Television advertising strategies and effectiveness

TV Advertising

Marketing success is almost always found in celebrity endorsements. We can take a look at Pepsi ads which have featured Madonna, Michael Jackson, Brittany Spears, and even Mike Tyson. Pepsi is known around the world, just as the celebrities whom are featured on the Pepsi commercials. In other words, in using the notoriety of celebrities, a corporation may be able to increase its market share into the pockets of consumers who are more familiar with the celebrity than the product. The celebrity thus is a bridge between the consumer and the product. But what happens when those celebrities are notorious for other things as well as their entertainment or sport talent? And why do the corporations continue to utilize these celebrities if these celebrities have been known to engage in improprieties or dubious activities?

Corporations have a business model that has multiple branches leading from three or four divisions such as Board of Directors, President, Vice President and CEO all the way down to thousands of retail venues where the bottom line, alternatively known as the cash flow, can be acquired. The marketing department, in its function point on this tree, is responsible for making sure the money flows in as much as possible. The marketing division will usually stop at only that which is clearly unethical to a large group of people, but even then, it will continue to push the envelope in a variety ways to convince people to buy the product. The most important thing in a business is the bottom line, or there is no business. Therefore, the marketing division uses an extremely effective method, namely celebrity endorsements, to capture the minds and business of the urban market demographics.

Teenagers and young adults emulate those they seek to become. Many people want to be stars, with all the attention, money, and power being a star suggests you can have. The problem is two fold. Firstly, the question is begged that teenagers and young adults should be emulating these celebrities in the first place. Secondly, even if it was a nice idea to emulate these celebrities, many of the most notorious celebrities don't exactly qualify for role model material because of their behavior, especially relative to impressionable teens and young adults. It is a fact that there are those who are positive role models. One example is Tiger Woods who represents Nike.

However I advocate that because the only reason such corporations, which in and of themselves don't have clean track records, seek to employ these celebrities, good or bad, is because of the bottom line. Nike cannot seek to use the image of Tiger Woods as an image of diversity or winning against the odds, because Nike has had protracted human rights violations in employing workers in undeveloped nations without following the regulatory laws in the United States that provide safety for the workers in these other countries.

It is not logical to argue that celebrities, even if they were good, would have a positive impact. They are merely serving the corporate image and not, say, advocating a better environmental policy. They are helping market shoes and other material goods for millions of dollars in the span of a thirty second commercial. Michael Jordan cannot give a positive message when he represents Hanes, Gatorade, Nike and countless other products after a bidding process which ensures him the most money possible against the offers of PowerAde, Reebok and other competitors of what he has represented.

This says nothing about loyalty, but it does shed a lot of light on materialism. Even if Michael Jordan is an amazing human being, the fact he is on T.V. For material gain, saying what marketers paid him to say, should preclude him from being any type of role model to America's kids, through a commercial served to get money from these kids and their parents.

In conclusion, I would advocate a campaign of education about how advertising works on all levels. If corporations understood that they might be harming themselves through these commercials, by realizing that the audience sees these commercials as opportunistic ploys and in turn making business decline, then these corporations would scale back using celebrities most of which never even use the product, or if they did, don't even attach any special significance to the product.