This 2011 super bowl advertisement is distasteful for a
number of reasons. Firstly it targets the female audience with their ‘low
calorie’ Pepsi max drink. Targeting a low calorie drink at women could be
viewed as sexist and enforces stereotypes, suggesting women must watch their
weight and by doing so this empowers them in their relationship.
Secondly Pepsi
attempts to use humour to catch the attention of the audience, it does so by
trying to make violence comical however connotations of domestic violence come
to mind when watching this ad. If the roles of the two characters in the advert
were reversed and the man was violent to his girlfriend, the advert would not
be permitted to be aired. The advert suggests a certain amount of acceptability
towards violence because it is a women carrying out the actions.
A study by Brown,
Bhadury and Pope (2010) assessed the impact of comedic violence like that used
in the Pepsi advert, on advertising effectiveness. They created 4 viral message
conditions, a high intensity severe consequences advert, high intensity
moderate consequences and the same with low intensity adverts. They were then
asked to rate the consequences, intensity and humour of the 4 adverts. They found
that overall higher levels of violence intensity and more severe consequences
lead to greater involvement with the ad, better retention of the brand
information and greater likability of the advert. However attitudes towards the
brand remained unaffected. They also found justification for the violence and relatedness
to the product brand were important considerations in its effectiveness. Therefore
it can be argued the advert itself may be remembered, however the audience are
no more likely to buy a Pepsi max because the advert has no justification for
the violence and it has no relation to the Pepsi brand.
Brown, M., Bhadury, K., & Pope, N. (2010). The impact of comedic violents on viral advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, 39, 39-65.
nice work.
ReplyDelete