Why deo ads don’t pass the smell test

Most commercials for deodorants you see today feature a guy walking out smelling daisy fresh, and skimpily dressed girls around him go into a frenzy. They might also include sisters-in-law—otherwise coy—but who suddenly develop affections for close relatives. What next – incest?

Audiences don’t need a jury to tell them why such ads are not just pure bunkum, but are downright offensive. Even to a majority of the guys, whose fantasies these ads purportedly claim to cater! How guys would wish it was so easy to woo a girl! Just spray on a Rs 150 deo, and play the pied piper to all the femme fatales in town. Whoever said fancy cars, fat bank balances and personality are important, can eat crow.

Alright, we know that sex is a powerful tool to sell products. Sprinkle a bit of humour, and it acquires an air of disarming sensuality.

Recall an old commercial for Axe – a scrawny guy and a girl are shown in a close-up, cheek-by-jowl, literally, appearing to be travelling in a crowded train. The camera pans out, and you see that the couple is all alone in the compartment. The sign-off: ‘The Axe Effect’. Nice and easy!

Compare it with the ads you see today. Bikini clad girls emerging from a dip in the ocean (copied frame-to-frame from a Brazilian ad), bhabhis or newly-wed girls turning naughty at the sight of the neighbourhood hunk… the ads seem to make such a desperate and crude attempt to sell the product. All the commercials seem to drop off a mould. Lately, even Axe seems to have fallen into the trap, and taken the easy way out. Whatever happened to USP and positioning!

I guess the creators of such communication (client + ad agency) should wake up and smell the coffee before they expect customers to try out and smell their ware.

A typical Indian ad for a motorcycle is never complete without daredevil stunts and buxom belles heaving in orgasmic pleasure as the protagonist takes off his helmet. On any given day, the dailies carry at least one incident of road accident involving a speeding two-wheeler. Are the two phenomena interrelated? I leave it up to you to decide.

On the other side, you also have benign advertisements that drive home the message without the bravado. I can particularly recall the Bajaj Avenger ad, where the hero rides through the scenic terrain of Ladakh, forgiving everyone from his father to the barber, ‘feeling like God.’ I don’t want to take sides here as to which company or brand does a better job of selling dreams. But I strongly feel that whoever is selling the dream, without inspiring someone—however unintentionally—to drive off the edge, is doing a good job.

The two-wheeler is as stylish as it is risky. In the past few years, the machines have become heavier and faster. The design of a bike leaves very less chance for the rider to walk away from an accident without any injury. Even at seemingly innocuous speeds of 35-40 kph, it is difficult to control the bike if the rider loses his balance. And unlike a scooter, if the bike topples over, it can crush the limbs of the rider. That’s why, it is not uncommon to see most Indian parents wave out to their young sons with a fervent hope that he comes home safe and sound.

Though marketers are not so heartless to endanger the lives of their customers, but unwittingly, some of them are inspiring youngsters to drive recklessly.

This phenomenon is not restricted to advertisements, or for that matter, only bike ads alone. You have had cases of kids leaping off buildings thinking they were Shaktimaan and breaking each other’s necks in a bid to emulate WWE stars.

So, where should marketers draw the line? The debate can go on and on. But in this case, I guess, biking ads can do with a little less of adrenaline rush.

For once, an indecent exposure we liked!

The cat is finally out of the bag. After seven years of preparation, the Suresh Kalmadi-led Commonwealth Organising Committee has got nothing to show for its efforts. And it is thanks to the media that these guys have been caught with their pants down and exposed their naked ambition.

For its propensity to sensationalise all things important and trivial, this behaviour of the media has actually come as a blessing in disguise. To ensure the success of an event, which can make or mar the country’s image, any amount of noise that is needed to make the guilty heads roll, is welcome. Kudos to the media for having played its part!

The media has exposed the nefarious activities of politicians who are running the affairs of the Games, petty contractors and vendors, corrupt NRI businessmen with dubious track records and the ignorance of insouciant senior politicians. A loud bang was indeed warranted to wake up a government, which seems to be insensitive to everything – price rise, Maoism, the civil unrest in Kashmir, floods in Bihar, UP, Gujarat and Ladakh, even acquiescing to a loud and foul mouthed Pakistani foreign minister.

Hope, the media continues the good work, and refrains from indulging in stories about superstition, incest, black magic and all things that do not deserve more than one minute of air time.

Just not ‘fair’

The government prohibits advertising alcohol and cigarettes. In all fairness, it should consider banning fairness creams. While substance abuse affects the body of an individual, racism afflicts the entire society. And the psyche of generations. Ads for fairness creams only seem to exacerbate this prejudice.

Ads have tremendous power to influence people. Till the past few years, fairness creams were associated only with beauty. But the brands are now using the idea of ‘success’ as an outcome of fairness. Even if the ‘dark-skinned’ protagonist in the ad is talented, it will require her to become fair in order to get noticed. To use the mass media to propagate racism is a dangerous phenomenon.

It is no secret that we Indians have a preference for all things white. But brands and advertisers cannot wash their hands off on the premise that they are only catering to a demand. For that matter, alcohol, drugs and pornography too have tremendous demand!

Over the years, careers, relationships, dreams and lives have been broken because of our infatuation for fair skin. In matchmaking sessions, job market, modelling world, Bollywood, college and school campuses, and even in homes when parents discriminate between siblings.

The qualities of a human being should be the sole criteria for his/her success. Beauty is skin deep, whichever colour it is - Aishwarya or Lara.

