3 ms·
That muddies the water by treating all adverts the same, when sometimes (like the t-bell example above) the celeb truly likes/uses the product. I guess the bes
by Domenic_S 10y ago
That muddies the water by treating all adverts the same, when sometimes (like the t-bell example above) the celeb truly likes/uses the product.
I guess the best you can do as a celeb is build your brand around how you do adverts. Some radio hosts here in CA (Armstrong & Getty) say they only do adverts for products they personally use & recommend. I admit to buying a product they advertise (a belt) some years ago and it's great - I'm glad they advertised it because I wouldn't have heard about it otherwise (still wearing it!).
- valarauca1 10y ago>That muddies the water by treating all adverts the same, when sometimes (like the t-bell example above) the celeb truly likes/uses the product. But you admit this is irrelevant because you don't know if that person has any in-depth knowledge. Nor do you know/trust that person. In your scenario that person is just a voice on a radio saying Trust me I love Tacobell and eat it all the time. Trust is an interpersonal social currency, gained via social interaction. If there is no prior social interaction between the advocator, and the person being advertised too... How can there be trust?
- pbhjpbhj 10y agoIMO it doesn't matter how much the person loves the product it's still an advert if they're compensated in some way for promoting it. "I loved it so much I bought the company", well then it's not an ad?? Of course it's advertising. If there's a causal link between the placement and [the paying of] a consideration then it's an ad. >they only do adverts for products they personally use & recommend // Is that a legally binding statement in the relevant jurisdiction, sounds just like the sort of thing a person who'd never used something but was only concerned about the money would say.