Economics and rhetoric have their roots in Greek antiquity with Aristotle. They share fundamental assumptions in many areas. Both see the freedom of action and freedom of the actors as the prerequisite for their work. This takes place to a large extent in public and neither rhetoric nor economics are to be understood monologically. Homo oeconomicus and homo rhetoricus alike are motivated by the achievement of a specific goal. Both disciplines have the instruments to create negotiation processes, and to analyze these processes theoretically. A significant difference between the two disciplines is that economics does not have any ethical guidelines, such as e.g. the vir bonus ideal of rhetoric. The economy uses money to communicate on the market. Money is a means of communication that presents values or statements in the form of prices, which requires a double acceptance (the value of money itself and the value expressed in the price) by the market participants. Being an instrument of the economy, advertising has generated an equivalent means of communication: the brand image. As a means of communication, like money, it requires twofold acceptance (meaning of the brand image and the consumption statement) by the market participants. Rhetorically speaking, the sensus communis determines the meaning of the statement/value of the economic means of communication. In this context, the principle of the impossibility of non-communication applies to all market participants.