Marketing by most peoples standards entails the creative ways of educating certain market segments of the benefits and value that a companies product(s) can provide. Susan Krashinsky, however, published an article that examines an alternate use of marketing, and that is to help fight crime. Krashinsky explains how a recent video that has been released by Toronto’s Crime Stoppers uses a different type of marketing to target youth and students of the GTA. The video attempts to assure viewers that tips given to Crime Stoppers will forever remain untraceable and anonymous. This advertisement is in response to a growing amount of criminal activity amongst area school students, largely being teenage offenders.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dte3k9qNUeI

This article highlights a very undervalued use of marketing. I business school we tend to be herded into thinking that “we use marketing to sell our products, and that’s it” however as we’ve learned both in class and as this video shows that is not the case. Recently, in class, we’ve discussed the use of the marketing mix in creating a brand. Price, product, promotion and place are the pieces of the mix and very closely relate to tangible products however, even though this advertisement isn’t related to any specific tangible product it is still deeply intertwined with these components of marketing. The perceived  cost of using this service is getting hurt or facing emotional abuse however, this commercial tries to explain how there actually would be no way to identify users so there’s actually no cost! The product provided is actually prosecution of individuals who have committed crimes. The promotion for this is in the video, and is utilized on social media sights in order to attract members from the targeted segment. Finally, the place where this is available is clearly in the GTA however, it speaks to the campaigns that other crime stopper organizations are working on as well. This goes to show how versatile and important marketing can be to all types of markets and towards all kinds of issues.

In Brand and Politics: Thinking Inside the Ballot Box Lucy Handley examines the how companies and brands are begin align themselves politically, which until recent history has been an extreme marketing taboo. Handley details the ways in which brands like Starbucks, the European O2, Virgin and Elle have begun to affiliate themselves with certain causes and viewpoints. The article, largely, discusses the ways in which Starbucks and its CEO Howard Schultz have in recent years backed the Obama administration as well as lobbied for an agreement to be made regarding the recent American Government shut down. She further acknowledges the legitimacy and acceptance for certain brands to take a stand in favor of certain political views such as, same sex marriage, equality, and certain political affiliations.

I found this article extremely interesting and also contradictory to my last post. This article outlines the growing acceptance of companies to discuss topics and market their views on subjects that I thought were extremely taboo and would result in organizational suicide. This article examined certain marketing practices that in recent years have become increasingly used and sought after by consumers. I believe that marketing should include more value basis, as it is both important to a growing number of consumers and reflects a much more modern approach to marketing.

While reading this article I did come a across a few questions, I wondered just how far a certain organization could go in support of a cause without becoming too political affiliated? This question interested me because there are certain organizations, like Starbucks, that have a very strong brand image and at times seem like no matter what marketing tactics they may or may not use they will continue to be successful and profitable. At what point would consumers in todays society stop believing in an organizations brand enough to hurt profits.