Nadia Gunderson, in her post, said that she did not stop to view the ad because of the celebrity on the page of a magazine but because of the “brand name, visuals and the product itself”. She says that although a celebrity does help an advertisement, it’s the other features that really make the ad effective.
However, I believe that at times celebrity endorsement is already enough to make an ad successful, especially in the field of athletics. Take for example, Nike Basketball. It has arguably the most popular basketball stars as its celebrity/athlete endorsements; an impressive list consisting of LeBron James, Kobe Bryant and Kevin Durant just to name a few. Although Nike ads often feature very impressive visuals, I think the star power of these athletes are more than sufficient to influence consumers to buy their product.
All the above athletes listed have signature lines within Nike Basketball, ranging from shoes and apparel that are specially designed for them. In the market for athletic goods, these endorsements serve not only as a publicity tool but also as a “stamp of approval” or a review from the highest critics, the best players in the NBA.
Nike Basketball knows its target market, basketball players, tend to watch the NBA. They know that by simply having a star player in its ad is enough to get their attention. This is because as a basketball player I am drawn to the players I watch. Heck, Nike could print a spread with the word KOBE and a Nike logo and I’d still be interested in what they have to offer.
The ad above hardly shows the product, which is the shoe. Instead Kobe takes the majority of the spread. But it is enough for me to want to know more about this product because as a basketball player (Nike Basketball’s target market), having Kobe on the page is enough for me to be interested.
Nadia seems to state that the celebrity endorsement is more of a cherry on top of the ice cream, but to me, celebrity endorsement is often the ice cream itself.