Consumers are constantly bombarded with advertisements that tell them what to think, how they’ll feel, and what they should buy, without asking for an opinion from the very person whose attention they are trying to grab. This leaves consumers feeling powerless and defensive of their own opinions without a way to tell the brands what they think about a product or a social movement used in an advertising campaign. They then create a defense mechanism by blocking out all forms of advertising from trying to persuade them to buy because of their feeling towards advertising in general, which is defined by pushiness without caring for an individual. In an article called “Big Hugs All Around,” Neil Shoebridge tells how Coke tried to turn around this phenomena of consumer blockage by engaging the consumer and inviting response from them (Shoebridge). They gave the world a chance to design a Coke bottle online, use an inviting, interactive Coke dispenser in restaurants to choose their beverage, and even started bringing Cokes, along with other items, such as pizzas, sub-sandwiches, and soccer balls to groups of people in their own gathering places, i.e. cafeterias, streets and offices. These tactics show consumers that Coke is interested in them as individuals and cares what they are like, and how they feel, outside of vested interests which would add to Coke’s own ability to sell more Coke products. This not only shows interest by engagement, but it also gives consumers a sense of empowerment by giving them a say in how Coke should identify itself. Coke has even gone as far as reaching out to ask consumers directly how they want to be advertised to, because everyone now knows that consumers are ragged from all the advertisements thrown at them. This tactic gives the consumer more power, as well as giving the brand a means to advertise to consumers in a way to which they will respond, and even embrace - because they were allowed to come up with it. Empowering and engaging the consumer then serves to advantage Coke in the long run, because people will see Coke as “friendly,” “caring,” “considerate” and “happy.” Since consumers are loyal to companies they feel understand them or take the time to hear them out, they will be more attracted to Coke than to other brands and spread their own love of Coke, causing the campaign and brand to go viral among consumers. This is exactly what a brand wants, and empowering the individual is the way to do it.

​

      In her article, “Psychopharmaceutical Advertising Strategies: Empowerment In A Pill?,” Ruth A. Chananie describes a psychopharmaceutical company’s attempt to advertise emotional-behavioral medication (for depression, social anxiety, obesity, premenstrual syndrome, and menopause) as a means of empowerment, particularly for women to take control of their “illnesses” and put their lives back in order. However, she points out, this method only really serves to disempower women by pointing out their seeming fragility in stating that they have emotional disorders to get over in the first place (Chananie). The backfire of this campaign shows that people pay attention to the personal messages brands send to them as consumers. If they feel the ad offends or attacks them (or the identity they project onto themselves), they will take offense with the brand itself, not just the advertisement. They will not identify with the brand, which will negatively affect consumer purchase rates. Thus, how consumers connect with the brand’s advertisement on a personal level, directly affects their like or dislike of the brand, and this personal feeling toward the brand can be very strong and difficult to change.