Archive for Responsibility
Did Nike Buy off More Than Tiger’s Reputation?
Posted by: | Comments
We all saw the ad: Tiger Woods stares stoically and misty eyed into the camera in his usual Nike apparel. The voice of Earl Woods, Tiger’s late father, questions him about his infamous adulterous escapades. “Tiger, I am more prone to be inquisitive, to promote discussion,” Earl Woods says. “I want to find out what your thinking was. I want to find out what your feelings are. Did you learn anything?”
Talk about powerful advertising. Nike is a company that sells sports gear, but this commercial is proof of just how far advertisers in our culture have come from simply selling products. For years, Tiger Woods has been the face of Nike, establishing a fiscally beneficial situation for both parties, who grew into a kind of comfortable codependence. Tiger was able to finance his yacht (or whatever it is celebrity billionaires do with the cash from their endorsements) and Nike was able to capitalize on an athlete whose talent on the golf course was matched only by his squeaky clean image. Tiger was a marketer’s dream, and Nike amassed the revenue to prove it.
Nike sold Tiger’s image just as much as his short game and swoosh-embossed polos; he was a family man to be revered for his unwavering morals. In the face of the past and present multitude of adulterous athletes who still received millions in product endorsements after their transgressions (think Kobe Bryant), Tiger Woods was a wholesome breath of fresh air. As a company, endorsing Tiger Woods meant representing his personal life, which at the time, was all about the values of our country. Or so it appeared.
Did consumers buy Nike products partially because they believed that Nike was a company with a similar set of values to their own? I’m guessing the marketers at Nike have heard of value segmentation, and targeting consumers who placed high value on family or who admired Tiger Woods for both his professional career and admirable personal life wasn’t a coincidence. Tiger Woods was a figure whose life was consistent with Nike consumers’ values, or so it seemed. When the Tiger scandal hit the media, the endorsers who had made him the most highly paid athlete in the world were faced with the big decision: damage control or exit stage right.
Several of Tiger’s endorsers did in fact choose to bow out, deeming his reputation irreparably damaged. But not Nike. Nike’s response to the scandal was this commercial, which in one thirty second spot repositioned Tiger as a living commentary on our society’s changing values. Instead of marking him with a letter “A” and writing him off as another professional athlete turned modern day Hester Prynn, Nike did what they do best: emblazoned their famous logo on their fallen spokesman and used the media to cleverly redefine him as a man who needed his father to help him through a difficult time in his life. Nike battled the public’s critique of Tiger’s tainted family values with the ultimate trump card- more family values. The only way Nike could continue to endorse Tiger, who at that point was so ingrained in the culture of their brand image and company that dropping him would mean redirecting efforts towards an enormous and risky counter-campaign, was to fight fire with fire.
The question remains: did Nike make the right choice? Was this commercial just about the money, and saving face? Or does it speak to our culture’s values at large? In spite of his egregious transgressions, Nike supports Tiger Woods. Advertising as an industry now carries a lot of social responsibility that it never did before, possibly because agencies now brand their image with meaning beyond simply functions of the product they’re selling. No matter what, Nike’s decision was going to make a statement, and the impact of the decision and the ad are unmistakable. Instead of changing their spokesman to an athlete who was a better representation of their values, Nike changed their values, and attempted to change ours as well. Did we fall for it? Like I said: talk about powerful advertising.
Do YOUR Trust Issues Affect THEIR Bottom Line?
Posted by: | CommentsWhy are we as consumers continuously trying to dodge advertising? The answer is both complex and yet quite simple.
As a consumer driven culture we are inundated with ads through various types of media every second of every day. From television and magazines to Internet and buses, we are never without the influence of some form of advertisement. Even those aspiring to build a career in the advertising field do not want to see ads–thus the genius behind such technological advances as DVR and Tivo–and yet, advertising drives consumerism just as much as it depends upon it. At the heart of this infinite cycle is trust, and the ability to distinguish the responsible from the irresponsible while wading through the ad clutter.
