- Ask one (1) question about the reading. It can be about something you may not have understood completely or about something you thought was interesting. Be thoughtful with your question, and try to make it a question that could start a conversation, not simply be answered with a ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ You are not allowed to post a question that someone has posted previously, so make sure to read through your classmates’ posts.
- Answer/respond to two (2) questions that others have posted by commenting on their posts. When you answer, read what others have said — do you agree with them? Do you feel there is more to the discussion? Do you think that someone is missing an important point? Be thoughtful and think about the question, responses and what your thoughts are.
- Finally, EMAIL one multiple choice question per chapter to me (mccollam_p@wvwc.edu). At the end of the book, we will have a quiz on the general themes and concepts of the book, and if your questions are good enough, you may find your question(s) in the quiz. KEEP IN MIND that the book is still a few weeks away from being finished, meaning that by the time we take the quiz, these earlier chapters will be very old. I strongly suggest making the questions about overarching topics and concepts rather than about minute details.
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Emotional Branding: Reading Response 02
For this assignment, you will need to read pages 29 - 67 in Emotional Branding, then do the following:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
On page 46, the author quotes Michael J. Silverstein and Kate Sayre. Together, they claim that, "as a market, women represent a bigger opportunity than China and India combined." Personally, I feel that the statement is very bold to say the least. What is your opinion on the claim? Do you feel that women of America really have enough power to overcome two of the largest and economically significant countries in the world?
ReplyDeleteJust as the data suggests in chapter 3, I think it would be a huge mistake for any company/brand to disregard the female population and its doings. However, I'm not sure if we have enough power to overthrow China and India combined. China, for example, is advancing faster than America in some areas, such as education and technology, and they're becoming an even greater force to be reckoned with. As much as I believe that women can be/are very powerful, I'm not sure how accurate this statement is.
DeleteI agree with Ashley, but the chapter also focused on the different ways in which women perceive things differently than men. This includes from the grocery store to a business. Women are bringing with them a very unique form of logic and problem solving skills that have not been utilized in the past and it's the changing market (the need for emotional branding) that is giving women so much power, because they already understood things in that light. They understand how to make an emotional connection with others and that might make them very formidable in this new market.
DeleteI think that the demographics are too far removed from one another to be properly compared. You cannot say that the female population of a particular region generally represents a greater opportunity because they are all purchasing different products for their different needs and different lifestyles. Its like comparing apples and oranges, neither is better than the other its based on personal preference and needs for the products being sold.
DeleteThe claim says that women in General represent this giant target, not American women or Chinese women, etc. So I think the article refers to women as a whole and therefore is definitely possible to overtake China and India. Women are truly the driving force behind any successful economy because of their influence within the households.
DeletePage 31 speaks of the need to market specifically to African-American people. I completely agree with this, but I feel that it could be tough because of some people's mindsets. Say, if there was an ad intended to appeal to the aspirations of African-Americans (such as a travel ad to take them "back to their roots,") do you think that white people would take offense to the ad, saying, "OH, well of course there's a black man on THAT commercial"?
ReplyDeleteI agree that all types of people should be represented in commercial advertising, but do you think that there could be an issue with this? Do you think this "issue" is the reason that they aren't better represented?
I do believe that racism still exists in many places, but to quote the book, "Our society, most noteably Gen Y, is becoming less and less tolerant of this kind of ignorance." I know the quote was referring to the gay & lesbian community, but it is a quote about our generation's lack of tolerance for the short-sided ignorance that leads to discrimination in general. So, no, I don't think marketing directly to African-Americans will cause any major issues.
DeleteI think that today people have become so prone to stereotyping and racism that when there IS a person of color in an advertisement people automatically think, sometimes even subconsciously, there's the token (black, Asian, Hispanic) person to make the ad multicultural and appeal to a wider audience. I think a lot of advertisers especially shy away from having ads that feature only people of a different race because they assume that that ad will not appeal to white consumers, even though people of color are expected to respond to ads that feature only white people. It isn't a two-way street, and I think a lot of companies, while they will feature one or two people of color in ads, are afraid to feature NO white people in their ads. For all the progress it seems has been made, there is still racism that, no matter how much WE wish was different, companies with money to lose are still terrified of.
