watered-down representation of the original.