"Spellcasters": The Hunt for the "Buy-Button" in Your Brain

by: World Business Academy, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

Advertisers and Politicians Hunt for the "Buy-Button" in Your Brain
MRI brain scan. (Photo: jsmjr / Flickr; Edited: Lance Page / t r u t h o u t)

Editor's Note: Truthout is joining with the World Business Academy in an effort to demonstrate popular opposition to the unethical practice of neuromarketing manipulation. Please visit the Stop Neuromarketing page to view a video and sign the petition.

Guard your reptilian brain. Corporations and politicians are trying to tap into it to use the latest brain research and sales techniques to influence your buying and voting patterns.

The idea is this: you have three brains, the new brain that thinks, the middle brain that feels and the old brain that decides. The old brain (also called the "reptilian brain" because it dates back 450 million years and is like reptiles' brains today) is focused on survival. It is the gatekeeper that controls what gets to the other two brains.

Using a form of marketing known as neuromarketing, corporations and politicians are using MRIs, EEGs, and other brain-scan and medical technology to craft irresistible media messages designed to shift buying habits, political beliefs and voting patterns, as described in the World Business Academy's video "Spellcasters."

By measuring activity in different parts of the brain in response to an ad or other media message, advertisers and political consultants can create advertising campaigns that tap into the pre-conscious brain. The idea is to assess central nervous system response to certain ads, the better to skirt the viewers' rational thought.

Since the dawn of commerce, sellers have tried to figure out how to best pitch their wares, grab attention and close the deal. Sales pitches have always been designed to create a willing buyer, often by creating needs and wants and then offering up a new product to satisfy them.

Clever and unscrupulous sales pitches are nothing new. They helped create a nation of smokers until litigation revealed that tobacco companies hid known risks. The court cases led to big damage awards, new warning requirements and, finally, fewer smokers.

The use of music, images and emotion to manipulate the consumer and voter is also nothing new. But neuromarketing involves a degree of intrusiveness and manipulation that needs to be exposed and stopped. Consumers pushed back when advertisers turned to subliminal advertising - the practice of flashing an image for a tiny fraction of a second, too fast for the cognitive brain to process. It's time to push back again.

Neuromarketing is sometimes defined to include not just the use of brain scanners, but also the use of eye tracking and skin sensors to assess the power of an image or media communication. Whether or not there is any bright line that divides appropriate and inappropriate uses of technology to get inside people's heads in the figurative sense, here is a stand we should take and fight to hold: technology that literally gets inside people's heads in an attempt to circumvent their rational thought and animate their preconscious brain is unethical and unacceptable. Brain scanners go too far. Marketing and public relations firms should be limited to tools that measure the external manifestations of people's reactions to media messages.

Neuromarketing undermines our core democratic values of freedom and self-determination. No wonder the practice is still largely in the closet. Most companies and political parties do not want to become known as master manipulators, whether they're selling a consumer product or a political candidate. But just this week, Bark Group Inc., a multinational European advertising company, issued a release about neuromarketing technology that Bark is developing with a brain research firm MindMetric, to produce ad campaigns that will create a stronger emotional response in consumers.

Spooked? If you aren't, you should be.

Powerful and well-funded corporate interests already wield too much political power. If neuromarketing catches on as a favorite tool of politicians and their masters, 2010 will make the totalitarian mind control games described in George Orwell's frightening book, "1984," look like child's play. Big Brother is watching you.

Congress should hold hearings to investigate the commercial and political uses of neuromarketing so the public can learn what companies and political candidates are using neuromarketing research to manipulate consumers' and voters' choices. The Democratic and Republican parties and all 2010 political candidates should disclose their neuromarketing research and expenditures. The public should demand that companies pledge not to use neuromarketing or other unethical marketing techniques.

That you, the reader, take action is more important now than ever in light of this week's Supreme Court decision that allows corporations to spend as much as they want to influence voters in federal elections. The decision wipes out a century of law that somewhat curbed the power of corporate money over Congress. If not countered by determined citizens fighting back, it could spell the end of our 200-year experiment with democracy.

The fact that 72% or more of the U.S. economy is consumer-controlled means that we can - and must - use our dollars to impact corporate decision making, or all is lost. People must put their money where their values are, and corporate America will listen - because our purchases make their cash registers ring. We may have lost tremendous power at the ballot box but we can control society from the cash register.