DeleteI believe that there is an issue with an advertising company going out of their way by making their ad multicultural or even age/genderless just to appeal to a wider demographic range. Today's age is one where racism and other forms of prejudice are at their lowest. Certainly, it has not completely disappeared, but still, there is definitely a more equal and balanced field between different demographics. Today's population should focus more on what the specific product could DO for them, not why the company wants to make them feel a part of the larger society. By going out of the way to make ads influential on all, by separating races to show that everyone is represented, I believe it only increases the prevalence of racism in today's world.
DeleteIn the section about Hispanic consumers, Gobe talks about the varying degrees of acculturation and English language usuage. How do you think these barriers affect marketing strategies for this group, and others that are affected by the same problem?
ReplyDeleteIn order for companies to adequately overcome the cultural and lingual barriers posed by the unacculturated Hispanics, companies are going to have to make 2 sets of each of their commercials. The first commercial will be in Spanish and aired on TeleMundo for the unacculturated Hispanics to watch while the second commercial will air on regular American television for English speaking Hispanics and Americans.
DeleteOR
I would love it if the company would help to lobby and fund a bill in D.C. that would force elementary-school-aged children to begin learning a second language, English o Spanish during elementary school (the brain soaks up information best at this time period of your life), This way, unaccultured Hispanics and Americans can watch the same commercials.
Obviously paying for Spanish classes for millions of kids or creating two commercials can add up to be quite an expensive endeavor. Thus money is definitely a big obstacle affecting the media in appealing to unacculturated Hispanics.
DeleteCompanies are really going to have to research their minority publics before they go and market to them. This comes back to the fact that a company shouldn't force their advertising, but they should learn to identify with different ethnic groups and relate to them. This would make messages seem less "fake."
DeleteWhile Gobé emphasizes in Chapter 4, page 61, the importance of including homosexuals in brand marketing in order for a company to avoid losing valuable business, the recent 2012 Chick-fil-A scandal makes me wonder, is this really true?
ReplyDeleteThe following Huffington Post article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/chick-fil-a-business-thriving_n_2016864.html) reports that the fast food restaurant's overall sales actually increased by 2.2% following the company president's controversy-starting, anti-gay remarks. Due to the efforts of thousands of Chick-fil-A supporters who stood in line at Chick-fil-A restaurants to grab a bite to eat and show their support for the company during the controversy, the company's market share went up 0.6% during this time period as well.
So what do you think? Is the homosexual community actually an important demographic to market? Why or why not?
Because homosexuality is still such an explosive issue in America, there will always be protesters on either side. Chik-fil-A was already known as a conservative chain--it's never been opened on Sunday so that employees can go to church and enjoy family time. Because of that reputation, it already had a strong fan base that agreed with its policies ready to fight back. However, there are also cities that have banned Chik-fil-A's because of its conservative points of view, losing the company money. After the initial publicity, Chik-fil-A attempted to retract some of its statements to lessen the damage. I think that, were we more distanced from this incident now, the numbers would not be so good. After the buzz and publicity goes away, protesters will still be protesting and the support rallies of conservatives eating there will end, and I am guessing the numbers will even out or even dip. No matter the negative backlash and temporary monetary gains, I still think that homosexuals are a vital marketing group--just look at all of the publicity this created BECAUSE of this one group for only one chain, which we are still talking about and debating.
DeleteFirstly, the company does not have any official agenda against the homosexual community. The owner made a simple personal statement that he believed in same sex marriage. The company itself as a whole has never actually made any movement to discriminate against homosexuals. That being said it is unconstitutional for Chic-fil-A to be "banned" from certain locations. The first amendment protects the rights of individuals to have their own beliefs.
DeleteChic-fil-A will make sales to anyone regardless of their sexual orientation. They cater to everyone that likes chicken! The leftist media which succeeded in branding one man's personal statement to an entire companies policy is in the wrong here and should be criticized by the gay community and the world rather than Chic-fil-A. Why? Because the media personally attacked and persecuted an individual's beliefs just as the homosexual community is persecuted every day. The homosexual community should know better! Moral of the story, the leftist media and some homosexuals led a campaign against a company that never actually discriminated upon the important homosexual demographic and have essentially barred themselves from eating some amazing sandwiches. The company itself will continue to flourish though because I believe many people are willing to ignore politics because of how good the food is. Ultimately, it is my belief/hope that eventually homosexuals against the company will realize their unjust accusations and once again enjoy the chicken of Chic-fil-A, a company that simply enjoys selling chicken to all.
I know I don't technically have to respond, but I think I need to. It is not unconstitutional for cities to ban certain things, that's a city-by-city situation and goes by its ordinances. I also think comparing a man who publicly announces his bigoted beliefs to a group of people who are persecuted for being who they are is HARDLY fair comparison. No one feels bad for the multi-millionaire who is unwise enough to share his unkind views. Of course it will reflect poorly on his restaurant. That's like saying wow, why are people upset that X restaurant's owner doesn't like black people? Crazy!! I don't think "The homosexual community should know better." Were you attacked for liking something different than other people, you too would fight back, whether you "knew better" or not. That's human nature to defend oneself. And really, the chicken isn't that good.
DeleteI think that the homosexual community is a very important demographic. The homosexual community is an increasingly large demographic and companies should try to market to as many different people as they can. I think that too often homosexuals are silenced and feel as though they are not supported (ex – bills for gay marriage keep getting turned down, “don’t ask, don’t tell” policies). If marketing started supporting this demographic and giving them a voice and allowed them to feel accepted, I think the gays would return the support and be great consumers. Marketing should not neglect a whole demographic just because something isn’t universally accepted and realize that homosexuals are just another group of people who need to be related to and are in fact the ones earning the most money, which they could then spend on a company’s products.
DeleteRecently, I've heard a lot of backlash over the importance of women in marketing and advertising. Products such as Dr. Pepper Ten are marketed exclusively to men; its tagline is actually "For Men Only". This goes completely against the entire chapter in the book saying that companies need to pay more attention to women.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think about products such as Dr. Pepper Ten or television channels such as Spike that market themselves to men? Do you think that these products are successful and warranted because of marketing channels and products just for women, or do you think they perpetuate stereotypes and a sense of male-dominance? Why or why not?
The book highlights the importance of marketing to women but never states that women are the only demographic a company should cater too. There are about an even amount of men and women in the United States; ergo the male market is very large as well and shouldn't be ignored either. Just because Dr. Pepper runs one advertisement campaign appealing to men doesn't mean they are sexist and are going to lose business. They run adds appealing to both men and women all of the time. Now if they never ever appealed to women at all, they wouldn't be around anymore and vice versa. If Dr. Pepper never appealed to men, they wouldn't be around anymore. As for the TV channel agenda, Spike is one channel that caters to men. There are several channels that cater just to women such as Oxygen and Lifetime. Are Lifetime and Oxygen losing business and or perpetuating woman stereotypes? No, these broadcasting companies are definitely not going out of business and are not perpetuating stereotypes just because they cater to one sex . Men and women do have their differences and it would be a disaster for companies to ignore that fact.
DeleteI completely agree with Colin on the points that he makes about the fact that companies that indulge one gender over the other are not in danger of going under. I feel as if there is too much indignation at companies that sell a product to a specific gender. In most cases, there's probably a reason why a product is aimed at either men or women. Even if this is the case, who's to say that a man can't buy some Activia yogurt or a woman couldn't buy Dr. Pepper Ten. Children are a good example of this because no ones going to tell a little girl she can't buy a Nerf gun or a boy can't watch a Barbie movie if they want to. Each person, regardless of gender, have their own identity and should not be limited to products they buy simply because it is advertised for another gender, race, or age.
DeleteHaving a roommate that already boycotts Dr. Pepper and gives me dirty looks when I drink Dr. Pepper, I think that specifically isolating and alienating woman when advertising products can have very adverse consequences. I do not entirely understand how such a marketing campaign can result in a positive manner. I understand gender specific marketing in cases where the product is obviously and unarguably gender specific. I believe companies should advertise to as many groups as possible without every excluding one. In doing this, the only result can be a drop in sale from the majority of the offended group and maybe a slight raise in the targeted.
DeleteI love this comment because immediately I thought that I have never heard of this commercial before. Then when I saw that it was on spike, I realized it is because I really never watch Spike and, to make a generalization, neither do a lot of women. I think that is why they can get away with making such a bold statement like "for men only" since it is on a "manly" network.
DeleteIn chapter 4 on page 63, it states that, "brands must recognize from the outset that their emotional identity is not only a result of ads and products, but also corporate policy and stances." How prevalent do you believe this is in today's society? Because as far as I'm concerned, only when a scandal or hot topic is brought to attention do people actually research a corporations policy and agenda.
