If there is one business in America that is both necessary and unnecessary at the same time, it’s advertising. As humans, we digest more advertising in one day than we do food. At least once every hour, we are bombarded with commercials and billboards and slogans and product placements that are supposed to encourage us to buy the products we see. I realize that society as we know it would not be able to exist without advertising on a financial level, but what about on a moral one?

I find advertising in general to be sometimes brilliant, clever, funny and entertaining – but I never find advertising to be influential. I would not purchase one battery over another because a celebrity tells me to. I would not drink one soda over another because my favorite singer does, and I am certainly not going to take a special life-enhancing vitamin because a famous actor tells me that it will make me feel great. What bothers me is – does anyone else feel the same way? – Apparently not.

According to statistics compiled by the Nike Corporation, their profits increased by more than $36,000,000 solely because of endorsements by Michael Jordan. Madonna was paid $5,000,000 to appear in a series of Pepsi ads in conjunction with the release of Like A Prayer. After the controversy surrounding the song surfaced, Pepsi pulled the ads and never aired them – but Madonna still kept the $5,000,000. American Express spent millions of dollars to acquire the set and cast of Seinfeld for a series of commercials to promote card membership. What message does that send? Does it say that if a superstar with fame, fortune and success decides to use this product, then so should I? Or does it say, “I should listen to this person only because they are famous. It doesn’t matter how much they know about the product they are endorsing. I don’t care whether they actually use this product on a regular basis – or have even tried it. And it doesn’t matter to me that if they did not receive monetary compensation for supporting this product – they would not be doing it. I’m just going to buy it because they are telling me to.”

It is not just the celebrity endorsing the products that bother me; it’s some of the products themselves. Like this new vitamin craze that is currently infecting our airwaves faster than the diseases the products are marketed to prevent? I cannot fathom how the FCC can allow a commercial promoting a pill promising relief from heartburn with severe abdominal pain as a side effect, or one advertising a pill to help men grow hair with possible sexual side effects and risk of permanent birth defects to any female who even touches the pill, on the air. My comment on those commercials is this – if I offered you a drink of something you did not recognize and told you that it will make you immune to the common cold – but eventually cause cancer – would you drink it?

Another favorite advertising category of mine is car commercials. No matter the car company, no matter how much the car costs, whether it is a car, truck or sport utility vehicle, the commercials are always the same: They start by showing the vehicle going speeds you can never legally go and doing things you can never possibly do while showing you the most important things – like finance charges and taxes and contract stipulations – in very small print at a speed faster than the vehicle in the commercial in traveling. Does anyone else see a problem with this?

Don’t get me wrong. I realize that without advertising, consumers would not be aware of what products are available which is why advertising is an essential part of our lives. All I’m asking is how about treating consumers like they have a little intelligence? Instead of showing or telling us that a product can do the impossible, or cure the incurable, or make you look years younger, tell us what the catch is, what side effects there are, and why this product is better than its competitors – to me – that’s advertising.

Remember – it’s your money – make sure you know what you are spending it on.