There is one shining example where a depressed minority in America without the right to vote, opposed by every formal institution in society, channeled consumer spending to change the political course of our nation’s history. That was the grape boycott in the 1960s led by migrant farm workers and Cesar Chavez who said, "please do not buy grapes, so we can live without being subjected to toxic pesticides and inhuman working conditions." American consumers responded with their dollars and history was changed forever.

That example of consumer power does not apply only to disenfranchised political minorities. It is the beacon we must follow if we are to save our free will and the legitimacy of our electoral system.

Almost two centuries ago, Thomas Jefferson warned about the power of "moneyed corporations" to distort good government. He wrote about his hope to "crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."

Sign the neuromarketing petition. The World Business Academy will keep a public record of those companies that pledge not to use neuromarketing. Those are the ones you want to do business with. Your choice to be individually responsible matters now more than ever. It's time to put your money where your values are.
 

About the Authors:

Rinaldo Brutoco is a well-known futurist and the founding president of the World Business Academy, a nonprofit think tank launched in 1987 with the mission to educate and inspire the business community to take responsibility for the whole of planetary society. He is a frequent public speaker and a prolific author on renewable energy, climate change and sustainable business strategies. He is the co-author of "Freedom from Mid-East Oil" (2007), a leading book on energy and climate change, and "Profiles in Power" (1997) a college textbook on nuclear power and the dawn of the solar age.

Madeleine Austin is vice president of the World Business Academy; editor of the World Business Academy's 2007 book, "Freedom from Mid-East Oil," and a member of the Hawaii Energy Policy Forum. She is the co-author with Rinaldo Brutoco of "The Nuclear Nemesis"  (ABA, Trends May/June 2008) and "The Nuclear Nemesis Redux" (Forum CSR International, Dec. 2008).

Creative Commons License
This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.





     

»



The World Business Academy is a nonprofit business think tank founded in 1987 based on the belief that business, as the most powerful institution in society, should assume responsibility for the whole of planetary society. Led by its founder and president, Rinaldo Brutoco, the Academy publishes extensively on renewable energy, sustainable business strategies, and the challenge of innovative and values-driven leadership. The Academy has a unique resource in its many Fellows, who comprise a veritable "Who's Who" of world-class thinkers.


Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.



Like Frankenstein, we have

Like Frankenstein, we have created a monster that is out of our control. The Supreme Court allows corporations unlimited "free speech", and we see this report that tells us we probably can't even fight back.

What's my name, fool? Orwell Was An Optimist.



Hmm... if advertisers are

Hmm... if advertisers are targeting the "reptilian brain," I would think their ads would be fairly limited to points more in line with animalistic behaviors of said brain. In that case, wouldn't their success rate be about that of a paint company tailoring its ads to iguanas? How many ducks care about Gucci? I would think that they are gonna have a tough time getting past the "thinking brain" that controls the dough. Unless of course, looters, muggers and junkies desperate for money to buy the next fix are their target demographic of "reptilian brains." Their may have the technology to attempt new methods or control, but I think, we'll always have the will to resist. And once something becomes ubiquitous enough, our brains do a pretty good job filtering it out.



Step one: turn off the TV

Step one: turn off the TV and radio. Step two: interact with family, friends, and neighbors. Step three: buy local for what you need, not what you think you want.



I doubt any of this could

I doubt any of this could make things worse in the world than they already are.



PK, the "reptilian brain"

PK, the "reptilian brain" doesn't work that way, it cannot "think". The reptilian brain works on the level of "should I eat this or run from it" and that's as complex as it gets. Also unmentioned by the article but most likely applicable is the scientific evidence that a 2nd vision pathway exists in the brain that connects directly to the reptilian brain and if these theives-by-proxy have found a way to use that pathway your conscious mind never even knows about the message, the only message you get is from the reptilian brain saying "eat it". It isn't the content of the message they're working on, it is the visual form of the presentation in order to stimulate the "eat it" reaction and suppress the "run from it" reaction, and your higher brain listens to the reptilian brain and generally heeds its commands.



This is very carefully

This is very carefully studied out: for many years now, has anyone noticed, shortly before & on election days, certain 'comfortable/eazsygoing songs & music' panoply of songs are retrieved & repeatedly played to lull us to complacency & inaction--songs as 'loves grows where my rosemary goes..' by Edison Lighthouse & others.



It's great that this

It's great that this expensive medical technology is being used! With so many people out of jobs and without insurance, these machines are likely sitting idly by...



