Article May 18, 1974 Issue

SPIRITUALIZING THOUGHT

defense against "mind-stealing"

JOY V. DUELAND

Some months ago there was shown on United States television screens a seemingly innocent commercial. A sixty-second spot, it was mainly composed of the usual photographic "frames" that whisked by the eye a normal advertising product message, with a critical difference. Inserted at four intervals was a single unrelated frame that, almost impossible for the untrained person to detect, flashed "Get it" on the screen.

The aim was for this subliminal message to flicker on too fast for the viewer to catch it consciously, but the eye was to relay the message to the subconscious. The individual was to be motivated without having a conscious choice. The advertiser fortunately was caught in the act, and television stations were informed that they could easily black out the subliminal portion from the commercial. However, apparently many stations didn't care enough about their viewers' freedom of choice to make this simple alteration.

But one man cared enough to do something about this unscrupulous mind-stealing. A longtime consumer advocate, he took the important step of filing a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission, which not only gave the advertiser the bad publicity he deserved but also promises to have an effect on the whole advertising industry. See The New York Times, December 27, 1973;

Enjoy 1 free Sentinel article or audio program each month, including content from 1898 to today.

Send a comment to the editors
NEXT IN THIS ISSUE
Article
A Family in India
May 18, 1974
Contents

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit