Throughout time commercial advertising has served as an extremely influential tool used by companies and businesses in order to disseminate information to their publics, although it wasn't until 1975 that the US Supreme Court even determined that advertising enjoyed a certain degree of First Amendment protection (Pember,Calvert). As society changes, businesses continue to adapt their advertising and marketing strategies with the intention of adhering to new societal norms. It wasn't until the late 1960's that direct brand advertisements began to frequent various outlets of print media, most notably in 1968 when American Motors compared its "Javelin" to Ford's "Mustang"(Golden 63-67). This advertising technique spawned a new wave of innovative thinking: comparative advertising. Comparative advertising is defined by the Federal Trade Commission as advertising that compares alternative brands on objectively measurable attributes or price, and identifies the alternative brand by name, illustration or other distinctive information (FTC). This beckons the question of ethicality. Just how ethical is it for companies to participate in this type of mudslinging battle? Upon my investigation of various codes of ethics and through the examination of specific advertisements and ad campaigns I have come to the conclusion that comparative advertising is a beneficial technique that is sometimes necessary for companies to implement in order to garner consumer attention.
When thinking about specific companies that have implemented similar comparative advertising strategies, there are a few big ones that come to mind right away. Notably, Burger King has put a great deal of time and money into emphasizing the better value its dollar menu compared to that of McDonald's. In one series of commercials Burger King hypes its $1 double cheeseburger's size in comparison to McDonald's $1 “McDouble”, and even mentions the extra slice of cheese offered on their burger (the “McDouble” only has one slice of cheese). On top of this, Burger King has recently released a new commercial in which "the King" appears sneaking into "McDonald's Headquarters" and steals the recipe for a breakfast sandwich. As "the King" leaves, a voice-over comes on and says, "…Its not that original, but its super affordable." (Advertising Age) Interestingly McDonald's seems not to be phased by Burger King hinting at its better value; a McDonald's spokesperson told Advertising Age that "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery." Allstate, along with Geico, Progressive, and State Farm, is one of the largest car insurance companies in the US and has implemented similar comparative advertising practices. Over the past few years Allstate has aired several widely viewed commercials in which they list exact amounts of money that can be saved annually by switching from Geico to Allstate; specifically $473. One of the commercials even tells consumers that if they switch to Allstate they won't even have to worry about dropping their previous insurance company because their new Allstate agent will do it for them. (Allstate Commercial) Pepsi and Coke have been partaking in a serious comparative advertising battle since the 1980's (Advertising Age). In one Pepsi commercial random pedestrians are given a blind taste test of Coke and Pepsi and apparently 8 out of 10 people say Pepsi is better. Another Pepsi commercial features the famous curly-haired little girl who orders a Pepsi and receives a Coke. Her voice then changes from a friendly high-pitched kiddish voice into a deep Italian accent and she goes on to say that she is insulted that she was given a Coke (Pepsi Commercials). The list of comparative advertising companies can go on and on with another large scale advertising battle between Adidas and Nike being a rather prominent one.
Now this begs the question of how successful these campaigns really are and are they ethical? In "Consumer Reactions to Comparative Advertising" Linda Golden says "…In conjunction with specific themes a comparative advertisement may have a relatively stronger influence upon purchase intentions than a non-comparative advertisement." (Golden 65) This affirms the notion that these ads certainly are successful and that positive consumer feedback is evident within the overall effect of the advertisement. To get another professional opinion in regards to the practice of comparative advertising I interviewed an account executive at a local advertising agency I interned at last fall (Trone Inc.). He told me that he believes comparative advertising is almost essential at times especially depending on the intention of the message. Although he has never worked on a campaign that specifically names competitor companies, he said that it is a smart move because it creates an association in the consumer's mind between your company and your competitor company (LaFleur). He went on to further explain that idea and essentially what he meant was that if a consumer frequently gives business to one company, seeing an ad in which that company is compared to another might make them consider trying that similar product as well. So financially speaking comparative advertising can certainly help to bolster a company's overall revenue. Even the American Association of Advertising Agencies seems to promote these practices; "It is recognized that keen and vigorous competition, honestly conducted is necessary to the growth and health of American business." (AA of AA)
In the end I think it must be accepted that comparative advertising is here to stay. To me, as long as the advertisement tells no lie and doesn't seek to intentionally deceive the consumer, it is fair game. In today's rapidly expanding marketplace consumers are introduced to new products and companies almost on a daily basis, making it difficult to even remember some of the ads they come across. Comparative advertising has a proven positive effect on company sales and helps to distinguish similar companies from each other and has a lasting impact in the minds of American consumers, thus making it an essential form of advertising that is successful when properly used.
Sources
· Linda L. Golden (1976), "CONSUMER REACTIONS TO COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING", in Advances in Consumer Research Volume 03, eds. Beverlee B. Anderson, Cincinnati, Ohio : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 63-67.
· Allstate Insurance Dance Break Up TV Commercial [Advertisement]. (2009, November 2). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nm1xGhJXFf0
· Comparative Advertising [Advertisement]. (2008, October 26). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiIIMcelMjk
· STATEMENT OF POLICY REGARDING COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING. (1979, August 13). Retrieved May 4, 2010,from Federal Trade Commission website: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/policystmt/ad-compare.htm
· Parekh, R. (2010, April 1). BK Wages Breakfast War on McDonald's With New Sandwich. Advertising Age.
· Pember, D., & Calvert, C. (2008). Mass Media Law (16th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
· Creative Code. (1990). Standards of Practice of the American Association of Advertising Agencies.Retrieved May 4, 2010, from http://ams.aaaa.org/eweb/upload/inside/standards.pdf
· LaFleur, M.(2010)[Interview with Mark LaFleur, account executive with Trone Inc.] 5 May 2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment