Page 235

i

i

i

i

Eduardo Camilo

229

the ad of the competitor. This exclusion can be analysed in two ways. In one, the brand mocks the ad of the competitors. It is reproduced but in comical terms to show how it is related to an abusive, insincere, vicious speech act. The other way is a structural one: the parody is not related to a specific ad of a competitor anymore, but to the competitor itself, specially its commercial and discursive honesty. The parody hides an accusation aim21 and consists in showing, under the advertising discourse, secrets, strategies and goals which are dangerous, trivial or totally strange to a specific field of advertising and economical activity. In other words: the objectives of the accusation procedure are to reveal the real nature of the competitor. Pepsi-Cola is very good in these strategies: how is it possible to believe in Coca-Cola flavour and quality, when even their sellers sneakily buy Pepsi-Cola22 or are taken by surprise collecting their promotions23 obsessively? Pepsi-Cola answers this question: what is important in Coca-Cola is not the drink itself and its apparent functionality, but something else totally different. For example a can top which can be used as a tool to make the buying of Pepsi-Cola possible. All the rest does not matter: it is commercial waste.

Conclusion In this paper I tried to demonstrate how the aggressive advertising is a specific commercial discursive production. Its main characteristic is to be an interactive discourse towards other advertising productions. These ones are conceived as being abusive and insincere, which means that the symbolic fights among commercial brands are always related to the reposition of a commercial discursive order that was broken (or eventually can be broken). The concept of conflictive advertising interaction is linked with the Mikhaïl Baktine’s concept of dialogism. The configuration of the aggressive ad always relates to another advertising discourse which can be a past or a future one. This means that the advertising conflicts can have reactive or projective specificity. If reactive advertising discourse is linked with an institutional reaction to past commercial messages, the projective advertising conflicts are discur21

ANGENOT, Marc —La parole pamphlétaire p. 228. BBDO (1995) – Nothing else is a Pepsi. USA, Pepsi-Cola, TV Spot, 45”. 23 (1996). Pepsi, la decision es tuya. Mexic, Pepsi-Cola, TV spot, 40”.

22

Livros LabCom

i

i i

i

Ensaios de comunicação estrategica  

comunicação