The Elephant in the Room

Here’s to the end of my Comm 296 journey. It was a short and fulfilling experience, broadening my perspective of the marketing world. One major takeaway from this class would definitely be the time spent on our group projects.

Along with my fellow group members, our project’s focus was on the retail fast-fashion giant, Zara.

Our task of uncovering the company’s current environment and segmentation practices was much more arduous than I expected. I would have to say that gathering all the necessary information was the toughest aspect since much of Zara’s information, such as financial reports and various statistics, are not disclosed to the public. However, all our efforts paid off and I saw how the initial assignments of this project all came together and contributed towards our final group video.

Creating a video was not only a creative way to share our newfound knowledge of the firm, but also aided me in seeing how all the different steps of marketing came together to create a marketing plan that strategically addresses issues and opportunities the firm may have.

If I were given a chance to re-do this project, I would honestly say that I wish I had put in more effort into uncovering Zara’s opportunities in targeting the dominant market of fashion-forward young woman, and also in gathering quantitative data to support my analyses. All in all, this project truly changed how I view marketing, from the common misconception of “just advertising” and campaigns, to the more in-depth consumer and research-based aspect of it all.

Fun fact: You can get paid as much as $13,000 for a single brand endorsing tweet. Before you start flooding your Twitter feeds, waiting for the $5,000 offer to roll in, you need to be famous first. By famous, I mean CRAZY famous, with hundred of thousands of followers in your pocket.

With the increasing popularity of social media sites like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, it comes with no shock that firms have now turned to the Twitter-sphere to reach out to the masses. Specifically, to attract the quintessential smartphone-obsessed Generation Y and Z population. The growing purchasing power of Generation Y and Z-ers has made them a highly viable target market, and whatbetter way to reach them than through their life source, the Internet, or more specifically, their Twitter feeds.

Sources show that Grammy-nominated R&B singer-songwriter Tyrese can rake in $7,800, while reality TV star Khloe Kardashian and American heartthrob Jared Leto can earn a whopping $13,000 for a single endorsed tweet.

But this brings about a new dilemma, when celebrities and people with large fan bases on social networks feature a product or service, it’s usually impossible to know if it’s a legitimate mention or if they were paid to say nice things about it. Miley Cyrus’ post, highlighting BlackJet, a Silicon Valley start-up, is a perfect example. The arrangements between BlackJet and Cyrus are unclear but BlackJet has disclosed to the New York Times that the pop star “was given some consideration for her tweet.”

Twitter @MileyCyrus

When it is not explicitly marked that the tweet is an ad, the public is led to believe in these plugs even if the tweet wasn’t personally written by the stars themselves, infuriating the Federal Trade Commission. However, products bathed in star power tend to sell whether or not viewers realize the endorsers are receiving payment for their services. Plus, celebrity Twitter feeds are so exceptionally curated that any hopes of credibility is probably misplaced.

This brings me to my closing question. Are celebrity endorsed tweets prime examples of #irresponsible tweeting or should user just wise up about Twitters commercial applications?

The ad below demonstrates the use of sexual innuendo in today’s advertising world.

From designer perfume to beverages, advertisers use sexual images to pitch their products and ideas to the masses. Yes, sex sells. Renowned men’s magazines like FHM and Maxim have experimented with the covers of their magazines. When a sexy, half-naked woman adorns the cover, it surpasses that of an image of a male icon, with the former appealing greater to male genetics. But, there’s a fine line, and all too often these days brands are stepping way over the line—search Tom Ford’s “Vaginads”—repelling customers instead.

“Smoking means being a slave to tobacco”

This particular anti-smoking campaign commissioned by Les Droits des Non-Fumeurs, a pressure group supporting the rights of non-smokers, was devised to bring a halt to the rise in smoking amongst young teenagers in France. The advert depicts young teens kneeling in front of older men as if forced to perform oral sex, with a cigarette in place of male genitalia. As discussed in the Telegraph, Les Droits des Non-Fumeurs stated in an online discussion, “the campaign targets young people who see cigarettes as symbols of emancipation, of freedom, when it really causes dependency and submission.” However, is the use of sexual innuendo even as a deterrent ethical? Admittedly, sexual appeal has the ability to grab the attention of teens, but as a teenager myself, exploiting underage sex, even for a good cause is out of the question.

Just how much sex is too much sex in the world of marketing? And for you curious minds out there, check out the video below to find out your limits.

Veggie Love – PETA’s Banned Super Bowl Ad

Welcome to UBC Blogs. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!