 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
 |
|||
B.U. Bridge is published by the Boston University Office of University Relations.
Ads pitching patriotism backfire, say COM faculty
By David J. Craig
In the days following the September 11 terrorist attacks, the suspension
of normal life in this country created a dilemma for U.S. companies: should
they participate in the nation's mourning by addressing the tragedies
in ads, by not advertising, or by conducting business as usual, the way
officials like New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and President George Bush
implored people to do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tobe
Berkovitz |
|
|
For many companies, making a public statement about the issue was too
much to resist. Within two weeks of the attacks, waves of television,
radio, and print ads appeared expressing sympathy for victims, announcing
what advertisers were doing to assist relief efforts, touting the strength
and resilience of the United States, and encouraging customers to support
the economy by spending money.
According to experts at the College of Communication, most of the companies
would have been wiser to keep quiet.
"Corporations might place these ads out of a sense of social responsibility
or because they think it's good for business to wrap their product in
a patriotic, goodwill message," says Tobe Berkovitz, a COM associate
professor of public relations and advertising. "But the general public
doesn't crave knowing how sad a corporation is for America's losses. Ads
that wave the American flag and try to be heartwarming are like water
off a duck's back. They're innocuous and uncompelling."
Placing a full-page ad in the New York Times seems like a pricey way to
communicate an uncompelling message. But that's exactly what several companies
did the Sunday after the attacks, including Lehman Brothers, who felt
it was important to let people know that the company had donated $10 million
to agencies providing relief.
"That's no good," says Susan Parenio, a COM associate professor
of advertising and public relations. "Most people would read that
as climbing on the back of the tragedy. They see an ad like that and it
confirms in their minds that companies are cheesy and greedy."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Susan
Parenio |
|
|
The worst offenders, she says, are companies whose ads combine a sales
pitch with a patriotic message, such as General Motors, which recently
launched television and radio spots that promote special financing offers
on new automobiles by reminding consumers that it's important to "believe
in the dream, believe in each other," and to "keep America rolling."
"That one's awful," Parenio says. "Retailers operating
on slim margins, like car dealerships and department stores, can't afford
to take a month off from advertising, but they don't have to be so cheesy
about it. If they continued to do their regular advertising, people would
understand, because it's part of their world. But there's no in-between.
If you try to be patriotic and combine it with your sales pitch, it really
strikes the wrong tone and risks turning off customers." On the other
hand, ads that appeared immediately after the attacks and simply instructed
people on how to give to relief efforts were appropriate, Parenio says.
And Berkovitz says that ads by companies directly affected by the events,
such as those with offices in the World Trade Center, also were acceptable.
So how could so many major corporations be so far off the mark? Robert
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert
Montgomery |
|
|
Montgomery, a COM professor emeritus of mass communication, who ran
his own advertising agency for several years, says corporate response
to tragic events often is made hastily by emotionally charged executives
and against the better judgment of their own public relations personnel.
Such ads have several target audiences, Montgomery says -- companies want
to convince customers that purchasing their products contributes to the
nation's welfare, to tell the government that they support its actions,
and in the case of companies directly affected by the tragedy, such as
the airlines, to assure investors and employees that they are on solid
ground.
He says he has not seen or heard an ad in recent weeks that he thinks
works. "I would advise a company in a situation like this to do what
they always do," he says. "If you sell loafers, then advertise
your loafers, and if you don't feel comfortable doing that, then pull
your ad for a week. But these sappy, vacuous ads we're seeing have no
impact."
There was an era, however, when corporate advertising successfully served
a social function. During World War II, Berkovitz says, companies whose
manufacturing facilities had been transformed to help the war effort regularly
took out ads with a patriotic message, which were well-received.
"If you couldn't make stoves or refrigerators during the war because
the metal was being used for airplanes, tanks, and ships, you still had
to keep your name in front of the public," he says. "Patriotic
messages were better received back then partly because America was a different
place, and also because the public wasn't as sophisticated in terms of
reading these messages."
05
October 2001
Boston University
Office of University Relations