Controversy Over Proposed Food Marketing Guidelines
By · Comments
Ad Week recently reported that in response to pressure the Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children is considering making changes to their proposed voluntary guidelines for food marketers targeting children. The controversy over the regulation is indicative of our increasing concern as a society over both childhood obesity and the effect advertising might have on that problem. In a nutshell, the plan proposed that marketers either change the formulation of certain products aimed at children to make the foods more healthy or cease marketing those products to children. While the proposal has a number of Senate Democrat supporters, it has generated strong criticism for being too heavy-handed (despite being completely voluntary) from both the advertising industry and GOP congressmen. While the goal of reducing childhood obesity is laudable, those in favor of increased regulation of advertising need to realize that, in this case, regulation of advertising may not achieve the desired effect.
At first glance it may seem like regulation is the way to go. While children aren’t making most of the final purchase decisions, they do play a strong role in influencing their parents’ decisions which is part of the rationale for marketing to children. Yet because children aren’t fully developed mentally, they may be more prone to impulsive behavior and less capable of making rational decisions, making them more likely to be misled by advertising. As childhood obesity is now widely recognized as a major social problem it therefore might seem like a no-brainer to push the kind of regulation the Interagency Working Group is proposing.
However in this case regulating marketing efforts may not be the best way to go about achieving the ultimate goal of promoting healthy eating during childhood. Faced with the prospect of the stick rather than the carrot, advertisers may simply find ways around the regulation while technically remaining in compliance. In fact this might already be happening to some extent. An earlier piece by Ad Week mentions a report by the Rudd Center noting that while advertisements for junk-food aimed at children are down, children’s exposure to junk-food product placement is up.
For their part, advertisers need to realize that concern over childhood obesity and worries that marketing efforts are exacerbating the problem aren’t going away. Rather than continually taking defensive action against this kind of regulation they need to consider the benefits of developing and advertising healthy products that kids actually like. Easier said than done, but considering the influence children have on family purchases how much easier would it be to increase sales if the foods they wanted didn’t cause parents concern?
Ad Week: Feds May Soften Controversial Food Marketing Guidelines
Ad Week: Study: Industry’s Found Sneaky Way to Keep Advertising Junk Food to Kids
Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children’s Guidelines
Reebok EasyTones: Workout or Worked Over?
By · Comments
On Wednesday, the Federal Trade Commission announced that Reebok has agreed to pay $25 million in settlement for false advertising claims. The product in question is the popular EasyTone sneaker line, including RunTone and TrainTone. According to Reebok ads, these sneakers will help you loose weight, tone your muscles, and improve your balance. However, the FTC has cited the company for not having sufficient scientific proof to support its claims.
The advertisements for EasyTone were developed by ad agency DDB, and began running in 2009. According to AdvertisingAge, Reebok spent 80% of its media budget on the advertisements for this line of products, and $10 million this year alone on marketing in the US. In 2010, Reebok EasyTones were named by Ad Age as one of America’s Hottest Brands in 2010. So what caused such a detrimental claim to be made against the company?
In several of the advertisements, Reebok claimed that customers would see a 28% increase in rear tone, and an 11% increase in calf and hamstring tone. In January, these statements caught the attention of NAD (the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureaus). However, though NAD recommended that Reebok discontinue these claims, the ads continued to run. NAD then suggested the case be reviewed by the FTC.
Though the company has agreed to settle, Reebok denies that their claims are illegitimate. They continue to market and sell the EasyTone product line, though they have stopped production of promotional materials printed with the facts in question. Furthermore, they are banned from making any health or fitness-related statements until they have sufficient backing and scientific evidence.
This case raises many questions about the ethics and responsibility of advertising. Under the first amendment, commercial speech is only protected if it is not false or misleading. In this case, the FTC has made it clear that they believe Reebok’s advertisement is entirely deceptive to consumers. Though Reebok is continuing to support the products in question, patrons of the product will undoubtedly feel cheated or misled in some way.
