Advertising works, on everybody. The only way to get to a level playing field is to filter it out of your life as much as possible. The only thing I haven't found a solution for is billboards and radios and TVs playing in places that I have no control over.
So yea, I echo the claim. But I’m probably wrong. Where’s my blindspot? Is there a way to test how affected I am by ads?
I volunteered in several marketing positions for educational non-profit organizations and university clubs, and read books about marketing and advertising to try to improve at my job.
A great deal of advertising tactics rely on emotional appeal first (e.g. identifying a human need or fear–like the want to belong, the want to find a good romantic relationship, the want to save time or money, the want to look smart–then selling a product or service as a solution. Another common tactic is to reduce friction to make a purchase, to make impulse purchasing easier (e.g. one-click purchases, very visible purchase buttons). A third is to use other high-pressure or manipulative tactics (e.g. a countdown timer to get a discount, or offering free gifts or books to make a purchase).
You're likely to reduce the effectiveness of these advertising tactics on you by being aware of them (though there's a high chance they still have an effect). Besides knowledge from reading about advertising, good habits to reduce ad effectiveness include: delaying purchases, especially large ones, by writing them on a list and seeing if you still want them after a month; avoiding regular, small purchases of ~$20 because they add up; and holding yourself to a personal budget, where impulse spending comes at the cost of other life goals (e.g. setting up an emergency fund, saving to afford a vacation with a loved one, or pursuing educational training).
NB also made their logo reflective, so there is utility in that. All these people running in black shorts and shirts, there ought to be a law.
This might sound silly, but I deliberately train my eyes to avoid looking at advertisements on posters whenever I take public transit (not completely successful, but it does reduce exposure).
For radio advertisements, that's what the 'over-priced in ear headphones' are for (admittedly a luxury and not a necessity as I could achieve the same effect with earplugs or cheap, noise-isolating earphones, but I enjoy the high-quality music).
TVs are the most difficult because they easily catch attention due to the moving picture. I also try to avoid looking at them like billboards when I go to the gym (plenty of TVs) and turn off the display whenever using the treadmill, but it's a conscious decision I make before walking in.
Also, for what it's worth, I don't think the value of iPhones are overstated by advertising. I purchased my first one after reading a book by an academic about the lack of privacy in technology. It was a suitable option for a phone that's relatively private while working with relatively easy setup (versus most Linux phones). So, iPhone usage may reduce the effectiveness of targeted ads by collecting less data to use for advertisers.
This means that it is actually possible to not be affected by advertising and still use fashion items, on the theory that everyone else is affected by advertising and the effect you want is to leverage that effect.
I'm sure the most fashionable people are aware of this since they need to parse the fine distinctions of brand associations to maximize their desired effects. Ironically I think they may be the least affected by the advertising even while becoming the strongest real world advocates.