In the CTV news article, I saw this advertisement with Berlusconi and three women that was released from Ford India. This picture was never used commercially, but it appeared on the Internet and caused an uproar. This is a bigger problem at this time because it wasn’t long a go that a girl was victimized in a gang rape on a bus and provoked the nation into a massive protest. India passed a new law on violence against women, and the status of women in India has been in the spotlight since the incident.

It’s not clear if anyone at Ford India has seen or approved this advertisement. But with Ford’s name and its Indian-made vehicle in the picture, the blame is to be aimed at the company. Whether it was made by Ford or not, this advertisement obviously contradicts the cultural and social trend surrounding India right now. The whole country is concerned about the gang rape, the status of women and how to prevent further issues like this. The way this ad portraits women, tied up in the trunk of the vehicle, would be the last thing the consumers want to see in an advertisement.

Similar advertisements feature Paris Hilton in the driver’s seat with Kardashian sisters tied up in the trunk and Michael Schumacher with other Formula One drivers as well. They all have the same phrase “Leave your worries behind with the Figo’s extra-large boot.” Okay, we get what you are trying to say. However, this is not the right way to approach the consumers especially in India after the incident and where very conservative social values exist.

This is a good example of advertisements that failed to target customers appropriately. Because of this, Ford’s image was harmed, lost a bit of its brand value, and cannot escape from all the blame.

Sometimes you get marketing opportunities from something you never expected. Psy’s Gangnam Style phenomenon in 2012 is one of those opportunities. With Psy’s #2 Billboard song, I agree with So Yeon’s post that K-pop wave that was mostly limited to Asia found a way to expand to broader global markets to America and Europe.

Korean wave is already a phenomenon in parts of Asia. Korean celebrities become a reference group for consumers of Korean wave including music and drama in those regions. Consumers desire to belong and become associated with them by using Korean products and adopting the norms. As a result, many advertisements in those countries use Korean celebrities.

This is a shop in Nepal using the name and the picture of a Korean girl group Girl’s Generation. The clothes in there have nothing to do with Girl’s Generation, but it means Korean wave is influential just by itself. This shop used popularity of Korean celebrities as a marketing strategy.

Now, with Psy’s worldwide hit song, Korean wave is on its way to target consumers in other regions of the world as well.

For example, Hite Jinro, a beer and soju (Korean traditional drink) company, used Psy as its main model to promote soju targeting Western customers. With his funny image and worldwide fame, Psy is a perfect model to advertise Korean traditional drink to foreign customers.

It’s seen in this article that Korean wave is opening new doors for not only Korean companies but for promoting tourism in Korea as well. Many people want to visit Gangnam, a central part of Seoul, and Korea Tourism Organization is using this opportunity to raise the profile of the destination.

With the new marketing opportunities the Korean wave is offering, Korean companies can expand their markets and target broader segments.

I think World Wildlife Fund has one of the advertisements that is interesting and gets the message through clearly. Global warming has been a big issue around the world for some time, and we’ve all seen the pictures of a polar bear floating on a piece of ice or permanent snow on top of high mountains significantly reduced from a few years ago. All those advertisements and campaign posters alert us to the situation but it does’t last long. It’s just one moment that we think ‘aww, poor bear,’ but we forget it after a while.

What makes the advertisements of WWF interesting is, I think, that they brought the issue closer to us and displayed it in a way directly relating to our daily life. For example, pictures of cars and factories underwater with the phrase “If we don’t stop global warming, nature will.” show that these activities cause global warming and that the consequences will come back to us. Of course we know this, but these visuals give bigger impact than just knowing it. And because these pictures use themes that are relevant to everyone, it can overcome the cultural barrier that might exist when we use pictures of animals or mountains.

These advertisements contain both cognitive and affective components of attitude. They make us think about the issue right at the moment we see the picture. Thoughts extend to feelings because it’s related to daily life. Those feelings can eventually make us act on it, which will be behavioral component.

WWF’s advertisements gave me a new perspective on environmental issues, and I think they are very effective at fulfilling their purposes.

Drew made an analogy between marketing and horses in his post in Drew’s Marketing Minute. He writes that you can lead the horse to the water but you can’t make it drink. You could force the horse by putting its head inside the water, which is not very nice, or wait until the horse gets thirsty. I thought it was a very interesting approach, and it made perfect sense.

If the horse was a customer, the water is a product. I think the role of marketing would be to arouse thirst in the customer that he would feel the need to drink the water, so that he will be motivated to do so. When a new product is introduced, customers are led to the product (or water in the analogy). Marketers  try to appeal to customers by showing how awesome their products are through advertisements. If they can hold customers’ interest until they are motivated to buy the product, they will make sales eventually. Some might leave, but you can’t get everyone to buy your product.

In another post about his experience in Walgreens, he says how Walgreens made him uncomfortable by putting too much pressure on him to make a donation. What Walgreens did is like trying to force the horse to drink the water, but this kind of approach makes the customers feel animosity toward the company rather than the need to buy the product.

Marketing attracts customers to the product, but it can’t make them buy it. We need to hold their interests, let them hang around by the water for a while and decide whether they feel thirsty or not.

According to BostInno, American Apparel sent out this advertisement via email to its subscribers on the day Hurricane Sandy hit the United States. Sandy, the largest Atlantic hurricane ever measured by diameter, devastated Northeastern United States, Mid-Atlantic and part of Caribbean as well. American Apparel thought this could be a chance for them to advertise their sale plans. However, the damage in the US caused by Sandy is estimated to surpass $63 billion, and there were people killed in countries like Jamaica, Haiti and Puerto Rico. Was it really necessary for American Apparel to make the natural disaster sound so trivial and use words such as ‘bored during the storm’?

Many people who received this advertisement were offended by the way American Apparel used Sandy as advertising tool and the way it was phrased. However, Dov Charney, CEO of American Apparel, said “We don’t think it was offensive. We are sorry if people felt it was.” It might not had been intentional, but people thought it was inappropriate, and it definitely was not considerate of the victims of the storm. Just because it wasn’t intended to offend people, it doesn’t become okay to make use of a devastating disaster in an advertisement. If the company showed some respect for the victims and apologized for their hasty decision, the situation could have been better. However, the what the CEO said represented the company’s moral standards, and made me think about how their values were presented in that advertisement. What should be more important is not only getting their words out but considering their customers and current situations.

Although American Apparel did not make any false statements or had product safety issues, this kind of advertising definitely crosses the ethical line, and marketers need to have ethical principles when they make advertisements.

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