Further, the current ethical scrutiny of using unrealistic, unhealthy images of women in advertising has certainly heightened the FTC’s aggressiveness in ensuring that healthy and beauty claims are legitimate. The fact that Reebok has targeted youth under the impression of improving body image is likely to receive criticism. The FTC is always quick to examine the validity of any health related claims, and Reebok’s coupling of fitness claims with idealized body image probably strengthened the FTC’s motives for investigation. The promise of improving body tone and self-image is always very enticing for women, but it raises significant ethical issues when these promises are not valid.
This case will likely cause setback for the ad industry. Not only will Reebok and EasyTone likely lose credibility, but so also will the entire institution of advertising. While “virtuous” is not commonly used as to describe advertising, it is instances like these that cause even more setback. Making unsupported claims, whether intended or not, should never be acceptable.
Read the original AdAge article here.
Imagination…Ecomagination at Work
By · CommentsDid you know that by submitting one photo that had water in it to GE’s ecoimagination website last year provided 480 gallons of clean drinking water to developing countries? By posting a wind photo, 4.5 KW hours of wind powered health clinics in rural Peru and by uploading a photo of light, 175 hours of solar power were given to families in East Timor. Through GE’s ecomagination website, GE encouraged a joint collaboration with Flickr members to take photos of these elements and “Tag Your Green” allowing for that one simple uploading of a photo affect lives across the globe. The campaign was very successful and GE achieved their goal of 10,000 photos for each nature element thus changing countless lives.
Since global warming and energy crisis have become buzzwords in the media, companies such as General Electric have decided to turn the negative connotations of the words to a call of action utilizing social media. Within doing this, they have created a branding moment that demonstrates their understanding for environmental concerns and how their brand in turn can contribute to a “greener” Earth by involving consumers. On the photoproject website, GE gives tribute to Social Vibe http://www.socialvibe.com/an engagement-marketing website whose belief is the brand should be in the hands of consumers. On SocialVibe’s website, the company portrays a large global cause platform that is meant to be indispensible to consumers. By pairing social media to contributing to the greater good, SocialVibe and General Electric have positioned the role of social media to become an agent of change.
Consumers are not only becoming the agents of change, but theopportunity to affect change is in their (the consumers) hands.
GE’s tagline is “Imagination at Work” and it is evident that their imagination is cognizant of the need to be relevant to the younger generation and the countless number of people who interact with social media daily. As evident of the 2010 campaign, they successfully completed their goal. By being aware of the use of social media in promoting a cause, the company is not only enacting change, but also linking their name to good works. General Electric does have quite an advantage for promoting a greener earth, but other companies could also join the cause of utilizing social media and sites such as Social Vibe to jumpstart change in the world. If by taking a picture of water, posting it on Flickr, and then GE’s website and that one photo changed the life of someone else in the world, think about what would happen if more companies joined in to this concept of taking social media to a whole other level. Imagination at Work.
Imagination at Work commercial: http://www.youtube.com/embed/CsW1JE4Hg14?rel=0
The Enterprise Way
By · CommentsEnterprise Rent-A-Car. When you hear this name what is the first thing that comes to mind? Perhaps it is a picture of a wrapped car and the slogan “We’ll pick you up.” This could be because Enterprise has had the same advertising campaign for over two decades.
Earlier this year, the company announced a brand new advertising campaign that will be focused around TV commercials and social media. The campaign emphasizes the brand’s main philosophy, “Take care of your customers and your employees first, and the profits will follow.” Founded by Jack Taylor, and currently owned by family members of Mr. Taylor, Enterprise is a company that deeply cares about its customers.
“The Enterprise Way” created by St. Louis based Cannonball Advertising focuses on the most important values of the company. “The Enterprise Way” campaign uses current employees to tell the story. Each employee expresses how they feel about the brand’s customer service, heritage, and culture.
Along with TV spots, the campaign is also relying heavily on social media outlets. Their Facebook page includes all of the TV spots, but it also shows additional interviews with Enterprise employees as well as outtakes from the commercials. The company is also utilizing Twitter, YouTube and Flickr outlets to promote the new campaign.
