Reception Theory

Advert 1



















Dominant, Preferred or Hegemonic Reading

The Hegemonic Reading for this advert would be that Reebok have used 50 Cent, a successful and well-established rapper, deliberately to promote their brand. By doing this Reebok will have an increase of sales because of the increase in their popularity. This is because he is already a role model for his fans and has a connection with younger people- boys and girls, they will be attracted to buying this brands product.

Negotiated Reading

This advert can be viewed in many ways- such as positive and negative views. One positive view of this advert may be that the brand- Reebok, is paying attention to a group of people who have been marginalised by the society. This is because black people are associated with drugs and crime. We can see in the media how black people are portrayed and eventually a myth is created. Many of them are stereotyped by the society and the nation as a whole. Additionally, the fact that they have used an inspirational quote from the Celebrity himself, this may inspire other younger people to buy this brand and believe in what 50 Cent is saying. By using this quote Reebok can almost indoctrinate young and vulnerable children and teens into buying their products because after seeing this they think that they can be successful like him. However, Reebok have used 50 Cent ( an established and respected black rapper) to show how they don't ignore any ethnic groups. Alternatively, people have negative views about this advert as well. We know that 50 Cent didn't have a stable childhood- he used to get in trouble a lot and was involved in criminal activities. Many people have challenged this advert and Reebok for using him. They believe that a person like 50 Cent shouldn't influence young people as they are vulnerable and could be taking his advert in the wrong way. Adults who have concerns may not allow their children buying products from this brand due to it representing a person who had an unstable childhood. Furthermore, the fact that Reebok have used a male celebrity may bring opposition. These days society has changed, feminism is increasing and women believe that they have the same rights as men. BUT is Reebok showing this equality? Many people can challenge the fact of why they have used a male instead of a female. There are many successful female celebrities they could have used, such as, Emma Watson, Taylor Swift or even Beyoncé, but this advert is to promote sports and the brand so men are usually stereotyped as being the better sex at sport. Moreover, the fact that they have an inspirational quote attracts the younger generation means that more younger people will be inspired or take part in sports more. However they have also used a slogan a and the font for this is serif, therefore appealing to a wider range of audience, which includes older people. Therefore suggesting that the advert is well balanced and stands out to all age types.

Oppositional Reading

There are many oppositional readings for this advert. One of them may be that Reebok have used a black man to promote their brand. The fact that they have used a black man and not anyone else from any other ethnic group be seen as unfair in the society. Reebok haven't used any other man from any other ethnic group so they can be portrayed as a minimal and undeveloped brand because they haven't accepted the fact that society these days include people from different ethnic backgrounds and the fact that they have used a black man, not an Indian or a white man, can make them seem like an inferior brand and for one purpose. Additionally, the fact that they have used a male and not a female for this advert makes them seem gender biased. Even though these days we have many successful females Celebrities or even athletes Reebok still uses a male to promote sports and their brand.

Advert 2-my own




Dominant, Preferred or Hegemonic Reading


 The Hegemonic Reading for this advert would be that Sketchers has used Kim Kardashian, a fit and well known celebrity to promote their Sketchers. By showing Kim's body shape more people will be attracted to this product because they will start to believe that they can get better looking bodies, especially her fans- who want to look like her. Furthermore, the fact that they have stated that these Sketchers are "Kardashian-approved Shape-ups" will engage with the audience and the brand will generate some revenue and eventually make profit.

Negotiated Reading

This advert has polysemous connotations and can be interpreted in either a positive or negative way. One way in this advert is presented in a positive way is that it shows how successful this product is. The fact that it has been approved by a higher person (her signature) in society secures the audiences view about this product and reassures them that they will see a difference and eventually become slimmer and have a better toned body. Additionally, the fact that this advert uses a female and its purpose is to promote a healthy active lifestyle and sports may be seen as fair. This is because usually men are used to promote sports as this is the stereotype, however the brand deliberately focuses on a women to show that they are not gender biased and marginalising women. However, this advert may be seen as negative, this is because Kim is sexualised. Many people in the society may not find it acceptable that many women in adverts are semi naked whereas men are dressed up more respectively. This advert shows Kim wearing only a sports bra and some people, mostly feminists or even anybody else could find this degrading and almost objectifying towards women. Furthermore, the fact that they have revealed Kim's well toned body to the audience some viewers may find this offensive because they could be fat and find that this advert is centralised at them. It could also be seen as a stereotype towards women, because they are the one who are 'meant to be' in good shape.

Oppositional Reading

There are many oppositional readings in this advert. One of them may be that they have used a celebrity rather than an ordinary person. This is because the celebrity gets paid for the advertising and mostly only does commercials for the money, whereas an ordinary person from the same class of people interested in the product may be more appealing to the audience  as they might find that person more reliable. However, people look up to celebrities. Moreover, the fact that this advert is only centralising women fat and body weight may be upsetting or degrading to some female viewers as they may feel marginalised.


Do these adverts provide evidence for the idea that audiences are free to interpret messages in a variety of ways - including rejecting them? Answer this question as a mini-essay, exploring both sides of the argument.


I believe that these adverts are free to interpret messages in a variety of ways this is because these adverts are polysemic. Both of these adverts allow the audience feel free to interpret messages in a variety of ways this is because the adverts haven't used a direct mode of address. However there are signs and signifiers used in the adverts which appeal to some groups in the society than others, such as the colours they have used. For the first advert I believe that they have left the advert to be interpreted in any way this is because they have used an image and several fonts such as serif and san-serif to appeal to larger audience. Additionally, for the second advert they have said that the product is approved by Kim, however people who are not big fans of Kim may disagree with her. Or people who have had a negative experience with the brand may be opposed by this idea.

However, these adverts do provide evidence for the idea that audiences are free to interpret messages in a variety of ways to a certain extent. This is because the adverts leave some interpretations open for the audience to infer. An example of this is in the 50 cent advert, in particular the background image of the fingerprints. Some audiences may take this in a positive way because it shows that a person can change, whereas another audience may take this in a negative way because they think that he could be a bad influence on some of the target audience.

On the contrary. I also believe that adverts don't provide evidence for the idea that audiences are free to interpret messages in a variety of ways. This is because they both have centralised images which have significant meanings. They also have signs and signifiers to show this. The first advert is obviously more appealing towards male members of the audience due to the colours they have used. Also, the fact that they have shown fingerprints in this image suggests that they are promoting identity only. So the audience may be thinking that the only purpose for this advert is for inspiration. Also, the fact that they have used a male may think that the females don't need to buy the brand, when in reality women buy this brand too.Additionally, the second advert only focuses on women and their fitness. So people who are not fat may not pay attention to this advert whereas the women who are more curvy may feel that they have been centralised and marginalised by society.