I'm sure there are some

I'm sure there are some ethical uses of this technology however there is no way we can trust corporations will use it ethically; the banking meltdown proved that. I'd also love to hear some PR guy explain without his face turning red (or his nose growing like shown in the movie) that neuromarketing is some how a good thing for consumers. It's a Brave New World indeed.



I have been working in

I have been working in advertising and marketing for 29 years. What I find stunning, is that this is only know becoming something people are aware of.

All good advertising and marketing connects on a sub-conscious & emotional level before the content or message is intellectualized. The MRI, PET and the like provides a handy way to look at brain response when presented with certain types of stimuli. This is not however a magic bullet that is going turn us all into malleable consumer zombies.

This is the kind of thing that will appeal to bean counters and suites, in addition to making a great promotional tool for the agencies claiming to use these mysterious techniques.



This is a real issue and it

This is a real issue and it is not a simple matter of "how many ducks care about Gucci" Low tech approaches work well too. For information about the basic approach whether high or low tech, search for information on subliminal advertising (which also goes way beyond "flashing a subliminal message in a fraction of second and is alive and well today.) We might be lulled into complacency by "pledges" from corporations not to use neuromarketing. Just how are we to know what they actually do beyond a pledge? Consumer education seems appropriate. As simple as it sounds, I like the post for "Step one: turn off the TV" above. Developing some mindfulness of your consumer appetite seems desirable also.



The Stop Neuromarketing

The Stop Neuromarketing video is using fear & emotion to stir up our reptilian brain in an effort to override rational thinking… and geez, they didn’t even have to pay any MRI fees!

While peeking inside of our brains to see how we respond to messages is indeed insidious, and certainly will be used by mad scientists to TRY to control our behaviors, they are not going to find a "magic switch" that will somehow make everyone immediately jump from their couches, hypnotized into buying a product or voting for a sellout. With any form of advertising we are still only talking about language and images - nothing we haven’t seen before.

What neuromarketing will do is create more "effective" ads according to the numbers, but only through formulaic recipes that blend all the “target emotions” together into an uncreative, uninteresting, steaming pile of PowerPoint-friendly marketer’s bullshit. You can't create effective advertising that dramatically changes a herd’s behavior in this way.

Marketing companies have been looking inside of us for years in countless ways; surveys, focus groups, eye-tracking, response metering, etc... and to be quite candid, it doesn’t work – it merely serves to philosophically divide artsy-fartsy advertising creative’s from the number-crunching marketing stiffs whom constantly seek to sabotage interesting and effective creative ideas in an effort to make something with “less risk” that “responds better”, all to satisfy the careful CEO who has a million shareholders breathing down his back. Scanning brain waves is just another way for uncreative and conservative companies to make their ads "better" without actually taking any creative risks.

For instance, some common “hidden buy-buttons” that are found in current pre-broadcast response tests are gems like “the last four seconds should be on a yellow background instead of red” or “the second actor should have glasses”… Do you really think that brain scans are going to get any more specific than that? "I can see from the activity in his frontal lobe that to make this advertisement most effective the second actor should actually be wearing clear-framed square eyeglasses, not the round black ones he has now. I advise you to completely reshoot the $1 million commercial."

Honestly, when's the last time an ad for AXE, Dove, or a Big Mac actually worked on any of you pointy-headed intellectuals? Those companies’ ads are already using creativity-draining research and testing techniques, and the ads aren’t going to get much better when they look into your brains and still see the boredom painted all over.

Worry about something else Truthouters.



In hindsight, I shouldn't

In hindsight, I shouldn't have picked on Axe or Dove as examples of ineffectiveness; the advertising ideas behind those campaigns are actually quite brilliant... for them it's not the effectiveness but the deceptiveness of their promises in light of their products that is the issue... the exposure of which, in the end, is the entire point of this misguided article's wrath. Point the blame at companies and spineless ad agencies who sugercoat lies, not the sociolgists & brain scientists they hire to make their stakeholder's feel assured it's worth it.



As a neuromarketing

As a neuromarketing researcher I can confidently say that a single "buy button" in the brain does not exist. I would also like to address the falsely perceived link between neuromarketing and subliminal advertising - much of what is commonly known about subliminal advertising is actually rooted in a study that has failed to be duplicated with the same results.