These two TV spots are very simplistic and straight to the point. It is obvious that Enterprise values the fact that the company is family-owned. This campaign is responsible in the aspect that the commercials are not trying to shove the brand down the consumer’s throat, compare themselves to another brand, or market tangible items. Instead they are reinforcing some important values that customers find important such as family, hedonism and authenticity. This campaign is relevant to the large percentage of the population it will reach, as the values it touches upon are shared among our culture. When watching the TV spots, consumers will get that warm and fuzzy feeling by knowing that the company will be there for them in a time of need. The way that these commercials promote the brand is very successful because it will motivate the consumers to go to Enterprise when they need a vehicle, whether it is because theirs is in the repair shop or just because they want to go on vacation.
In the “Family Business” commercial shown below, it touches upon the aspect of not only getting a customer to come to Enterprise once, but keeping them for the long run. By showing the values that the company is based on and communicating good customer service to potential consumers, those consumers have the opportunity to develop enduring involvement with the brand. After all, everyone will probably need to rent a car at some point in life, right?
The portrayal of the company and showing that they will be there for their customers has made for a very successful campaign. Through “The Enterprise Way,” they have communicated that consumers will have peace of mind when working with Enterprise, and any experience they have will be one to remember (and hopefully one that promotes a long lasting relationship!)
Below are two additional commercials from the campaign:
If You Let Me Play
By · CommentsThis ad from Nike is fairly old (1995) but still an excellent example of how to sell a product while keeping in mind a socially responsible agenda. Although its arguable that you’re more likely today to see ads for sports products that show women in a positive light, many ads still follow the same tired format of associating sports superstars with products or showing gym addicts striving in their quest for the (impossibly) perfect body. The ad below however, presents a strong argument against the stereotype that ‘sports are for boys’.
This TV spot by Wieden+Kennedy however, simply presents factual real-world benefits associated with young girls playing sports, such as reduced risk of breast cancer or increased likelihood of leaving an abusive partner. The strong, simple message is proof that you can effectively sell products for women without resorting to gender stereotyping or exploiting body image fears.
By talking to parents about the benefits of girls’ participation in sports, the company is pushing a positive social agenda and effectively selling their product at the same time. From a practical standpoint, presenting sports as a way of empowering girls is a great way to achieve that all important relevance between the company and the cause, since research has indicated that with cause related advertising the better the fit between the company and the cause, the more effective it is likely to be with the consumer. Rather than simply tack on an unrelated social concern in a transparent attempt to boost sales, Nike has addressed a social issue directly related to their core business in a positive way while also effectively advertising their company. By attacking the stereotype that girls shouldn’t play sports, Nike is helping girls and themselves. After all more girls playing sports means better health and self esteem for those girls and an increased market for Nike.
Although there have of course been problems over the years with Nike’s treatment of labor, with all the exploitative advertising out there, it’s still nice to see something like this as a reminder that selling a product and promoting a positive social change aren’t mutually exclusive.
Honda: Good Reasons
By · Comments
This week, Honda launched a new campaign entitled “Good Reasons.” According to the company website, “the Honda ‘Good Reasons’ campaign highlights core Honda values as well as Honda’s long-standing leadership and tradition of earning top industry accolades.” Featuring actor and comedian Patrick Warburton, the campaign includes print, television, and digital media spots. The Honda website (http://goodreasons.shophonda.com) serves as the most comprehensive source for the campaign, and includes a very interactive Patrick Warburton cracking jokes while viewers surf the site.
View Video 01 – Honda: Good Reasons
After recently suffering major industry setbacks due to the Japanese Earthquake, Honda launched the campaign as an attempt to regain its presence in the American market. The campaign covers it all – from fuel efficiency, to quality, innovation, value, dependability, safety, reliability, and resale value of Honda vehicles. In fact, the campaign title seems to be an understatement; Honda doesn’t just highlight “Good Reasons,” but rather appeals to almost every recognized western-culture value.
RPA, the agency responsible for the advertisements, made sure that the campaign had a strong voice in the digital media landscape. By launching a Twitter account, Facebook contest, YouTube sponsorship, and an extremely interactive website, Honda is greatly expanding their target audience. Furthermore, the short pieces showcased on the website play on the versatility of today’s typical technology user. Each spot features Warburton using blogs, YouTube videos, Google maps, and other web content for commentary, making the ads relatable to today’s Internet-savvy, socially-minded consumer.
View Video 02 – Honda: Good Reasons
In an age where typical advertising for cars consists of treks through rugged tundra and high-speed pursuits, it’s very refreshing to see a different approach. Targeting consumer values rather than tangible product benefits is an extremely effective way to appeal to a large market. Keeping the campaign rooted in traditional American beliefs is a successful way to reach many potential customers, regardless of social class, ethnicity, or demographics. Additionally, consumers are much more likely to buy products that are in line with their personal values, and that represent the type of culture they aspire to be a part of. Honda’s campaign puts a positive spin on many of the values that are relevant in today’s society, including individualism, family, work and play, authenticity, the environment, and technology. Some may argue that though the ads are uplifting, Honda is just continuing to play into another major value in American society: materialism. However, as Honda reenters the transportation scene in the United States, concentrating on value-driven advertising seems like the most appropriate strategy for earning its way back into the heart of the American consumer.
Making and Breaking Social Class Distinctions
By · CommentsThough Levi’s Go Forth Campaign has often been one of controversy, it has also been one of empowerment. This campaign, set in Braddock, PA, shows a blue-collar town struggling to reinvent themselves after the recent economic downfall. In July of 2010, Levi’s, with the help of Wieden+Kennedy launched the Go Forth ‘Ready to Work” Campaign with such slogans as “Everybody’s Work is Equally Important.” Levi’s goal was to showcase real people doing real work in order to grab the attention of “the real American worker.”
The advertisements above show that advertising can bring together many social classes through the targeting of just one. Here we see a diverse group portrayed as hard-working, determined individuals. This campaign depicts the working class in an uplifting way by bringing up the point that all work is valuable. “Everybody’s Work is Equally Important” was the perfect slogan to move this campaign towards a more socially responsible way of advertising. Rather than focusing on the struggling town of Braddock, PA, Levi’s and Widden+Kennedy focused on the idea of equality within social classes as well the work force. It would have been very easy for Levi’s to construct an advertising campaign like they have in the past with the shirtless models shown at swanky parties, etc. Instead, they chose to target a different group, who in a way is more relatable to the everyday consumer. They were able to bring their roots back to the American pioneer, the hard worker, and the equally important individual.
Advertising targeted at a specific social class has the ability to be extremely effective. By tapping into the groups shared values, beliefs, and distinctions, you are able to gain a sense of understanding and persuasion among the members. This theory backs up the idea that as a society, it seems as through we want what those around us, or those with whom we relate, have. Go Forth promoted this by displaying a more localized campaign focusing on the empowered worker with similar life experiences. Individuals belonging to specific social classes are likely to be influenced by members within their own class, however this Go Forth campaign has the ability to cross boundaries into other social classes. Not only will this ad campaign influence how the working class views Levi’s, but may also influence how the Upper, Middle and Lower classes do so. Seeing a campaign directed towards a hard working way of life may motivate and inspire workers everywhere to make a change. Persuasion is a powerful tool, and although this ad is not directed at necessarily persuading individuals, it has the power to encourage others to notice that no matter what you do, it is important, and has the ability to impact something far greater than yourself. With a mantra like this, Levi’s has a great chance of bringing their classic collection not only to those in the middle or working class, but to everyone whom can relate to the idea that hard work matters and hard work pays off.
Now Go Forth, continue this idea and break the barriers….for “Everybody’s Work is Equally Important.”
September 11: A Day to Remember or a Day to Market
By · CommentsSeptember 11 represents a day that forever changed the American psyche. It seemed for a small moment in time that people willingly took a break from their everyday lives of consumerism and capitalism and stood together to support those in need. And now we will come together again this Sunday to commemorate the 10 year anniversary of that momentous day.
From a marketing perspective, we expect an aura of deference and caution to surround such a somber event. And for the past 9 years we have been afforded that. But something is different this year. It seems that 10 is the point at which advertisers consciously or unconsciously decided that it was no longer “too soon”. As a recent article in the New York Times explains, “marketers, media companies and advertising agencies are changing course, involving themselves with sponsorships, screenings, fund-raisers, programming and other highly visible activities”.
