-
- After reading the articles "The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception" by Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer and "Selling Culture" by Ohman, I can see that each had there own opinions and views about how they viewed culture. Though both had agreeable and disagreeable points of why they theorized culture the way they did, both did not support their theories in good ways. All authors felt, in some ways, the same way about particular topics about culture, but a few were different.

One point from Adorno and Horkheimer's article that I found in relation to Ohman's article was their view on the culture industry. They wrote that "the culture industry perpetually cheats its consumers of what it perpetually promises." I feel this is somewhat true depending on the product they're advertising. Adorno and Horkheimer did not offer a solution to this problem if this was how they felt the culture industry. Ohman's article,on the other hand, offers a strategy for businessmen to execute. He stated that 'rather than allying themselves with competitors,or swallowing them up,or making the government their executive committee, the masters of production could become engineers of consumptions.' He knew that although this strategy would not end competition,it could moderate it in two ways: First, companies could divide constomers up into "shares" of the market, and develop brand loyalties among them, so that competition would no longer be a voracious struggle ending in total domination or extinction. Second, companies could squeeze out smaller competitors and make it harder for new ones to gain entry.

Adorno and Horkheimer criticized a lot about the problems of the cultural industry, but rarely gave any explanations or soloutions that could hel fix these problems. Ohman's article gave his insight on capitalism, cultural indutry, and advertising, but he also gave a reason why he felt the way he did. He even added a little history of when some products got started, who started them, and why they started them.