In the recent times there have
been a slew of brands that are advertising their products through socially
inclined campaigns. One will remember the Lifebouy advertisement during the Kumbh Mela in India where chappati’s
were stamped with the lettering Lifebouy se Haath Dhoya Kya (have you washed your hands with Lifebouy?),
the recent advertisement by Coke that promises to connect the ancient and sworn
enemies India and Pakistan by ‘Sharing a Coke’ and
the ‘Real beauty sketches’
campaign by Dove.
Other than the fantastic media
attention for each of these campaigns, they have also achieved amazing success
in the digital world. The number of Youtube views for the Coke ad was well over
1.3 million, while Dove garnered about 5.4 million views. While the intention
behind these campaigns is to strive to achieve something ‘larger’ than the
brand itself, the execution of some have left me thinking that it’s all a
gimmick at the end of the day.
When a brand starts saying that
it cares about something more than profit/ growth in every communication it
generates, there is reason to believe otherwise. The social initiative
bandwagon is beginning to succumb to the weight of the number of brands getting
on to it. So unless the ad is carefully planned and executed, it begins to
resemble marketing gimmicks.
To substantiate this thought,
here are two campaigns that have the same underlying attempts- to reiterate
what the brand stands for. While both incorporate social angles into their ads,
to me one clearly wins over the other. And I believe that it’s the execution that
sets them apart.
Dove, in its ‘Real beauty
sketches’ video, suggested that every woman thinks she’s less beautiful than
she actually is. The women chosen for the ‘beauty sketches’ campaign look
fairly ordinary and randomly selected. However, I believe that the choice was
careful and deliberate- the women looked like ordinary women but from a
specific socio-economic class. And it was a well-crafted selection, for after
all, Dove does target women of a particular socio-economic class. The message
was aimed at the consumers and potential consumer of Dove. Given that it has
consistently communicated on the ‘real women’ platform, this ad seemed poignant
and yet not pretentious. It was an initiative that aimed at making women
re-think their own appearance and believe that they may be worth more than they
give themselves credit for. The best part of this campaign was that Dove didn't
make claims (in this campaign) of being responsible for ‘beautifying women’. It
simply illustrated a notion that existed in the minds of these women. It made
these women the heroes (or heroines) of the piece- it was all about the women.
On the other hand we have the
recent ads from Lifebouy. One in which the brand burnt, well- a brand (pardon
the punning!), into the rotis that were served at the Kumbh Mela in India. They then developed a commercial, in which a
man walks on his hands from his house to a temple, because his son turned 5. The
underlying social message in both instances was that maintaining hygiene can
have a positive effect on health. The message is simple enough, and true.
However, what irks me is the brand’s supercilious approach. It seems to me that
the brand is trying to say – Lifebouy saves lives, which is a tall claim to
make. It is also annoying to see that the brand taps so much into drama and the
emotional nature of Indians. It’s not that I don’t know about people offering ‘Angapradakshanam’ or walk on their hands
as a ‘thank you’ to the almighty. It’s just that those are not things that I’d
imagine are ‘ad-worthy’. What is also interesting is that earlier, Lifebouy’s ads
communicated the exact same message – the importance of hygienic practices.
Often the ads featured children from the lower middle and middle class,
beautifully mixing the social angle with the hygiene aspect. There weren't any
histrionics or overly emotional contexts. This, to me is far more effective and
far less irksome in nature! Also, the earlier ads made the consumer the
protagonist- Lifebouy only enabled the protagonist and was not the hero itself.
The recent campaigns focus on making the brand the central character and the
consumer becomes just a beneficiary.
Call me old school, but I still
hold the belief that ‘Customer is king’. Hence, a brand communication that
makes the consumer the hero resonates with me far better than one that
proclaims itself the hero! Interestingly enough, both these brands come from
the same stable- Unilever.
So my point is, by all means join
the ‘social initiative/ angle endorsed by brands’ bandwagon. However, execution
is of paramount importance. Over-doing it and harping on the overly sentimental
nature of your TG, or making yourself the protagonist of the piece, may not
necessarily be appreciated and may in fact make one seem shallow! Ultimately,
every consumer knows that the message the brand seeks to communicate is –‘Use
me because I have shown you that I can help make you a winner’.