There seem to be two trends converging here. One is the growing trend of advertisers trying to bring awareness of social issues by integrating them into their campaigns. One well-known example is Dove’s “Campaign for Real Beauty”, which spoke out against the advertising industry’s love affair with idealized body image by depicting images of women that more closely resembled the average American woman. Because they bring to light social issues and help us to deal with them, it’s not hard to argue that this type of advertising is laudable (even if the bottom line is still ultimately about positioning products in a way that will best grow the brand name).
However, the other side of the issue is advertisers’ seemingly insatiable need to inundate consumers with every type of advertising possible. Spurred on by changes in technology (such as the conception of DVR) that have made consumers less of a captive audience, advertisers are searching for more creative ways to imprint their messages upon society. This has often manifested itself in the form of sponsorships and promotional activities. The bottom line of advertising deals with selling, so we can’t entirely fault companies for these activities. But do the ends justify the means? Is 9/11 a day too sacred to sponsor?
We can’t automatically argue in the affirmative to such a question. Some of the advertiser activities surrounding 9/11 are easily praiseworthy. For instance, the Advertising Council is coordinating a PSA campaign that encourages people to visit the 9/11 memorial. PSAs provide consumers with important information and bring social issues to the surface (much like the Dove campaign mentioned earlier). Unlike normal advertising methods, PSAs are unconcerned with profits. Messages like these make people think about something bigger than just the product itself. They encourage people to reflect on the attacks and to preserve their monumental impact in American history.
However some advertisers take ideas like these to the extreme. The Lieb Family Cellars winery, for example, is marking September 11 with a bottle of Merlot that commemorates the opening of the national memorial. Is this the company’s heartfelt way to honor such a historic occasion, or a marketing ploy designed to play off of the psychological aspects of consumer behavior in order to boost sales. People often want the objects that they buy to act as symbols, to represent who they are as people. Perhaps some people may buy into the idea of 9/11 wine in an attempt to persuade themselves that they are compassionate, generous, and genuine. This masks the consumers actual need for the product and makes them reliant on their purchases rather than their true values. The issue is further muddled by the fact that the winery is promising to donate up to 10% of sales proceeds to the memorial. Can we condone their marketing as tasteless or applaud them for helping to raise funds?
Because we live in such a consumer-driven culture, we had to expect that inevitably companies would attempt to somehow market an event that captures so much of America’s attention. Perhaps the real issue then is where we draw the line. We want to encourage PSAs that keep the impact of September 11 in the collective consciousness, but we also want to encourage consumers to draw a distinction between acts of respect that help the human good and acts of marketing that help one company’s bottom line. Just because a PSA and wine promotion both deal with fundraising for the 9/11 memorial does not mean that consumers should view them in the same light. The PSA works because it is relevant to the actual day and it resonates with the true emotions of the people watching it. The wine promotion focuses more on the company and perhaps even encourages us to buy the product for the wrong reasons. The public should be spurred to action, but it should be the right kind of action. For the sake of 9/11 and the reputation of advertising as a whole, we should actively encourage people to be cognizant of the differences between a message that keeps the history of the day alive in our culture and one that mainly serves to help a company’s profits.
TED Identifies Good Ads
By · CommentsThe newsletter learnthe4Ps.com highlighted new TED activity!
Are you familiar with TED? TED (an acronym for Technology, Entertainment and Design) dedicates itself to promoting and disseminating “ideas worth spreading.” TED’s big event is an annual conference with 15‐20 presentations by leading thinkers (check out www.ted.com for more information). Many of these talks are posted at the TEDTalks Web site and later spread virally, where you may have seen one or more.
This past fall, TED moved on to our turf — advertising. It invited anyone to nominate “ads worth spreading” — with the idea that these ads deserved to be seen. TED wanted nominations in four categories: 1) social good, 2) infectiously compelling (viral), 3) industry impact (innovation), and 4) Talk – a format that follows the TEDTalks style.
After reviewing more than 1,000 ads, a panel of 24 judges picked 10 winners. You can see them at the TED Web site – see the first link above.
Take a look and see what you think. Are the judges getting it right?
It is the time of the year again. Everybody scrutinizes the advertising or online sources to find the best deal. It was once supposed that the Friday after Thanksgiving was the first day of the Christmas sales season. As marketers focused more and more on the “season,” the situation changed a lot. They begin the promotion of sales in early November or even October. This is called the “Christmas Creep.”