ReplyDeleteDoes this idea have as big of an impact as the book makes it out to be and why?
I agree with the book on this topic, as many different factors can affect the consumer's beliefs and opinions of a certain brand. Companies need to keep this in mind, as they go about their business work, and even in their everyday lifestyle choices. This is becoming more apparent in today's world, as we have seen CEO's and business owners own personal decisions negatively affecting the public's opinion of the brand, along with the company as a whole. Coupled with the far-reaching technology we have today, word spreads very quickly and hiding things has become more difficult. Negative opinions are often hard to change, and therefore recognizing this and having an ethical corporate policy is very important for succeeding in the socially affected business-world of today.
DeleteRegarding the reworking of Barbie, on page 58, into a working professional by the industry to keep up with Gen Y, do you feel that this only serves to increase the strain put on the youth of today? In the last chapter it stated that Gen Y already has limited amounts of free time. Now, Barbie is setting the example that while they must do everything, they must also look like Barbie doing it, in a society where looking "perfect" is already pushed on today's youth too much with magazines, celebrities, etc. Does this only serve to create an even tougher aspiration for young girls, that they must not only have a perfect figure but must also be a successful working professional? Why or why not?
ReplyDeleteI agree that Barbie does set a higher standard for today's youth, but I believe it is for the most part in a positive manner. Yes, Barbie has always created unrealistic beauty standards for young girls. However, it also starts young girls to set healthy goals at a young age. Also with the range of careers that Barbie now takes on, it shows these girls the wide range and choices they have for their future. This just helps girls to start thinking of the unlimited options for their future and the importance of keeping an open mind.
DeleteOn page 65, the author speaks of a "safety zone" approach in regards to the homosexual community, because they are afraid of controversy. Do you believe this is appropriate or offensive to the homosexual community? If no, then how would you openly advertise to this community without being offensive to others.
ReplyDeleteI feel like not talking about and to the homosexual community would be just as bad as actually addressing them, and then offending the community. This is a key financial opportunity for businesses, as this untapped market is currently being left out of most companies' advertising campaigns. I would try and market to a section of this sector, by placing my brand advertisements in strategic areas, such as certain television channels, magazines, and internet websites that would appeal to this targeted market. As we know, this is a sensitive topic in today's community, and therefore much tact and attention is required in order to maintain the emotions and feelings of not just the homosexual community, but of all of the consumers.
DeleteI don't think the safety zone approach used by the company was inappropriate or offensive towards homosexuals. The company was merely trying to knock out two birds with one stone by using the company ad to simultaneously gain the interest of homosexual consumers while failing to lose business from any of the company's current anti-gay supporters. The company recognizes the fact that homosexuals have become an increasingly important marketing demographic to appeal to, yet also know that a fully "uncloseted" gay advertisement could cause it to lose many of its current customers. Thus, the only way to maximize profits and attract both sides of the coin to their company was the safety zone approach. They were merely trying to do what any business does - make profit.
DeleteAdditionally, I think the majority of homosexuals would fail to find the ad offensive, as the fact that their community is being half-way recognized by marketing media is quite an improvement from the total lack of recognition and full-fledged discrimination homosexuals have had to endure in the past. Rome wasn't built in day, and homosexuals realize that they're not going to be accepted in a day. Slowly but surely, however, acceptance will happen. Advertising approaches such as the safety zone approach are simply necessary checkpoints on the road to full acceptance.
As the average consumer type in America continues to transform, it is becoming ever important for companies to be flexible in both their corporate strategy as well as their advertising campaigns. This flexibility is important in order to appeal to the largest possible number of consumers. These sensitive issues open the possibilities of competitors to enter and take over the market, by appealing to the consumers in a more meaningful way. Advertisements are widespread throughout society, as we are exposed to many different products, brands, and companies in our daily, everyday lives. What are some steps a business can take in order to ensure that they are not left behind?
ReplyDeleteWhen I was reading the part in Chapter 2 about the different types of Asian cultures and countries, I realized how different each one is with their customs and beliefs. How could a company wanting to target the Asian-American cultures whole appeal to everyone without offending the smaller individual cultures? Is it possible to please everyone? Do the companies just have to be super detailed when creating something like a commercial?
ReplyDelete