Fame doesn't sell
New research suggests celebrity endorsements are losing their appeal
JASON KIRBY | May 7, 2007 |
What's a struggling automaker to do when it wants to juice sales? Bring in a celebrity, of course. A couple of years ago Ford Motor Co. tapped Funkmaster Flex, a New York radio DJ and urban car culture "evangelist," to be its pitchman. But the campaign really kicked into high gear this month. There's the new Funkmaster Flex customized Expedition SUV, talk of a Funkmaster Flex Mustang, and if that wasn't enough Flex to boil the blood of young males, the company renamed its concept crossover vehicle the Ford Flex. Next up, reportedly, the limited edition Funkmaster Flex Flex.
Continued Below
Companies have long turned to the top names in sports and entertainment to sell their wares. Today it's common for advertisers to shell out tens of millions of dollars in return for star-powered testimonials. It's not known how much Flex is getting to flog Fords, though a few years ago Chrysler paid Celine Dion US$14 million to endorse the Pacifica before executives came to their senses and killed the deal. But a new study by researchers in Britain and Switzerland suggests most companies don't get their money's worth from the stars posing with their products.
That's because when people are deciding which products to buy, the study found, they are more motivated by keeping up with the Joneses than with the out-of-reach lifestyles of the rich and famous.
The researchers carried out a series of tests on nearly 300 students in Switzerland and Germany, showing them advertisements for a digital camera -- some endorsed by a fictional student, while the others saw ads carrying testimonials from celebrities. The results showed 56 per cent of students who admitted they were susceptible to peer pressure were influenced by the fake student's endorsement, while only 20 per cent said the celebrity pitch had any effect on them. The rest of the students, who said they rely only on technical specifications when deciding what to buy, barely paid attention to either of them.
That notion flies in the face of convention in the advertising world. The long-held belief has been that the celebrity shine rubs off on the products and services they're endorsing, making them more attractive to shoppers. "So many ad agencies and companies spend millions to get celebrities to give testimonials," says Brett Martin, a professor with the University of Bath's School of Management. "Our research found people are more influenced by an endorsement from an ordinary person like themselves."
Not that Paris Hilton or Gwyneth Paltrow are quaking in their stilettos just yet. But some researchers suspect our current obsession with celebrity may be a declining force, which could throw a wrench into the marketing plans of many companies. Grant McCracken, the Canadian author of Culture and Consumption and a cultural anthropologist affiliated with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wrote recently about the rise of "cultural fatigue." He thinks we could see a backlash against the cult of celebrity worship that has built up over the last decade. "Contemporary culture has a way of working things to death," McCracken wrote. "And eventually our attention wanders, and eventually we say as one, 'It's enough, already.' "
Perhaps as a result of celebrity saturation, more companies are turning to firms that analyze and rate celebrities on their "likeability" and power to influence purchasing decisions. One company, Marketing Evaluations in New York, regularly conducts research on thousands of celebrities and assigns them scores. "Companies have to be very informed when using a celebrity, especially because with technology these days a lot of celebrities are getting overexposed," says Henry Schafer, the company's executive vice-president. "Demand is definitely increasing for this kind of data."
Martin, the Bath professor, says he's not suggesting celebrity pitches never work. But for many companies, high-profile stars are the only option they consider when developing an advertising strategy. "Our research shows there is an alternative available," he says. And the name's not Flex.
To comment, email letters@macleans.ca

