So, the next time you see an ad for a fairness cream, use the power of the remote control. Stop the demand; the supply will dry up automatically! Fair deal, isn’t it?

Smut - coming soon to a TV screen near you

TV news channels, especially Hindi, seem to have become electronic versions of Mayapuri and Manohar Kahaniyaan.

Tune in to any news channel, and chances are you will see aliens making surreptitious landings, prostitution rings, haunted places, aghoris dancing half nude in cemeteries, astrology, or a mad dog terrorising a neighbourhood. There was this one time when the channel, which by its own admission delivers news the quickest, showed a 2-min clipping of two serpents having intercourse. Going by the anchor’s fever pitched voice, it was news to him that snakes are born out of physical enterprise and not produced on trees. ‘Dekho, kaise lipat rahe hain ek doosre se’ (Watch, how they are embracing each other), read his script.

Quite clearly, either there is a lack of serious news to fill in 24 hours of airtime or the newsmen have lost their bearings and the understanding of what constitutes ‘news’. It might also be a marketing strategy to appeal to the lowest common denominator of audiences, grab eyeballs and subsequently ad revenue. For a few channels, it does seem to be working. India TV seems to lead the pack, and purportedly enjoys an 18 percent market share. Audiences in the cow belt and in the hinterland do not really distinguish—or are bothered about differentiating—between hard-nosed news, fiction or pure bunkum. Surprisingly, viewers in metros, belonging to SEC A and B class homes, regularly tune in to these programmes.

The government’s programming guidelines clearly prohibit channels from promoting superstition and sleaze. But channels brazenly flout this rule. There are stories abound of self-styled babas curing possessed villagers by thrashing them when they are not caught in romps with starlets; babies being thrown from rooftops to ward off evil, titillating MMS’ involving teenagers in hormonal overdrive, gigolos selling their wares on Delhi’s streets, fisticuffs between step wives… everything seems to be ‘Breaking News’.

Clearly, sleaze, slander and smut have become the name of the game. And viewers seem to be lapping it up. No wonder, our leaders continue to screw the country’s future, while its citizens are busy watching smut.

Should the ambassador be held guilty if the brand goofs up?

Till he rammed his car that fateful night, Tiger Woods was one of the most expensive and sought-after brand ambassadors. But as his sexploits became media fodder, brands started avoiding him as regularly as his putts would avoid the birdie. While we know a lot of instances of the brand suffering because of its ambassador’s misdemeanours, it is also interesting to study the repercussions when the tables are turned. Should the brand ambassador be held responsible in case the brand creates any mischief?

In early 2000, Home Trade launched an advertising blitzkrieg using some of the biggest personalities – Sachin Tendulkar, Shah Rukh Khan and Hrithik Roshan. No one quite knew what Home Trade did, including the personalities endorsing them, I guess. Home Trade went bust soon after, and the trio seemed to develop selective amnesia. When the cola pesticide controversy broke out, Aamir Khan stood by brand Coca-Cola and went all out to defend it, even giving testimonials in his personal capacity. Aamir, being Aamir, pulled it off well, although it is a known fact that the beverage manufactured back then, did contain traces of pesticide.

But do you think brand ambassadors should find blood on their hands, if the hand that feeds them is covered in muck? Tricky!

When celebrities sign up for a contract, their immediate concerns are the moolah and whether the brand would gel with their personality. An adverse eventuality is the farthest thought in their mind. They would never be privy to the internal machinations of the company, stability and long term prospects. Hence it would not be entirely just to blame them.

Having said that, celebrities should realise that consumers would trust or prefer a brand over its competitors if they are endorsing it. Hence, they need to exercise maximum caution before signing on the dotted line. While initiating penal action against them would be harsh, brand ambassadors need to accept the moral responsibility and express regret about erroneously misleading consumers. After all, celebrities, too, are brands in their own right. And no one would like to be seen in the wrong company. Accenture would certainly agree!

Pester power ahoy!

Have you ever tried counting the number of ads featuring kids? Not that you don’t have better things to do in life! But if you are a parent, who has to regularly field off questions from your children why you cannot buy the latest car or mobile phone, you might do well to undertake this activity asap. The need for the brazen use of khandaani looking kids to sell everything from mosquito repellants to telecom services is indeed questionable. One can understand if the product or brand is meant for the child, say a toy, a health drink, bicycle or apparel. But why show a 5-year old becoming a scarecrow to help his granny shoo the crows away; and bring in a detergent which cleans the stains, while the kid beams his angelic pearlies before the camera? Probably, it is the urge to tell a story. Or the itch to add the cuteness factor, and establish the emotional connect with the brand. Whatever the ruse, the ground zero of all this marketing activity is the middle-class home, which might not be financially strong enough to satiate the kids’ endless demands. Marketers should realise this. Pester power is potent. And marketers do realise this. The sad fact is that despite all the claims of thinking out-of-the-box, marketers and advertisers resort to good ol’ pester power to sell their wares. Offhand, I can rattle off a slew of products which use children – telecom, detergents, mosquito repellant, soaps, washing machines, television, insurance, banking services, hawaai chappals, air conditioners, everything except condoms. Or is it? Hark back to the 1980s when a Kohinoor ad featured a desperate couple trying to steal in a few private moments when their bonny baby starts bawling. No one has been creative enough to feature kids in condom ads after that. Developed countries have strict rules for featuring young ones in ads. Like India’s free market economy, its advertising industry, too, uses kids wantonly to sell products. It’s time our marketers, creative gurus and ad film directors really put their thinking caps on, and shun the easy way out. Using kids to sell products is not cute, it’s irritating.