[OPE-L:1238] Re: Re: Re: Re: Advertising and productive labour

From: Michael J Williams (michael@williamsmj.screaming.net)
Date: Wed Sep 15 1999 - 13:11:00 EDT

----- Original Message -----
>From: <zarembka@ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU>
To: <ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 9:29 AM
Subject: [OPE-L:1235] Re: Re: Re: Advertising and productive labour

> Advertising of Coke and Pepsi is not a use value and therefore is not a
> commodity. It has no more use value than hiring a worker to dig a hole
> and refill it (Keynes' example). This is not a moral question, as far as
> I am concerned (at least for this example which I'd like to stay with
> until we have cleared the topic of advertising or agreed to disagree).

Such advertising is a use-value for the producers and distributers of these
drinks - which is why they are prepared to buy the commodity service. If
that service is produced under capitalist direct relations of production,
then it is a commodity. On what grounds other than 'moral' do you declare it
not to be a use-value? That it is not 'useful' in some general humanistic
sense? But that is true of many of the use-values produced under capitalism.


Dr Michael Williams
Economics and Social Sciences
De Montfort University
Milton Keynes

[This message may be in html, and any attachments may be in MSWord 97. If
you have difficulty reading either, please let me know.]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 27 2000 - 15:27:09 EST