My Not-So-Terribly-Revealing Revelations On Advertising

Through a series of unrelated events, I ended up watching "Celebrity Poker Showdown" on Bravo last night for much longer than anyone should. Now I realize that Bravo is the gay-friendly network, but they somehow managed to turn poker (poker!) into the gayest subject ever. I won't get into it.

However, recently I've become acutely aware of television advertising. I suppose it started when I was watching a lot of wrestling and realized that I had no interest in Stacker II, Motorola motor oil, Lugz street shoes or video games that I probably wasn't the average WWE fan (who is, apparently, overweight, likes cars, is poorly dressed and has no social life). Likewise, during a commercial for a prodcut promising to lower my cholesterol and being hawked by George Hamilton, I wasn't the target audience of "Celebrity Poker" either. What struck me as interesting last night, however, was the fact that by the time I'd stopped watching wrestling on a regular basis, I was saving up money to by a Playstation. Which led me to ponder, do I want all the products advertised during the Daily Show because I'm the Daily Show's target demographic (which I am) or because these are the products I keep seeing because I watch the Daily Show? Like in this paper I read today, is membrane thickness modified by the lipids or by the embedded proteins? Or is it symbionic? Or synergistic? Or axiomatic?

I think I'm rambling. Anyway, as you can see, my revelation was, well, obvious and not very illuminating. Kind of like the advice of "The Gambler".