Imagine this: A woman in her late 60s, a retired teacher, is scrolling through her favourite news app. She sees ads for anti-ageing creams, cruise holidays, and mobility aids. Each one screams a single, monotonous message: “You’re old, and this is all you need.” She closes the app, feeling unseen for who she truly is—a vibrant, tech-savvy individual with a lifetime of experiences, passions, and untapped potential.
Or think of a young man with a disability, bombarded by charity ads that portray people like him as objects of pity rather than participants in everyday life. He uses cutting-edge tech, travels the world, and runs his own business, but in the advertising world, he’s invisible unless he’s a symbol of “inspiration.”
These are just two of the millions of consumers who fall outside advertising’s narrow spotlight. It’s not just an oversight—it’s a cultural blind spot with massive consequences.
Who Are the Invisible Consumers?
Advertising tells us who matters. But who does it leave out?
1. Older Adults: The Forgotten Spenders
Older adults hold more wealth than any other demographic, yet their ad representation is abysmal. When they do appear, they’re either portrayed as frail and dependent or as unrealistically youthful, dancing through retirement as if ageing were a myth.
But older adults today are running marathons, launching startups, and embracing technology at record rates. Why does advertising refuse to reflect this reality? Ignoring them perpetuates ageism and sends a clear message: “You’re not relevant unless you look or act young.”
2. People with Disabilities: Stereotyped or Silent
Over a billion people worldwide live with some form of disability. They represent a diverse, dynamic consumer base, yet they’re either absent from ads or pigeonholed into narrow roles—the brave hero overcoming adversity or the charity case seeking pity.
Brands often miss the mark entirely, failing to normalize disability as an everyday part of life. Imagine seeing an ad where a person with a disability is simply buying groceries or going to a concert, without their disability being the focus. That’s the kind of representation that’s still shockingly rare.
3. Low-Income Communities: Erased or Exploited
Advertising largely ignores low-income consumers, except when pushing payday loans, fast food, or discount retailers. The underlying narrative? These individuals aren’t aspirational enough for mainstream brands.
This not only alienates a significant portion of the population but also perpetuates harmful stereotypes. Low-income consumers are as diverse and aspirational as anyone else—they want access to quality products and services that respect their dignity, not exploit their circumstances.
The Cost of Ignoring Diversity
The exclusion of these groups isn’t just morally wrong—it’s economically foolish. Together, these “invisible consumers” represent billions in untapped purchasing power. By ignoring them, brands leave money on the table and risk alienating a significant portion of their potential audience.
But the real cost is cultural. Advertising doesn’t just reflect society; it shapes it. When entire groups are erased or misrepresented, it reinforces harmful biases and perpetuates inequality. Ageism, ableism, and classism become ingrained in the cultural fabric, shaping how we view ourselves and others.
Real-World Failures and Successes
Failure: A notable example is the 2018 ad campaign titled “Dear Young People, Don’t Vote,” sponsored by the Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit Acronym. This advertisement depicted older individuals as selfish, uncaring, and out-of-touch, suggesting they were responsible for ruining the future due to their lack of concern for younger generations. While the campaign aimed to encourage young people to vote, its portrayal of older adults was divisive and derogatory, reinforcing negative stereotypes about aging.
Success: On the flip side, Tommy Hilfiger’s adaptive clothing line is a masterclass in inclusion. Designed for people with disabilities, it’s marketed without fanfare, simply showing real people living their lives. It’s a powerful reminder that inclusivity doesn’t need to be performative—it can be seamless and authentic.
For older adults, this means feeling pressured to fight aging rather than embracing it. For people with disabilities, it means being seen as exceptional only when they fit an “inspirational” mold. For low-income communities, it means internalizing the idea that they don’t deserve quality or aspirational products.
Breaking the Cycle: What Needs to Change
Authentic Representation Ads must reflect the full spectrum of human experience. Older adults, people with disabilities, and low-income individuals need to be shown not as outliers or exceptions but as everyday consumers with diverse interests and lifestyles.
Inclusive Storytelling Move beyond tokenism. Show older adults as tech innovators, people with disabilities as fashion-forward consumers, and low-income individuals as empowered decision-makers. Normalize diversity without making it the story.
