Engine Gunk
It is no secret that each gasoline company puts additives in their gas to distinguish their products. A primary function of these additives is to help keep the insides of your engine clean. Once the gasoline has combusted in the engine cylinder, the major by-product is carbon. Engine’s are designed to expel the carbon as exhaust. Unfortunately the carbon has a nasty habit of building up on certain engine components such as the valves. If enough carbon builds up it can actually inhibit performance and efficiency. Each gasoline company spends boatloads on research to develop the best additive to fight this gunk build-up, and then being able to wrap convincing advertising campaigns around it.
In the last couple of months Shell (Royal Dutch Shell) has introduced their “all-new Nitrogen Enriched Gasolines” containing the latest and greatest additives from their R&D. And of course a huge marketing campaign was initiated to promote it. It included radio spots, tv commercials, and on-line advertising.
My problem is with Shell’s choice of words when describing how the active cleaning molecule (containing nitrogen) reduces engine gunk. In their press release Shell claims this new additive is “designed to seek and destroy engine ‘gunk’.” Or on some of the YouTube videos featuring aloof and affable scientists, the language is “it seeks. it destroys. it protects.” When matched with the cool computer graphics of flames and edgy video cuts, you would think that Bruce Willis had come out with his own line of gasoline. But for a lot of people I think Shell’s choice of words is misleading at best and possibly deceptive. Some people might get the impression that Shell scientists have figured out a way to program nano-bots to ride chariots of nitrogen and conquer the evil engine gunk. Actually that sounds really exciting. Think of how much more engaging driving would be if you knew that there were millions of microscopic Russell Crowes fighting for the unsoiled freedom of your Coliseumesque engine cylinders.
Obviously I think there needs to be less snake oil and more fact in this kind of advertising. And I’m sure that the marketing team at Shell is always dancing on the line of what the government regulators will allow. The other possibility is to ensure the viewer is properly educated. Maybe a disclaimer could be shown warning that this advertisement is only appropriate for viewers familiar with molecular chemistry and mechanical engineering. That sounds like an ideal solution.
Or maybe the individual can’t be trusted to stay wise to cunning marketing ploys and the government is needed to step in and regulate with a big rubber stamp. How about we don’t allow companies to market boring products as exciting ones. I doubt there’s anyone who sits and waits for Friday night to come around so they can get together with their friends and rave about million year old hydrocarbons mixed with an inert gas. But millions of people will rush out to see Brussel Crillis and see the latest CGI fueled blockbuster. (I’m one of them.) And on opening night there may be a curious spike in Shell gasoline purchases. Hmm.
