What argumentation theory can teach us about commercials: Strategic maneuvering and the ‘tulip test’

Abstract

The paper seeks to show that the theory of strategic maneuvering, the most recent version of the pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation, can make vital contribution to understanding how commercials are designed and defended against legal challenges. If commercials can be subjected to argumentation-theoretic analysis, that would also show that the idea that commercials never constitute genuine arguments is mistaken. We will begin by sketching the pragma-dialectical approach and the theory of strategic maneuvering, then we apply the latter to two cases: the argument in a commercial aiming to persuade customers that Dove Intensive Cream moisturizes better than Nivea’s similar product, and the argument given by Dove’s manufacturer, Unilever, during the proceedings conducted by the Hungarian Competition Authority, which is intended to convince the Authority that the commercial is not deceptive.