Hunky
heroin junky, giant slaying, dabbler in the force and part-time adorner of
magnificent beards- its Ewan McGregor. Probably out to recuperate some of his
losses on that effeminate looking scarf, Obi Wan has teamed up with Davidoff to
flog a glass bottle seemingly filled with his own piss and pass it off as the
scent of adventure- in the context of Bear Gryls’ breath, perhaps that’s
accurate. So how did this go down with us the prospective consumer? A big hit! Men
were all over this like Renton and Sick Boy over smack and poor Ewan’s bladder
is now in meltdown. Looks like Davidoff’s marketing team can pull off a few
Jedi mind tricks of their own but what exactly is in play here?
Well
the first major tool is staring right at you- no offence Ewan. His fictional
on-screen exploits have made him a household name that has become a permanent
fixture on the Hollywood A-list and aside from the ‘come to bed’ eyes it’s what
ascribes such a degree of influence. Fame and power, albeit not tangible power
walk hand in hand and the mere depiction of wee Ewan’s photo-shopped face is
enough to convince us that this is a product worth buying. Indeed it has been
well reported that ads with celebrity endorsement tend to boost stock values
for their respective brands, (Agrawal & Kamakura, 1995) why? Well unless
you’re Amish he’s familiar to us and familiarity breeds trust (Gulati, 1995; Monahan
et al., 2000) or it may be we get lazy and employ judgmental heuristics to associate
(Pratkanis, 2007) Ewan’s accredited high status with the potential quality of
the product. However, much like Kerry Katona did nothing to change Iceland’s reputation
as being cheap, quick and easy, you may argue that as a mainstream designer company
it’s likely that Davidoff’s brand already attracts luxurious connotations
regardless of McGregor’s association but then purchase on this basis alone is
probably even more close-minded.
Very well, what about the message then? Adventure- to be adventurous, generally speaking this
is a desirable trait and the concept of it is largely subjective. There is a
subtle insinuation tied to the context that infers the very purchase of this
bottle constitutes adventure and we are encouraged to act consistent with the
pre-existing adventurous dimension of our self-image (Grubb, 1968). Don’t be
fooled, buying a bottle of perfume titled ‘adventure’ will not make you
adventurous any-more than it’ll make you smell like an adventurous person- not
that you’d want that anyway if you really thought about it.
As the wheel would allude, for Ewan adventure means poncing around the
world on a motorcycle with a BBC film crew and a bloke who looks like he spends
stationary life in a cardboard box but what does this have to do with perfume
exactly? Absolutely nothing; the whole ad is one big juxtaposition. As refreshing as it is
to see a perfume ad punt in theory with the rough and ready as opposed to the
usual pretentious bollocks we’re forced to endure (I’m looking at you Calvin
Klein) it remains nonsensical. When we picture an adventurer we tend not to
envisage an immaculate, squeaky clean film-star dressed in brilliant white and
rocking a carefully styled hair-do but this is what we respond to. A glowing
gold ring hovering above Ewan’s crown may be just out of shot but the halo
effect (Lucker et al., 1981) that proposes one’s physical appearance dominates our
perception undeniably exists and this makes him an effective communicator
(Chaiken, 1979) regardless of context. We may not all be able to look like a
film-star but anyone can be, look or even smell adventurous should you so
desire without a bottle of cologne but if you do intend on
riding off into the sunset on a transnational motorcycle jaunt smelling of roses, first consider this;
whilst mosquitos are far more attracted to perfume than girls are, urine makes a half-decent
repellent and if indeed that bottle were to contain a potent dose of Ewan’s
piss it’d probably be much more practical if you’re a true adventurer- the
irony.
References
Agrawal, J., & Kamagura, W. A. (1995). The economic
worth of celebrity endorsers: An event study analysis. Journal of Marketing, 59, 56-62.
Chaiken, S. (1979). Communicator physical attractiveness
and persuasion. Journal of Personality
& Social Psychology, 37, 1387-1389.
Grubb, E. L., & Hupp, G. (1968). Perception of self,
generalised stereotypes and brand selection. Journal of Marketing Research, 5, 58-63.
Gulati, R. (1995). Does Familiarity breed trust? The
implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management, 38, 85-112.
Lucker, W. G., Beane, W. E., & Helmreich, R. L.
(1980). The strength of the halo effect in physical attractiveness research. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary
and Applied, 107, 69-75.
Monahan, J. L.,
Murphy, S. T., & Zajonc, R. B. (2000). Subliminal mere exposure: Specific,
general, and diffuse effects. Psychological Science , 11,
462-466
Pratkanis,
A. R. (Ed.). (2007). Social influence analysis: An index of tactics. The
science of social influence: Advances and future progress. New York: Psychology
Press.
Rory
MacLeod
Risky, edgy and humorous. Another strong attempt flirting on the line of appropriate vs inappropriate. I like it. Be careful about using sentences that are too long as they can lose the reader.
ReplyDelete