Neuromarketing is the research and understanding of decision making processes in the human brain in order to create more genuine business interactions. Every single person perceives information in their own form and way, likewise this perceptual diversity leads to cognitive diversity, and through research we seek to understand the commonalities of our worlds. We make hundreds of decisions everyday (financial or not) so why not better understand this process.

Perception and cognitive processes in the brain are not limited to just buying products or services. If we, as neuroresearchers, understand how we perceive, think, and decide we can begin to better design a world that allows us to best understand the messages that are important. personally, my focus is how people use emotion to absorb education and learning in both professional and personal interactions. If i can better understand selling and buying from a neuromarketing standpoint, why not use that gift to sell the most important product ever, education?

www.social-brain.com



I gotta say, my own

I gotta say, my own reptilian brain has gotten pretty jaded for Ride of the Valkyries. If you wanted to make my fear and alarm centers light up with something by Wagner, you should have used the prelude to Act I from the same opera.



While this is an example of

While this is an example of a heinous use of neuro-research, I agree with Bjorn Borstelmann - if anything, this is all simply great PR for Bark Group, Inc.

And yes, turn off the tube!



Ask youself this question.

Ask youself this question. If neuromarketing is just an other market research technique no different than surveys and focus groups, then no company or politician should be concerned about telling the public they use these tecniques. So why are they hide that they use them? And do you really think companies and politicians can be trusted with this technology. Let's face it, even if neuromarketing isn't perfect yet at finding an irresistable buy button, this is what they are attempting to do. Do you really think they are using this for our good or their good? We are lambs playing poker with a wolf dealler who can see our cards but we can't see their's.



I'm a teacher and Keven

I'm a teacher and Keven Torres comment about using these tecniques to find out how to improve learning makes sense. However I don't think companies or politicians can be trusted as to when the use of neuromarketing is and is not ethical. We saw in the past 2 years that wall street and big business cares nothing about main street and the little person. So if this research practice continues we need government to establish laws on it's use. The market can not self police itself



As a neuroscientist with no

As a neuroscientist with no interest in neuromarketing, I am happy to say this article is totally misinformed, and completely overestimates the power of neuromarketing. There are lots of things to worry about when it comes to corporations trying to control our lives, but this terrible reporting on science creates a red herring.



Folks, again I wish to point

Folks, again I wish to point out my previous append above, and suggest you google 'blindsight' or 'blind sight' in order to understand a bit more about the neural pathways being targeted here and the insidiousness of the work being done. The conscious mind does not participate in any way, shape, or form in this, and if you read some of the links regarding blindsight you will have a better understanding of what this is about. People with blindsight are not conscious of being able to see, yet it can be clearly demonstrated that they can see. This is not about "changing a background color" and it is not about MRIs of the visual cortex or the normal neural pathways in the brain. This is about creating reactions in a part of the brain that the conscious mind is not aware of and cannot control. Please, even if you're doing neural research for advertising, research this and understand the difference between it and neural research on the cerebrum and cerebellum, both of which the conscious mind can affect. This article is about something far more insidious.



Perhaps this explains

Perhaps this explains FoxNews and Rush Limbaugh. They couldn't possibly believe the crap they spew everyday. They have tapped into what people may believe to be true. And when they say it, it self-certifies the veracity that's already in the people's minds.



It always amazes me when non

It always amazes me when non scientists latch on to something like this. They just dont understand that this is really nonsense just like the so called subliminal messages which have little or no effect on human behavior. You really are niave that you think we understand cognitive functioning that well. If you want to focus on a misuse of science try the bio labs at colleges that Bush funded but that still presumably without proper knowledge of bio hazards using some of the most dangerous organisms in the world regulate themselves.



Awareness is the antidote.

Awareness is the antidote. Notice the ad, notice the formerly unconscious tendencies that follow, change your behavior. The smoking ads no longer worked once people were more aware of themselves and their own tendencies, like desire for life vs desire for ad induced coolness.

Great book on the roots of this is "The Father of Spin," about Edward Bernays, Freud's nephew and founder of the modern field of propaganda and public relations. He's the dude that made smoking cool, softened hands while you do dishes, and virginia slims, you've come a long way baby, and got the cia and US Marines to overthrow the democratically elected government of Guatemala on behalf of his client, United Fruit.



