ETH301 MODULE 1 - Assignment Example

First, they are respected, and second, they are famous. In other words, celebrities are the perfect epitome of brand attraction, and their mere association with the product guarantees profitability. Now, celebrity advertising, the aim of which is to let the celebrity speak on behalf of the brand is coupled with positive and negative bearings at present. Over the past, recent years, “outside forces” have significantly “influenced” in company’s choice of a potential brand endorser (Lipsey 79).

This force is the media’s interest in scrutinizing the private lives and affairs of celebrities and his or her behavior that considerably affects the reputation of the company either it is a positive or negative gossip (Lipsey 79). To be specific, these are what we call celebrity scandals and misdemeanors. To date, history provides that consumers in the ancient times had no knowledge about the celebrity’s whereabouts except for its appearance on print advertisements, and the celebrity’s negative habits were “overshadowed” by his or her skills and performance (Lipsey 79).

However, that is not the case today. In times of celebrity scandals, major companies are in a deliberate dilemma whether to retain the endorser or drop him or her in the roster. Today’s scandals are so powerful in influencing the minds of consumers because of the advances in technology that no matter how skillful the athlete is during his match, he is overshadowed by his celebrated scandal. Friedman and Friedman (qtd. in Kahle and Kim 161) hold that advertisers chose celebrities over non celebrities as endorsers because it represents the “self-image” and “taste” of the celebrity over the product.

A certain celebrity endorsement entails a close relationship between the celebrity and the brand (Kahle and Kim 162). However, a noted research conducted by Baker and Churchill in 1977 (qtd. in Kahle and Kim 162) reveals that “sex” and “attractiveness” of any celebrity endorsers catch the attention of the consumers, but is “ineffective” in influencing consumers’ perception towards the endorsed product. It is difficult to draw the line between the celebrity’s influence towards the brand and the way consumers perceived the brand because somehow, they are closely associated.

However, I strongly believe that it is a hasty decision for companies to drop the celebrity endorser on the grounds of public scandal that are irrelevant to the product being endorsed by the involved celebrity. For instance, Tiger Woods’ infidelity issue prompted most of his major sponsors to back out and cut off his endorsement deals. There has been no research yet to prove the correlation between Woods’ exits from his endorsement deal in Nike to the company’s increase in sales, but there are researches to prove that Gillette somehow loses profit when he stopped promoting the brand.

The point is people are no longer ignorant to reach an illogical conclusion that Gillette’s brand quality will be reduced because Tiger Woods have an affair. It would be consistent if Woods supports a campaign for family planning methods so that his dropping from the brand is justifiable. It is justifiable, though, to scrap the celebrity endorser from a company’s roster of endorsers if he or she is no longer winning. Especially in sporting apparel and sports drinks, the winning track record of the sports icon is very important in the success of the product in the