As a consumer, we directly and indirectly live by a value system where trust is the leading act (hard to successfully get and keep). In a culture so bedecked with various media and ads, which should the consumer trust? According to Judy Shapiro, this idea of trust correlates with decreasing integrity in media as a result of too many options and undefined roles of “credible journalists, entertaining bloggers, and self-proclaimed experts.” Who is deemed credible, and how does the consumer know if the ad or advertiser is credible?
This is where advertising and its responsibility to the consumer play a part. Advertising today has evolved from simply selling a product to selling a brand, lifestyle, and most importantly, a relationship.
They always say that the key to a good and healthy relationship in life is trust, why can’t this be true for all aspects of life? Today, consumers build and break and rebuild relationships without blinking an eye. How do advertisers get to the consumer through all other competition and ignored ads? Advertisers must successfully sell the brand image and wanted lifestyle in order for the consumer to buy the relationship. In this culture, consumers buy an identity or a symbol not a product. The black hole here, however, is that the consumer must first form a relationship to a product, which begins with advertising.
Consumers do not trust advertising because it has lost its credibility due to the volume of ads consumers are exposed to daily. Not only does the amount of advertising defer us, but also by human nature we tend not to trust. This can be attributed to our cultural foundation based on classical liberal beliefs not to trust centralized government or big businesses. Again and again, this notion has been proven through such overbearing players as the once powerful tobacco industry that used ulterior motives, morally ambiguous marketing tactics, and capitol based get-out-of-jail-free cards to enhance profit. Instead, consumers listen to other consumers through word of mouth because it is based on experience and direct human interaction, not advertising.
Low-involvement, consumer goods brands face the challenge of differentiating themselves in product categories that are sufficiently saturated with very similar products, such as the beer industry. Dos Equis, in 2007, launched an advertising campaign centered on a fictional character, The Most Interesting Man in the World, whom they portrayed in television advertisements accomplishing outlandish feats and seeking adventures around the world. This ad campaign plays on the trickle-down effect as Dos Equis seems to assume that consumers of lower economic classes than the Most Interesting Man in the World will seek to emulate his behavior, and in this case, drink Dos Equis beer. Generally speaking, American consumers strive to better themselves economically by working hard enough so that they may achieve financial success. Thus, those in the elite are admired for their success, or envied for their inherited wealth; either way, those in the middle or lower classes tend to look up to the elite, and try to imitate their behavior. So, Dos Equis is using this wealthy and adventurous character to persuade consumers that although they aren’t as interesting as he is, they can be one step closer to being The Most Interesting Man in the World by drinking Dos Equis beer. The brand positions its beer as an affordable luxury; while the Most Interesting Man in the World enjoys the finer things in life like exotic vacations, he also drinks Dos Equis. If the average Joe can buy a six-pack of Dos Equis for $7.99 (at your nearest BevMo) and feel like the Most Interesting Man in the World while drinking one, why wouldn’t he?
Dos Equis, in creating such a worldly and accomplished man to recommend their beer, also takes advantage of the fact that consumers value the opinions of those whom they perceive as experienced. His age, estimated in the fifties or sixties, also adds to this image of a knowledgeable man. By incorporating characteristics that consumers value into the character of The Most Interesting Man, Dos Equis makes his recommendation of drinking their beer very persuasive.
At the same time, they use humor by going to such great lengths to portray him as “interesting” with absurd traits or hobbies that the viewer cannot help but laugh. These commercials entertain, and some viewers even look forward to seeing a new one, to see what his next ridiculous talent will be.