We've heard from a couple of

We've heard from a couple of people claiming to be neuroscientists or ad researchers and one that calls us non-scientists, implying that they are a scientist. In the article and in one of the comments we've heard about the studies on the two "higher brains". The article discusses the lowest of the 3 brains, the "reptilian" brain, which I believe in higher animals we call the brain stem. My references pointed to a discovery some years ago that suggests a connection from the eye to the brain stem that bypasses the "mind as we know it", one that is still being studied by brain research, and as the references I pointed out indicate, it is poorly understood as a result of the scarcity of subjects, requiring one certain and very unusual cause for their blindness. The references to the targeting of the reptilian brain in this article suggest that advertising research is trying to use this pathway, which is completely unrelated to "subliminal advertising" (which targets higher areas of the brain), and this pathway doesn't get much study in cognitive science (again, cognitive scientists mostly study higher areas of the brain and lack of subjects). They're trying to keep this piece of the message out of the higher brain where consciousness gets a crack at it. Various methods of monitoring brain activity can, I assume, detect activity in the brain stem just as in the rest of the brain (those articles with brain scan slices pictured generally point out higher brain effects, not the brain stem), and again us non-scientists infer from this article that advertisers are funding brain research looking for methods to stimulate the brain stem without signaling the conscious mind that this is happening. You tell us it's unfounded, but you don't provide any reasoning to support that statement, any education or a clue as to where to look for same for us non-scientists. Lastly, don't forget that some non-scientists come up with some pretty good stuff, one fella called Thomas Edison for an example among many, so non-scientists aren't all bad, and more of us might be scientists if the pay wasn't so bad and/or the educational system encouraged it.



Go to YouTube and search for

Go to YouTube and search for 60 minutes and brain. The whole 60 minutes piece is there and it has lots of scientists in it. You'll be really spooked. especially about the mention of hitting you with a zaser beam without you noticing. It's clear what the intention is and it's not about doing good for the consumer



Please take an 8th grade

Please take an 8th grade English class before writing any more articles. What a disjointed, nonsensical bunch of trite Orwell references and illogical fear-mongering.



I was waiting for

I was waiting for instructions to send copies of this article to 25 other people within the next 7 days, or all my hair would fall out. (too late!)

Where's the science that this even works? If you believe what this firm is selling, then YOU have fallen to reptilian marketing. Truthout, was there a reason for writing this article. I had to check my calender to see if it was April 1st.



Yes, the article is somewhat

Yes, the article is somewhat fear-mongering and the science is lacking BUT consider: If advertising firms are funding the research, and they are successful in their pursuit, do you expect to read about it in the scientific journals? Also consider: Where and how did you hear about all the discrepancies regarding the WTC? Not that I sign up for all the conspiracy theories, but there are many discrepancies surrounding the official story of what happened that day and we heard about them through articles such as this one, not through mainstream media or scientific journals.



We got ingredients posted on

We got ingredients posted on food labels, we should be able to find out whether neuro-marketing is an ingredient of the ads we see. I don't think we're going to ban it, we're saying tell us when you use it.



This is kind of silly. At

This is kind of silly. At best, won't neuromarketing only reaffirm the effectiveness of advertisers' best techniques? And for politicians, wouldn't it be cheaper just to read The Grand Inquisitor or Joseph Goebbels than study brain scans?



I'm the film maker who

I'm the film maker who created the Spellcaster video. And I am willing to actually put my email address in this posting, unlike many of the bloggers above. I have nothing to hide.

I'm reminded about what Martin Luther King said in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail where he said he normally didn't spend time responding to distracters as it would be consuming. However in this case I think responding to some of the postings would be of value. As background I have been a senior marketing executive for 25 years including VP positions with Fortune 500 firms, was formerly a managing principle at a top tier managing consulting firm, I've lectured on marketing at various Universities, and I have an MBA from Kellogg. And I've been actively involved in researching neuromarketing including with one of the worlds's largest consumer package goods companies. So I think I have the street credentials to make informed comments about neuromarketing. If any reader is compelled to know more, google me and you'll find plenty of information about my background. But I write this not as a representative of any company. I write it as myself.

I understand there are skeptics about neuromarketing. But let’s talk facts. There are ~90 neuromarketing research firms in operations around the world today and the largest CPG companies all have initiatives in play investigating neuromarketing. These companies are not doing so for egalitarian purposes. It's being done for one reason; get you the consumer to buy their stuff. Now you may ask, what's the issue with that? Isn't that what's been going on since the first ad was created? This is different. To understand why it is different you need to understand how we make purchasing and selection decisions. The basic rule is this, we buy brands, not products. Any marketing professor will tell you that. And so therefor, you need to understand how brands work and influence peoples decisions about what product to buy or not. Then you'd understand why neuromarketing has the potential to be an unethical tool.

