Marketing is defined as an organization function and a set
of processes for creating, communicating and delivering value to the customers
and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization
and its stakeholders. Earlier when the
brands catering to the needs of the customer were limited there was less of the
competition but as the brands increased so did the competition. The rules of
the market were simple and everybody was enjoying their share. With the due
course of time communication became one of the top priorities. The important
mediums constituted print, television, radio, fliers, billboards, mail,
telephone, posters, CDs. Audiotapes and internet. Brands wanted to grow by
increasing the size of the markets but slowly and slowly with the increasing
coverage snatching away of the market share from the competitors became
important to survive. Some ground rules were laid down by advertising council
of India so that competition may not turn into a hostile war.
Recently Colgate
and Pepsodent two oral health care brands are caught up in defaming case
against other. The campaign was so noticeable that even though somebody missed
it by chance on television the news covered it up. Earlier also so many
similarly themed advertisement talking about brushing the teeth, cavities, germi
check have appeared on television. But this one did its task very well meaning
to say covering a big chunk of the target audience. Though the case is still
going on in the court Pepsodent was able to come in news.
Does the brand appreciate the fact that it has come in the
limelight by whatsoever means?
Taking another example of the print ad which was created for
fun in the year 2002 and had no implications for the brand communication became
viral few days back.
The ad says that the earlier the kids start drinking Cola
better it will be for their future. However the person who has made this
advertisement says it has no implications for promoting the brand.
Now let us try to understand what does this type of
advertisement says at subliminal level. Earlier advertisements used to provide
the apt information and people could trust on that while making decision
making. But now when the information provided in the advertisement is
objectionable. Where does the responsibility of media lies? In the earlier
example of Colgate vs Pepsodent there
have been charges that no such laboratory test actually existed which has been
shown in the commercial.
The vintage advertisement of Cola shows the name of the “The
soda pop board of America” which is nothing. Also the claims done in the
advertisement are just baseless. What harm does this misleading advertisement
do? These type of advertisements because of their unique claims catches the
attention of the audience and then works at the subliminal level. Since not
every viewer will cross check or verify the facts and figures they at their subconscious
level make an acceptable premise. In future that information which gets stored
gives an optimistic purview. Even though a person can straight away negate the
claims (as done in the cola ad), but somewhere down the line if somebody
supports that idea the response would be positive. This is how advertisements
take the people away from realty at a very minute level of consciousness. In case
of advertisement of Pepsodent and Colgate though Colgate is the market leader,
Pepsodent will be successful in this attempt if its distribution becomes
equally strong as of Colgate and it increases its visibility too by 130
percent. The prime advantage which it can bang upon is top of the mind recall
because of the free publicity it has earned. Now if that is in sync with the
supply chain it can be a successful moment for the brand.
Ethically speaking this type of advertisement claims should
be strictly banned and be discouraged. A strict action should be taken for
their course of action so that there should not be any misleading effect. The whole
purpose of communications gets defeated and it will cost dearly in the future.
This ad probably aims at attracting anly those who are indifferent to Brand. As this type of publicity can not induce brand concious/loyal customers to switch.
ReplyDeletePublicity and advertisement should be differentiated as prime objective of brand to bring about its awareness suffers when false claim reaches the target audience. Even publicity for false claims should be ethically punished and brought to light. Otherwise faith from advertising for good brands will also vanish.
Delete