" How many brands and
products can one famous
individual endorse before the
effect is diluted?"
��� this type of fame makes for a tenuous link to a brand. It���s also fleeting,
and desperate measures are often undertaken to maintain the fame,
which will erode trust and credibility for any associated brand.
Worst of all is the possibility of major fallout; when a celebrity
endorser becomes embroiled in a scandal, the negative effects can easily
shift to the brand. This is only logical considering the vast sums of
money that have been spent to create that connection. Again, negative
connotations can transfer even when positive ones don���t, and in the
mind of the consumer, if the celebrity isn���t trustworthy or honourable,
then how can the brand possibly be? Take Tiger Woods or Lance
Armstrong for example; both once had massive profiles and perfect
images but were laid low by scandal and outrage. Marketers and sponsors ran
for the hills when the bad news hit because they had to break the connection
between their brands and the now infamous individuals.
The take-home message from the Ace Metrix study (and common sense)
is that endorsements just aren���t enough on their own. Any endorsement
really needs to be appropriate to be effective, but the creative components
and originality of a campaign are far more important than the presence of a
celebrity. Demonstrating relevance to the consumer, properly communicating
the message, and applying genuine creativity to the campaign���s execution are
what sell products, not some famous face. So marketers need to seriously
consider the ramifications of partnering with fame, and at all times, they need
to be making amazing ads, celebrities or no celebrities.
Ashley Kramer
www.partisanadvertising.co.nz
www.h e rmagaz in e .co.n z | 39