Community Collaboration Work directly with underrepresented groups to ensure authenticity. Co-create campaigns that resonate with their lived experiences rather than relying on outdated stereotypes.
Data-Driven Inclusion Brands need to stop underestimating these audiences. Leverage data to understand their behaviors and preferences, recognizing them as valuable consumers, not fringe markets.
Accountability and Metrics Just as diversity is measured in workplaces, it should be tracked in advertising. Brands should set goals for inclusive representation and hold themselves accountable for meeting them.
Imagine a world where advertising reflects all of us
A world where older adults see themselves as vibrant contributors, people with disabilities are shown in every aspect of life, and low-income communities are respected and celebrated. This isn’t just a dream; it’s a necessity in the current world we all living
The invisible consumer deserves to be seen. They deserve to be valued. And it’s time for the advertising industry to step up.
In 1928, Edward Bernays argued that shaping public opinion was not only inevitable but essential in a democratic society. His groundbreaking work,Propaganda, laid the foundation for modern public relations, casting persuasion as a neutral tool.
Fast forward to 2019, and Shoshana Zuboff’s The Age of Surveillance Capitalism paints a far darker picture: a world where personal data is weaponized, and human behavior is engineered for profit. Together, their perspectives offer a powerful lens through which to examine today’s Propaganda 2.0—a digital phenomenon that manipulates minds invisibly, blurring the line between persuasion and control.
The Dual Nature of Propaganda
Bernays saw propaganda as a means of organizing public opinion in an increasingly complex world. “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society,” he wrote. For him, propaganda could rally a nation during wartime, promote public health initiatives, or drive social change.
But even Bernays acknowledged the potential for abuse. Today’s digital propaganda takes his vision to an extreme. Unlike the overt messaging of his era, Propaganda 2.0 operates stealthily. Algorithms track every click, every pause, every scroll, tailoring messages to exploit our emotional triggers. This isn’t just persuasion—it’s manipulation, designed to bypass rational thought and tap directly into our subconscious.
The Surveillance Machine
Here, Zuboff’s critique comes into sharp focus. Surveillance capitalism, as she describes it, turns human experience into raw material for behavioral prediction and modification. The personal data harvested by tech giants fuels micro-targeted ads that don’t just persuade—they shape behavior in real-time, often without the user’s awareness.
Take the Cambridge Analytica scandal, where data from millions of Facebook users was weaponized to influence political outcomes. These “dark ads” exploited psychological vulnerabilities, crafting personalized messages that nudged voters toward specific candidates or policies. The result was a seismic shift in political landscapes, achieved through invisible, unaccountable means.
“This is not just about marketing,” Zuboff warns. “It’s about power—the power to shape human behavior at scale.”
The Ethical Quagmire of Corporate Activism
It’s not just political campaigns leveraging these tactics. Brands, too, have embraced Propaganda 2.0, often under the guise of social responsibility. Following the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, corporations flooded social media with messages of solidarity. Yet behind closed doors, some of these same companies were funding political actions or policies that contradicted their public stances.
This performative activism raises a critical question: Are brands genuinely committed to the causes they champion, or are they simply exploiting societal issues to build consumer loyalty? Bernays might argue that such campaigns can unify and inspire, but Zuboff would likely see them as another layer of manipulation, reinforcing surveillance capitalism’s grip on society.
The Feedback Loop of Polarization
One of the most insidious effects of Propaganda 2.0 is its role in deepening societal divisions. Algorithms prioritize content that maximizes engagement, which often means amplifying the most emotionally charged and polarizing messages. Over time, this creates echo chambers where individuals are exposed only to information that reinforces their existing beliefs, further entrenching political and cultural divides.
Consider the events surrounding the 2020 U.S. presidential election. In the months leading up to the vote, false narratives about election fraud spread rapidly on social media, fueled by targeted misinformation campaigns. These messages weren’t random—they were designed to sow doubt about the integrity of the election and erode trust in democratic institutions. The result was a deeply divided electorate and, ultimately, the storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Bernays and Zuboff offer complementary solutions to this crisis
Bernays would advocate for professional codes of ethics, urging advertisers and political strategists to use their tools responsibly. He believed in the power of persuasion to educate and unite, provided it was wielded with integrity.
