R. W Seaver Persuasive Essay - 1402 Words

Companies are in a constant war in attempt to surpass and gain more revenue than other corporations who they believe may get in the way of their success. Ira C.Herbert, an executive of the Coca Cola company, addresses R.W Seaver with a persuasive letter regarding the use of the â€Å"It’s the Real Thing† slogan. In response to Herbert’s letter, R.W Seaver, a representative of the publishing company Grove Press, also writes an influential letter and defends the utilization of the same phrase by establishing how Coca Cola would not be affected in providing a clear advertisement towards its consumers. Whereas Ira C. Herbert’s letter contains a direct tone as illustrated by his constant criticism, Seaver’s response is more persuasive due to its†¦show more content†¦His demanding tone comes off as importunate, because his statements are more like commands rather than statements. Herbert assumes that by implementing the same slogan in their adver tising, Grove Press and Coca Cola will complicate the customer’s shopping experience, because â€Å"There will always be likelihood of confusion as to the sponsorship of the goods†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Para 3). In his pursuit to persuade Seaver, Herbert illustrates the negative consequences and how the Coca Cola company will be affected as an effect of invoking the same phrase in their advertising. His argument is built with opinions and is not substantiated by any evidence, hence Herbert’s effort to convince the other party is unsuccessful. As a result, Seaver retaliates Herbert’s remarks by demonstrating how Grove Press’s use of the â€Å"It’s the Real Thing† slogan would not jeopardize any products. It would in fact be beneficial to the Coca Cola company in the sense that the consumer would recognize the slogan and feel compelled to go buy their product. His assertion shows how rather than being harmful, using the same slogans would be convenient to Coca Cola because the reader might â€Å"buy a Coke rather than a book.† (Para 3) Seaver counters Herbert’s argument by providing examples on how their slogan would not diminish or decrease the effectiveness of Coca Cola’s revenue. He then proceeds to assert â€Å"We [Grove Press] would be happy to give Coke the residual benefit of our advertising.† (Para 3)