Delaney Howerton

Anya Connelly
English 2
17 October 2016
Advertisement Analysis
Scandalous advertisements full of suggestive messages are often seen in the world we
live in. It is not uncommon to find a bikini clad female model advertising food or a shirtless male
model promoting cologne. We often even hear the phrase sex sells. This Burger King ad for
their Super Seven Incher Burger plays along those same lines. This advertisement analysis will
examine the provocative implicit message of using sex to sell food, and how it negatively affects
the young adult demographic it is trying to reach as well as the use of pathos to appeal to
viewers. It will also look into how this underlying message aides in the use of the logical
fallacies irrelevant reasoning and equivocation that are being used in this media.
Two different messages can be found in this advertisement; one implicit and one explicit.
On the surface, we see a message that is clearly telling viewers that this burger is large in size.
There is text explaining that it is a whopping seven inches and contains the word super in the
name. There is also a look of shock on the models face as she is about to ingest such a large
amount of food. It is easy to see that the main claim in the advertisement is that the burger is so
big it will Blow your mind away. On the other hand, the message that is not being plainly told
but rather implied is relating this food to sexual actions. This can be witnessed in the scene being
set with the models mouth open and the burger coming in from somewhere off camera. It is also
common knowledge among young adults that the word blow is a slang term for provocative
activities, and the words long and juicy are used to describe certain aspects of the human

anatomy. The text also contains words such as desire and yearn which seem to be more
appropriate for an adult romance novel than for a food advertisement.
A major rhetorical device found in this advertisement is pathos due to the fact that it
appeals to many different emotions when the provocative implicit message is understood. An
obvious emotion is lust, as the ad is merely a play on sexual desires. Another big aspect this goes
for is the shock value, for when seeing this ad, viewers may be in disbelief that such an ad exists,
and others may be appalled. There may even be a select few who find it humorous. However, the
biggest example of pathos in this advertisement is that it plays on the fears and insecurities of
viewers, which is a characteristic of most advertising (Cavendar&Kahane, 23). Lambiase and
Reichart explain, These are three benefits may be considered as subsets of an appeal to
idealized and gendered appearance and/or sexual performance. They are (a) sexual attractiveness
for the consumer, (b) likely engagement in sexual behavior (and more enjoyment from these
encounters), and (c ) sex esteem or feelings of being sexy or sexual (23). This ad may lead male
viewers to compare their appearance and performance to the standards of society that are
difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. This can then lead them to having low sex esteem and
make them feel as if they need to compromise to make themselves more manly, such as by
eating a massive burger. However, if this hits the emotions hard enough, a viewer could become
so self conscious about these issues that they become uncomfortable with the entire Burger King
brand and avoid it altogether. A female viewer who may prefer not to take part in such sexual
activities may also suffer from low sex esteem from this ad. It can tell them that if they do not
participate in these actions then they cannot be seen as sexy. They too may then compromise by
taking actions to make them more of a woman in sexual terms by consuming this long

burger. But, just like with the male viewers, this could likely have the opposite effect and lead
many in the female audience to completely avoid the brand.
The intended audience for this advertisement seems to be young adults who understand
the implicit message and find it humorous. Those who do may find it even more so due to the
shock value, because they too cannot believe the company was courageous enough to release
such media. However, the big flaw in the appeal to the chosen demographic is that their implicit
message may backfire due to the shock value. The makers of this ad can isolate a large part of
their demographic population, for It appears that viewers who like the sexual content are more
apt to like the ad and the brand, while the opposite is true for those who do not like the sexual
content (Lambiase&Reichart,7). There may be viewers who feel it is humorous, but also believe
it was taken too far at the same time. The ad can after all be seen as very offensive and vulgar,
and those who view it that way may now have a distaste for the entire brand of Burger King due
to how appalled they are by this message.
This advertisement also contains a few logical fallacies. The first is irrelevant reasoning.
Cavendar and Kahane tell us that irrelevant reasoning is committed when one attempts to prove
their argument with evidence that is irrelevant, and that is exactly what is happening here (88).
The ad is comparing two things that have nothing to do with each other, sex and food. They are
two completely different worlds, and therefore cannot sufficiently be used as evidence to support
the claim that viewers should purchase this product simply due to its size. With this in mind, we
can also see traces of equivocation in the text. As explained before, words such as blow,
long and juicy can have different meanings in different context. In this advertisement they
hold different meanings in the implicit message than they do in the explicit message, making the
ad guilty of this fallacy.

The world is full of advertisements that use sex to sell products, and this ad is a prime
example of how it is done. The image of the model with her mouth wide open and the burger
coming towards her as well as the words blow,long, and juicy gets across the provocative
implicit message to the viewers. The ad uses pathos to affect the audience in many ways, mainly
by attempting to use shock and insecurities with sex esteem to its benefit, which can actually
result in the opposite. The appeal to the demographic it is aiming to reach is flawed due to the
potential of the shock value to backfire and lead viewers to completely back away from the entire
Burger King brand. The distasteful implicit message even aides in the use of illogical fallacies
equivocation and irrelevant reasoning. After this close examination, one can see that this
advertisement is indeed ineffective.

Works Cited

Cavender, Nancy, and Howard Kahane. Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason
in Everyday Life. Boston, MA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2014. Print.
Lambiase, Jacqueline, and Tom Reichert. "Promises, promises: Exploring erotic rhetoric in
sexually oriented advertising." Persuasive imagery: A consumer perspective (2003): 247266.