The idea of the Christmas Creep vividly portrays retailers prolonging the “season” with the hope of gaining more sales. Black Friday is no longer the hallmark of their financial shift to profitability but has become a giant lure for people to buy more. A consumer culture may contend that continuous consumption is indispensable and it supports the national economy. Under this concept people thrive on consumption and do not need incentives to participate in it. It is understandable for marketers to maximize this Creep strategy. During a hard time of financial crisis, more deals and special sales enhance the ability and opportunity for consumers to buy, driven by the need for the appearance of a certain lifestyle and living standard. Moreover, this strategy stimulates the economy and heightens the ability for both businesses and consumers to survive the financial crisis.
This extensive promotion may boost sales for marketers and benefit consumers. It also seems that consumers are given more infomation and time to make more rational decisions. However, considering the pressure packed nature of sales (time and quantity limited), consumers are supposed to be put in a state involving low effort because they have to make immediate decisions. It is also common that sales offset many consumers’ own plans and budgets. They may be attracted by other items than what’s on a list and spend far more than they planned. Impulse consumption is more likely to occur during this period. Irrational consumption is further enhanced by giving seemingly strong support or reason for consumers to save money by purchasing more.
Here arises the ethical issue: when we admit the objective of sales promotion is profit, is that good for society and will it benefit consumers in the long-run? In this special time of year, nearly everyone becomes a sale-prone consumer. They will hunt for specials and be more easily influenced by price. Marketers advertise “save money” in the hope of encouraging them to buy more. It seems like a trick. They do not care about consumers but consumers’ purchasing power. The existence of the 55-day Christmas Creep is pressure packed sales trick: “Hey, think about the savings you can have during the holiday season. You can buy more and better stuff!”
However, this does not mean consumers will behave accordingly. According to the factors that influence the decision making, a disadvantage of the extended Christmas Creep may be that it leads to boredom and the insensitivity of price. Two months of sale after sale may make consumers get used to such “low” prices. Then they may unconsciously perceive that “special sale price” as the regular price. When the Christmas season ends, they may feel unhappy with the real “regular price,” which is higher than expected. On the other hand, to the consumers who think that the biggest sales will begin at Thanksgiving, the early promotion may distract their attention and make the Thanksgiving and Christmas sales less credible. Retailers may have trouble achieving overall sales objectives. Due to the potential dissatisfaction and the decrease of credibility, this 55-day promotion strategy may ultimately hurt business profitability and brand image.
Usually, a consumer who hunts for sales still understands that companies will earn a lot of profit by doing so. Most consumers understand the reason why advertisers have promotions and offer big sales is to get money from them.
But many people do have the desire to consume rationally and enjoy life, as contended by Target’s Chief Marketing Officer Michael Francis. “Guests really tire of these messages when they’re started too early in the season, and it doesn’t align with where they are in their lives. They look at Thanksgiving as family time.” Target, after careful research, and being sensitive to their customers finally decided to create a clean break from the Christmas Creep.
Calling for “giving back Thanksgiving,” Target did not start its sales promotion until Thanksgiving itself, focusing on Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving. When other retailers tried to entice consumers to purchase as early as possible, Target’s behavior may win approval from consumer advocates, as well as a positive attitude from consumers. It is smart and brave because this behavior not only differentiates itself from other competitors, but it also demonstrates an aspect of social responsibility. This clean break may convey its considerateness to its audience and make them believe that Target cares. Similar to ordinary interpersonal relationship, consumers will respond positively when they feel the care. The positive reinforcement will become input into future decison. Meanwhile, satisfaction may derive from that and lead to long-term trust.
When others are at the half-way point of promoting the holiday season, Target may signal its return as a pioneer — returning Thanksgiving to families and real holiday sales to the weeks before Christmas. Now, if Target will also allow Salvation Army volunteers to set up their kettles at Target locations to benefit the poorest of the poor maybe they gain even more credibility.
What will happen next? Will other marketers follow Target and create a new trend for holiday promotions? Only time will give us the answer.
http://adage.com/article?article_id=146940
