SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Gümüşhane Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 14 Sayı: Uluslararası Bi Marka Türkiye: Karadeniz Kongresi Özel Sayısı

THE MYTH OF TECHNOLOGY IN ADVERTISING: A SEMIOTIC READING OF THE DYSON CASE

REKLAMDA TEKNOLOJİ MİTİ: DYSON ÖRNEĞİ ÜZERİNE GÖSTERGEBİLİMSEL BİR OKUMA

Nuri Paşa Özer(NECMETTİN ERBAKAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-9743-2878
Beril Özer0000-0001-5638-2181
Pages
235–268
Publication Date
2026-10-26
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In conclusion, Dyson advertisements present technology as a natural, necessary, and desirable consumer value, thereby revealing the ideological function of the technology myth in advertising.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines how the myth of technology is constructed in five advertising/brand videos produced by Dyson and through which visual, verbal, and technical signs this myth is naturalized.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The sample of the study consists of Dyson PencilWash, Dyson V16 Piston Animal, Dyson OnTrac PORTER, Dyson Airstrait, and Dyson Airwrap advertisements.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, Dyson advertisements present technology as a natural, necessary, and desirable consumer value, thereby revealing the ideological function of the technology myth in advertising.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Teknoloji miti · Göstergebilim · Reklam

Abstract

This study examines how the myth of technology is constructed in five advertising/brand videos produced by Dyson and through which visual, verbal, and technical signs this myth is naturalized. The sample of the study consists of Dyson PencilWash, Dyson V16 Piston Animal, Dyson OnTrac PORTER, Dyson Airstrait, and Dyson Airwrap advertisements. The study is based on Roland Barthes’s approach to denotation, connotation, and myth. Accordingly, the advertisements were analyzed using qualitative semiotic analysis. Numerical data, screens, sensors, internal mechanism visuals, airflow animations, automatic movements, hygiene discourses, product design, color use, and innovation emphases in each advertisement were examined. During the analysis process, the myth of technology was evaluated through six codes: scientific legitimation/evidence, miniaturization/lightness/superior performance, automation/intelligent systems, purification/hygiene, aesthetics/status, and future orientation/the imperative of innovation. The myth of technology appears quite intensely in Dyson advertisements. The findings show that technology in Dyson advertisements is presented not only as a functional tool but also as a signifier of a proper life, smarter consumption, a more hygienic home, less damaging care, and more refined aesthetics. In the background, what is non-technological is represented as old, inadequate, and dysfunctional. PencilWash and V16 construct cleaning practices mythically through data, hygiene, and automation; OnTrac constructs technology mythically through craftsmanship and status; while Airstrait and Airwrap construct hair care mythically through airflow, damage-free styling, and automated shaping. In conclusion, Dyson advertisements present technology as a natural, necessary, and desirable consumer value, thereby revealing the ideological function of the technology myth in advertising.

Özet

Bu çalışma, Dyson markasına ait beş reklam/marka videosunda teknoloji mitinin nasıl kurulduğunu ve bu mitin hangi görsel, sözel ve teknik göstergeler aracılığıyla doğallaştırıldığını incelemektedir. Araştırmanın örneklemini Dyson PencilWash, Dyson V16 Piston Animal, Dyson OnTrac PORTER, Dyson Airstrait ve Dyson Airwrap reklamları oluşturmaktadır. Çalışmada Roland Barthes’in düz anlam, yan anlam ve mit yaklaşımı temel alınmıştır. Bu doğrultuda reklamlar nitel göstergebilimsel çözümleme yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Her reklamda yer alan sayısal veriler, ekranlar, sensörler, iç mekanizma görüntüleri, hava akışı animasyonları, otomatik hareketler, hijyen söylemleri, ürün tasarımı, renk kullanımı ve yenilik vurguları incelenmiştir. Analiz sürecinde teknoloji miti, bilimselleştirme/kanıt, küçülme-hafifleme-üstün performans, otomasyon/akıllı sistem, arınma-hijyen, estetik-statü ve gelecek yönelimi/yenilik zorunluluğu olmak üzere altı kod üzerinden değerlendirilmiştir. Teknoloji miti Dyson reklamlarında oldukça yoğun şekilde yer almaktadır. Bulgular, Dyson reklamlarında teknolojinin işlevsel bir araç olarak sunulmasının yanında doğru yaşamın, daha akıllı tüketimin, daha hijyenik evin, daha zararsız bakımın ve daha seçkin estetiğin göstergesi olarak sunulduğunu göstermektedir. Arka planda, teknolojik olmayan eski, eksik ve işlevsiz olarak betimlenmektedir. Reklamlarda PencilWash ve V16 temizlik pratiklerini veri, hijyen ve otomasyon üzerinden, OnTrac teknolojiyi zanaat ve statü üzerinden, Airstrait ve Airwrap ise saç bakımını hava akışı, hasarsızlık ve otomatik şekillendirme üzerinden mitsel olarak anlatılmaktadır. Sonuç olarak Dyson reklamları, teknolojiyi doğal, gerekli ve arzu edilir bir tüketim değeri olarak anlatmakta; bu yolla reklamlarda teknoloji mitinin ideolojik işlevini görünür kılmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özer, N. P., Özer, B. (2026). THE MYTH OF TECHNOLOGY IN ADVERTISING: A SEMIOTIC READING OF THE DYSON CASE. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, Cilt: 14 Sayı: Uluslararası Bi Marka Türkiye: Karadeniz Kongresi Özel Sayısı, 235–268. https://doi.org/10.19145/e-gifder.1985440

