The Science of Persuasion — Psychology and Propaganda

So far, we have watched mass production give rise to mass consumption, and advertising begin to sell not ‘products’ but ‘brands.’ Yet people came to realize that talking about a brand was not enough. How could that appeal actually open a person’s wallet? In the early twentieth century, advertising finally stepped from the stage of ‘telling’ to the stage of ‘moving.’ What it leaned on was the science of how the mind works. In this installment, we trace how persuasion became a technique, centered on two men: Claude Hopkins, who refined his sales copy through measurement, and Edward Bernays, who reached into the depths of the mind — following both the light and the shadow of their work.

What Can Be Measured Grows Stronger — Claude Hopkins

A figure often named among those who tried to move advertising from ‘instinct’ toward ‘science’ is Claude Hopkins (1866–1932). He made his mark at agencies such as Lord & Thomas, and is said to have written ‘Scientific Advertising’ in 1923. This small book was later cited again and again by successors like David Ogilvy, and has been counted as one of the classics of the trade.

The core of Hopkins’s thinking was plain to the point of simplicity: advertising is not art but an act measured by results. Change the headline, change the wording, change the way to apply — each time, count the responses and keep the version that produced more orders. In today’s terms, this is the prototype of effect measurement and testing. He is also said to have valued devices that let responses be grasped in numbers, such as free samples and coupons.

Here lies one turning point in the enterprise of advertising. Into a craft that had often spoken in inflated, ornate language, the question ‘so, how many actually sold?’ was introduced. Exposed to verification, baseless grandiloquence becomes easier to sift out. In that sense, the introduction of measurement had the effect of pulling advertising back down to solid ground.

Into the Depths of the Mind — Edward Bernays and PR

Where Hopkins refined the effectiveness of sales copy, Edward Bernays (1891–1995) tried to work upon human desire itself. A nephew of Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, he is sometimes called the ‘father of public relations.’ Bernays is said to have believed that people are not moved by reason alone — that if you appeal to the emotions and longings beneath, the crowd will move.

Well known is the demonstration he is said to have staged in 1929. At the time, there was still strong resistance to women smoking in public. Bernays likened cigarettes to ‘torches of freedom’ and is said to have staged a scene in which female participants smoked in a New York parade. The press treated it as an event symbolizing women’s independence and, scholars note, did not mention the tobacco company’s involvement. In other words, rather than an advertisement that looked like an advertisement, it took the form of news to move people’s awareness. It should be added that historical research argues that some details of this episode, as recounted in later years, are exaggerated, and assessments of the specifics differ.

Another often-told story concerns breakfast. Commissioned by a meat-related company, Bernays is said to have asked many physicians whether a hearty breakfast was good for health, and then spread the resulting agreement as ‘the breakfast doctors recommend.’ Bacon and eggs were presented as a desirable example, and this is said to have helped them take root as a staple of the American breakfast. Rather than praising the product directly, he moved the very habits of daily life to create demand — the brilliance of that method is still cited again and again.

Between Advertising and Propaganda — Where to Draw the Line

Setting the work of Hopkins and Bernays side by side, one question rises to the surface: where is the line that divides advertising from propaganda?

To convey the merits of a product with grounds, and leave the judgment of whether to buy to the other person — this is the honest face of advertising. On the other hand, a staging that conceals a tobacco company’s involvement and makes itself look like a spontaneous social movement tries to design the very premises of judgment. Between the two lies an ethical boundary: how much information to disclose, and how far to respect the other person’s freedom to judge. That said, we must also note that real advertising activity moves ceaselessly back and forth across this line, and cannot be cleanly divided in two.

The technique of ‘working upon the mind,’ established in this era, is in itself neither good nor evil. The same method has been used for public purposes such as spreading hygiene habits and lifting wartime morale, and also for the hard sell of products. That is precisely why later generations would ask, again and again — advertising, having gained the power to move people, what should it tell, and what should it conceal? The attempt to make persuasion a science gave advertising great power, and at the same time left a long question about how that power should be used.

Carrying that question, advertising advances to its next stage. The art of persuasion, honed on the printed page, would soon ride the airwaves flying through the sky, and as voice and image, be delivered directly into the family living room. It is the dawn of the broadcast-advertising age, when mass media and mass consumption joined hands.