The institution of advertising as a whole is expected to be socially responsible by informing the consumer, rather than manipulating the consumer into buying products they don’t actually need. Alcohol advertising is held to even greater accountability with regards to sensitive social issues like drinking and driving and underage drinking. Though these topics are never directly addressed in these commercials, one could argue that Dos Equis is being socially responsible in the way that it frames the act of drinking beer: a leisurely activity which adults (twenty-one or older) engage in occasionally after a long day of work, or in the case of The Most Interesting Man in the World, worldly activities. The Most Interesting Man is not shown guzzling multiple Dos Equis before “curing narcolepsy” or while chest-pressing two women in chairs; rather, when the mood strikes for a refreshing bottle of beer, after a day of exotic adventures, the Most Interesting Man reaches for a Dos Equis. His now infamous tag line “I don’t always drink beer. But when I do, I prefer Dos Equis,” clearly does not encourage binge drinking or other socially irresponsible activities involving beer. This almost serves as a reminder to the consumer that excessive consumption of alcoholic beverages is very rarely perceived as a classy act. A Dos Equis, as portrayed in the commercials, serves as a final note to the day, not a start of a rowdy night.
There are opponents to this campaign, some of whom argue that the commercials are not believable, specifically in the fact that a wealthy man like the Most Interesting Man in the World would drink a Dos Equis. He is portrayed as a man who can afford many luxuries, so the question some critics ask is why would he settle for a Dos Equis? This all depends on taste, for these critics clearly do not like the taste of Dos Equis, so cannot buy into the idea that such a worldly and rich man would enjoy this specific beer. Others question why an older man was used as the main character of beer commercials, which are generally targeting college-age young men.
However, most consumers enjoy the entertainment aspect of these commercials, and those of age to consume alcohol might say, “If the Most Interesting Man in the World drinks Dos Equis, why wouldn’t I?” Class is the ultimate persuader in this ad campaign, as Dos Equis creates this character of the Most Interesting Man in the World who possesses both money and worldly knowledge. This has such an impact on the consumer because these are two qualities which most Americans strive to accumulate a wealth of over the course of their lifetimes. The commercials thus position The Most Interesting Man in the World as someone who most consumers will respect and therefore value the opinion of. The sarcastic nature of the ads simply adds to the positive associations consumers will create in their minds toward Dos Equis beer for although we strive for perfection, we do so knowing that perfection is impossible. So by making the accomplishments of The Most Interesting Man in the World so wildly impossible to believe, Dos Equis takes advantage of this tension within consumers of craving perfection while knowing it cannot be achieved. This ad campaign influences consumers to consider Dos Equis when purchasing beer, and influences the beer industry in creating an ad campaign that stands out from the rest in using such a classy and respectable character to persuade consumers.
This campaign could influence the greater society in the interpretation of The Most Interesting Man in the World’s sign-off “Stay thirsty, my friends.” This could have multiple implications, but the most plausible would be that it encourages consumers to “stay thirsty,” keep drinking, Dos Equis beer. This affects society in its promotion of alcohol consumption, and the side-effects or fatal accidents which occur when consumers do not drink responsibly, but is a relatively moderate statement due to its abstract or vague nature and the many different possible interpretations one could make of it. However, in conjunction with all other advertisements for beer, this could lead to an all too positive perception of beer by consumers; while beer is not a harmful substance by any means, irresponsible consumption thereof has caused an obscene amount of injuries and fatalities. This explains why alcohol advertising in general is a very tricky business in walking the line between promoting its products as superior to competitors while not condoning irresponsible behavior, which both public and private institutions make sure to monitor.
A compilation of the Most Interesting Man in the World commercials:
Liberty Mutual-Responsibility
Posted by: | CommentsThe first time I saw this commercial, it really stuck with me. Liberty Mutual doesn’t mention their name or brand logo until the very end, so before even knowing the sponsor, I really appreciated the ad. The concept is ‘Pay it Forward;’ each little nice/helpful thing you do for someone will continue a chain of helpful events. I love this concept because it’s a reminder for all of us in this fast paced world that all the little things add up. Picking up a toy a child in a stroller dropped is such a simple thing to do, yet it is so helpful for that parent trying to juggle a million things and may not even realize the child dropped their beloved stuffed animal.
At the end of the commercial I was really surprised to learn that it was for Liberty Mutual, an insurance company. I think they’ve done a great job emphasizing that their company is responsible, and will be there for you when you need that extra bit of help. Furthermore, they managed to create an insurance ad that isn’t dull and dry; something I haven’t seen since the Geico Insurance ads.