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (35)

  1. Ames, M. G. (2019). The charisma machine: The life, death, and legacy of One Laptop per Child. MIT Press.
  2. Barthes, R. (1972). Mythologies (A. Lavers, Çev.). Hill and Wang.
  3. Barthes, R. (1977). Image, music, text (S. Heath, Çev.). Hill and Wang.
  4. Baudrillard, J. (1998). The consumer society: Myths and structures (C. Turner, Çev.). Sage.
  5. Belch, G. E., & Belch, M. A. (2018). Advertising and promotion: An integrated marketing communications perspective (11. bs.). McGraw-Hill Education.
  6. Benjamin, W. (1968). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. İçinde H. Arendt (Ed.), Illuminations. Schocken Books.
  7. Coyne, R. (1999). Technoromanticism: Digital narrative, holism, and the romance of the real. MIT Press. de Saussure, F. (2011). Course in general linguistics. Columbia University Press.
  8. Debord, G. (1994). The society of the spectacle. Zone Books.
  9. Eagleton, T. (1991). Ideology: An introduction. Verso.
  10. Eco, U. (1976). A theory of semiotics. Indiana University Press.
  11. Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society (J. Wilkinson, Çev.). Vintage Books.
  12. Fiske, J. (1990). Introduction to communication studies (2. bs.). Routledge.
  13. Goldman, R. (1992). Reading ads socially. Routledge.
  14. Holt, D. B. (2004). How brands become icons: The principles of cultural branding. Harvard Business School Press.
  15. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWzhMDiEfpU
  16. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LkiXiJYsGM
  17. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQVpSJIJeLA
  18. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wS5aCGLx5ZY
  19. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umCKeY10Xpw
  20. Jhally, S. (1990). The codes of advertising: Fetishism and the political economy of meaning in the consumer society. Routledge.
  21. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2. bs.). Routledge.
  22. Marvin, C. (1988). When old technologies were new: Thinking about electric communication in the late nineteenth century. Oxford University Press.
  23. McCracken, G. (1986). Culture and consumption: A theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(1), 71-84.
  24. Mick, D. G. (1986). Consumer research and semiotics: Exploring the morphology of signs, symbols, and significance. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(2), 196-213.
  25. Mosco, V. (2004). The digital sublime: Myth, power, and cyberspace. MIT Press.
  26. Nye, D. E. (1994). American technological sublime. MIT Press.
  27. Oswald, L. R. (2012). Marketing semiotics: Signs, strategies, and brand value. Oxford University Press.
  28. Özer, N. P., & Yarar, A. E. (2019). Göstergebilimsel bir reklam analizi: Burger King “Ateş Seni Çağırıyor”. Atatürk İletişim Dergisi, (18), 105-124.
  29. Özer, N. P., & Yarar, A. E. (2023). Türkiye’de fitness dergi reklamlarında insan bedeninin sunumu. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (50), 184-203. https://doi.org/10.52642/susbed.1224446
  30. Özer, N. P., & Zengin, A. M. (2020). Arabesk kültürü özelinde Orhan Gencebay’ın rol aldığı Rexona reklamlarının incelenmesi. Kritik İletişim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 1-12.
  31. Phillips, B. J., & McQuarrie, E. F. (2004). Beyond visual metaphor: A new typology of visual rhetoric in advertising. Marketing Theory, 4(1-2), 113-136.
  32. Schroeder, J. E. (2002). Visual consumption. Routledge.
  33. Slack, J. D., & Wise, J. M. (2005). Culture + technology: A primer. Peter Lang.
  34. Williamson, J. (1978). Decoding advertisements (C. 4). Marion Boyars London.
  35. Winner, L. (1986). The whale and the reactor: A search for limits in an age of high technology. University of Chicago Press.