We as humans make decisions at the unconscious level. You might think you are a rational person making logical decisions, however the truth is we are not; we just think we are rational. So when we go down the snack food isle we don’t normally pick-up each product, look at its ingredients, look at its price per unit of measure and so on. If we did that our minds would go in overload deciding upon dozens and dozens of products we put in our baskets. We are wired to make efficient decisions. And when it comes to products, we rely on the power of brands, be it a food, a car or even a politician.

A brand consists of all the information we have stored about that brand; good, bad and indifferent. And the decision about it being one or the other is mostly an unconscious decision. The information then stored and recalled by the brain, is essentially through “networks” of neurons working together that create associations of things linked together in our memories. So, when we see a Coke or Pepsi, or we hear a song, or we smell something, and so on... we pull up everything about it—the entire network of associations, emotions, thoughts and images that are all connected together in our brains. We don't have to think this; it's automatic. Just think about the last time you heard a song from say a great time in your life. Without thinking, you senses light up. Perhaps it's a song from a time in High School or a first date, or whatever. The song brings you back to the emotions of that experience.

And we are not conscious of this, but that is what we do and neuroscientists know this. Interestingly, the imagery that surrounds words and their meaning (like a song, a photo, the script of the logo, the last time you enjoyed or did not enjoy the product) is more important than the words themselves. You can see this in action—successful brands evoke valuable meaning through associated images, metaphors, myths and legends. There’s no ‘single message’ that goes with a brand. Everything communicates something.

Historically, advertising theory was dominated by the very linear A-I-D-A model (attention-interest-desire-action). This theory was based on the view that consumers first think, then feel, then do. In this model, ad claims were pushed on consumers with highly cognitive messages. It was believed that if you could get people to think about your brand in a certain way, they would feel differently and respond accordingly. Recent thinking across a wide range of disciplines has changed this theory. We now understand that emotion is actually the first filter that decides if we are going to pay attention. In fact, emotion plays a role not only in our unconscious, but also shapes our conscious thoughts about brands, products and services. Let me say that again, emotions actually shapes our conscious thoughts and not the other way around.

This is what make neuromarketing so concerning. Companies and politicians are looking not for a “buy button” so to speak, but they are looking for ways to craft messaging that bypasses the rational mind and improve their ability to imbed positive emotional responses that are sticky and irresistible. Yes that is what all advertising has been attempting to do. However with neuromarketing, and the use of MRIs and EEGs, these tools point the advertiser in the right direction with greater precision and accuracy. And the better they are at doing it, the more likely we make more and more unconscious decisions about what to buy. And most concerning of all, who to vote for.

We just have to go to the last presidential election to see that as large numbers of people who voted for either presidential candidate, be it Obama or McCain, voted for them not because of some rational decision. They voted for them due to their unconscious emotions. While this is not something new, in the age of multimedia and now the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn limits on corporate spending in federal elections, we become more and more susceptible to unethical uses of technology that can change the course of elections by tapping into our unconscious brain and influence our decisions in more than an incremental way. Neuromarketing is a quantum leap in advertising manipulation.

In the last several elections the numbers were very close. A little neuromarketing will tip things one way or another and we would not know what hit us. I for one would rather err on being concerned about neuromarketing than waking up to a Brave New World or 1984. But here's the simple fall back. If a candidate or CPG company really doesn't think neuromarketing is unethically, then they should not be concerned about publicly saying it is one of the marketing research techniques they use. To date no politician or major company will do so. Why is that? It's clear, they know the public would be out raged. And they know what they are doing is crossing the boundary of ethical market research.

I welcome thoughtful dissenting opinions from people not afraid to not be anonymous. People who poke and hide need not apply.



O'Connor email address. My

O'Connor email address. My email address did not post. Here it is so it is clear I am not hiding from the debate like others. toconnor2000@kellogg.northwestern.edu



Tim O'Connor's email address

Tim O'Connor's email address is toconnor2000@kellogg.northwestern.edu I welcome thoughtful comments pros or con.



I welcome debate. And here

I welcome debate. And here is my email address as I wish to not hide like others.

toconnor2000@kellogg.northwestern.edu



Selling Fear ? or are you

Selling Fear ?
or are you selling a product/database by asking bloggers to sign their names to a list