How far would you go for love?
This advertisement belongs to the pricey, but ever-so-classic French jewelry brand, Cartier. Depicted in the advert is Cartier’s famous bracelet, the “love band” and a date promoting what Cartier (so cleverly) has christened “Loveday.” Emblazoned across the top of the advert is the challenge, “How far would you go for love?”
The first persuasive technique used in this advert is the technique of similarity. By using “How far would you go for love?” as the headline, the advert is drawing consumers in on the basis of a shared experience of love. Everyone at some point in his or her life has experienced love. An experiment conducted by Aune and Basil (1994) showed that donations made to a charity more than doubled when the person making the request appeared to be similar to the donor. Cartier here is assuming that everyone at some point in his or her life has experienced love. Cartier takes it further by inviting consumers to join them at an event that not only celebrates that love, but challenges the strength of that love.
Association is another persuasive technique utilized in the Cartier advert. If something we find appealing is associated with a specific product, we are more likely to purchase it. The Cartier advert hits the mark on this one by associating the company with the three things most sought after by women: gold, diamonds and love. The gold band and word “love” stand out from the red background, causing consumers to focus on these concepts. By grouping them together, Cartier is implying commitment, satisfying our fanciful notions about love and togetherness. In a study by Smith and Engel (1968), men who viewed a car with a good-looking model beside it were more likely to consider the car as being more appealing, expensive and better designed than other cars. The same concept can be applied to the Cartier “Love band.” Through association, it is assumed that love comes along with the piece of jewelry.
Lastly, the concept of scarcity in this advertisement helps to ‘persuade’ consumers to buy Cartier. More particularly, any item that is seen as being rare or unique is considered to be more valuable because it is less available. In this case, the items in short demand are diamonds and gold. Their rareness is based on cost and limited availability, which gives the “love band” more appeal than jewelry made lesser materials, such as silver. Adding to the exclusivity of the product is the personal invite to Love Day, an interactive experience for those willing to go far enough. This concept of scarcity/exclusivity is explained by Lynn (1989) as social influence in which we manage to take a shortcut. Specifically, Lynn states that we use an item’s availability as an indicator of its quality by assuming that things that are more difficult to get – either because of cost or rarity – must be better.
How far would you go for love? The gauntlet has been thrown. If you don’t go as far as buying a love band, you simply haven’t gone far enough. B
Aunel, R.K., & Basil, M. D. (1994). A Relational Obligations Approach to the Foot-In-The-Mouth Effect. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(6), 546–556.
Lynn, M. (1989). Scarcity Effects on Desirability: Mediated by Assumed Expensiveness?. Journal of Economic Psychology, 10(1), 257-274.
Smith, G.H., & Engel R. (1968). Influence of a Female Model on Perceived Characteristics of an Automobile. Proceedings of the 76th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 681-682.