Zuboff, on the other hand, demands systemic reform. She calls for stricter regulations on data collection and use, greater transparency from tech platforms, and robust public education to equip individuals with the critical thinking skills needed to resist manipulation. “We must fight for a future where the digital world serves humanity, not the other way around,” she insists.
The stakes in this fight couldn’t be higher
In an era where information is both ubiquitous and weaponized, the battle for public opinion is a battle for democracy itself. Propaganda 2.0 offers unparalleled power to influence—but with that power comes a profound responsibility. By combining Bernays’ emphasis on ethical persuasion with Zuboff’s call for systemic accountability, we can envision a future where advertising and political messaging inform and inspire without undermining autonomy. The health of our democracy depends on it.
I had an interesting chat today about whether magic in advertising still remains .
In the golden age of advertising, campaigns weren’t just about selling products—they were about selling ideas, dreams, and emotions. Think of Coca-Cola’s “Hilltop” ad, with its chorus of voices singing about unity and peace, or Apple’s iconic “1984” spot, which heralded the dawn of a new era in personal computing. These weren’t just ads; they were cultural moments, etched into the collective consciousness. They worked because they dared to be different.
But today, the creative spark that once defined advertising seems to be flickering out. In its place, we have an industry increasingly dominated by algorithms and data-driven decision-making. The rise of artificial intelligence and machine learning has brought unprecedented precision to ad targeting and performance measurement. Brands can now tailor their messages to specific audiences with incredible accuracy, optimizing every element of a campaign in real-time. On the surface, it’s a marketer’s dream. But beneath the surface lies a troubling truth: the relentless pursuit of optimization is strangling creativity.
The Algorithmic Trap
At first glance, it’s easy to see the appeal of data-driven advertising. Why take risks when you can use algorithms to predict exactly what will resonate with your audience? Why rely on intuition when machine learning can tell you the perfect color for a call-to-action button or the ideal length of a video ad? The problem is that data only tells us what has worked in the past. And when decisions are made purely based on past performance, the result is often a race to the middle—a homogenized landscape where every ad looks, feels, and sounds the same.
Take the rise of programmatic advertising. By using algorithms to buy and place ads, brands can ensure their messages reach the right people at the right time. But what’s often sacrificed in the process is the human element—the bold, unexpected ideas that grab our attention and linger in our minds. The irony is that while algorithms excel at optimizing for clicks, shares, and conversions, they struggle to account for the intangible qualities that make an ad truly memorable.
The Creativity Crisis
This reliance on data and AI is fostering a culture of risk aversion. In an era where every decision is scrutinized through the lens of performance metrics, there’s little room for experimentation. The result is a flood of safe, formulaic ads designed to maximize short-term gains at the expense of long-term brand building. Creativity thrives on uncertainty, on the willingness to take risks and embrace the possibility of failure. But in a world governed by algorithms, failure is a luxury few are willing to afford.
Consider the case of Super Bowl ads. Once a showcase for daring, innovative storytelling, many of today’s big-game spots feel more like calculated exercises in brand-safe messaging. The stakes are too high, and the data too abundant, for brands to take a chance on something truly groundbreaking. Instead, we get a steady stream of feel-good montages, celebrity cameos, and humor that’s been tested to within an inch of its life.
Finding a Balance
Does this mean data and AI are inherently bad for advertising? Not necessarily. When used thoughtfully, these tools can enhance creativity, providing valuable insights and freeing up time for human ingenuity. The key is to strike a balance—to use data as a guide, not a crutch. Some of the most successful campaigns of recent years have managed to do just that, blending data-driven insights with bold, creative ideas.
Take Spotify’s “Wrapped” campaign, which uses personalized data to create highly engaging, shareable content. Or Nike’s “Dream Crazy” ad featuring Colin Kaepernick, which leveraged data to understand its audience but still took a bold stand on a divisive issue. These campaigns show that it’s possible to harness the power of data without sacrificing originality.
The Way Forward
The future of advertising depends on our ability to reclaim creativity from the clutches of algorithms. This means embracing uncertainty, celebrating bold ideas, and recognizing that not everything can—or should—be optimized. It means trusting in the power of human intuition and storytelling, even when the data says otherwise. Because at the end of the day, the ads that truly resonate aren’t the ones that are perfectly optimized; they’re the ones that dare to be different.
