How to limit the damage from gaffes of star promoters
THE PROBLEM | Saturday, 14 June 2008
Sharon Stone, the Hollywood actress and the face of one of Christian Dior's skincare lines, caused recently an outcry with remarks labelling China's earthquake as "karma" for recent Chinese actions in Tibet. Her words spread quickly online and the response was hostile. Shocked by the strength of reaction in China and beyond, Dior and the actress issued apologies; Christian Dior has nonetheless dropped her image from advertisements in China. What are the pitfalls for organisations that associate their names with high-profile people whose persona can turn sour in an instant? And what can they do to rescue the situation?
THE ADVICE
THE ADVERTISING AGENT
Hamish Pringle
M'learned friends will no doubt point out how essential it is to have a proper signed contract with "death and disgrace" clauses in it. However, agency professionals will advise against invoking such clauses too hastily if the brand owner wants to be a long-term employer of stars. Draconian action will lodge in the memories of the agents to the stars and the company may find it hard to enlist a celebrity worth having in future.
It is when the star crosses the line of legality that most brand owners do invoke the clause. Justifying the relationship is so much harder if the star is convicted of using Class A drugs, theft or violence. However, a faux pas such as using a competitor brand in public, or "mis-speaking" about a sensitive issue, creates a media storm in a teacup that soon blows over, often having added valuable publicity to the relationship.
The key thing when a problem occurs is for both company and celebrity to take ownership of it and ensure their apologies are consistent and sincere. Denial and cover-ups are deadly as they give the story a second wind.
(The writer is director-general of the Institute of Practitioners in Advertising and author of Celebrity Sells)
THE LAWYER
Susan Barty
Endorsement by a celebrity whose image matches a product's core brand values undoubtedly works. Unfortunately, celebrities may not always act with the best interests of the brand in mind or the celebrity may suffer a run of bad luck. Either way, a link between the celebrity's real-life profile and the endorsed brand is unavoidable.
Conduct due diligence on the celebrity and do not underestimate the value of media training and education about the brand. The contract can be the most important document for the success of a campaign. Many impose minimum obligations as to conduct, entitling termination if behaviour falls below an agreed standard. The contract should also clearly identify what will give the right to terminate or suspend the contract, and the rights of both parties after termination. This may include payment penalties for the celebrity.
In the event of a PR disaster, the brand can then either distance itself or work with the celebrity to remedy the situation quickly and efficiently. But make sure you have options available to give you flexibility. The key is to plan carefully, assess risk, then be innovative.
(The writer is a partner at CMS Cameron McKenna)
THE CONSULTANT
Rupert Merson
Companies keen to recreate the magic of the early years or give a reassuring sense of the personal will often turn to personalities. At the heart of Virgin is a man with a beard. If a live person is not available, a dead one will do -- witness Colonel Sanders or Lenin; or even a fictional one such as Ronald McDonald.
Product association is slightly different. Sharon Stone has been useful because we all know she's older than we think, and Dior has been trying to shift anti-wrinkle potions. Ms Stone's days were always numbered, of course. Dior existed long before her, and would have disposed of her long before she began to look like Mt Rushmore.
Where the association is between personality and brand, severing the ties can be problematic. Where the association is between person and product and is skin-deep the relationship can be terminated easily. Thus, the only face Dior and the Chinese will be losing over this episode will be Ms Stone's.
(The writer is a partner at BDO Stoy Hayward)
THE ACADEMIC
Roger Martin
The pitfalls are limited because the good news about celebrity endorsement is that companies always have the option of sacking the celebrity and propagating the following sort of message: "We had no reason to believe that Sharon Stone would say something as ridiculous as she did. But of course, we all know that she is a celebrity because of her beauty, not her brains. So, we are very sorry for the harm she has caused. We have sacked her immediately and will have nothing more to do with her."
As long as Dior distances itself from Ms Stone and gets a new relatively mindless but distinctively beautiful celebrity, it will be just fine. In essence, both the customers and the company wink at one another. Customers understand it is silly for them to be influenced by a star who is promoting the product solely because he or she is getting paid to do so, so they are not too fussed by the celebrity misbehaving. And the company understands that it does not really matter which celebrity it uses and simply apologises and serves up another.
(The writer is the dean of the Rotman School of Business at the University of Toronto)
THE ADVICE
THE ADVERTISING AGENT
Hamish Pringle
M'learned friends will no doubt point out how essential it is to have a proper signed contract with "death and disgrace" clauses in it. However, agency professionals will advise against invoking such clauses too hastily if the brand owner wants to be a long-term employer of stars. Draconian action will lodge in the memories of the agents to the stars and the company may find it hard to enlist a celebrity worth having in future.
It is when the star crosses the line of legality that most brand owners do invoke the clause. Justifying the relationship is so much harder if the star is convicted of using Class A drugs, theft or violence. However, a faux pas such as using a competitor brand in public, or "mis-speaking" about a sensitive issue, creates a media storm in a teacup that soon blows over, often having added valuable publicity to the relationship.
The key thing when a problem occurs is for both company and celebrity to take ownership of it and ensure their apologies are consistent and sincere. Denial and cover-ups are deadly as they give the story a second wind.
(The writer is director-general of the Institute of Practitioners in Advertising and author of Celebrity Sells)
THE LAWYER
Susan Barty
Endorsement by a celebrity whose image matches a product's core brand values undoubtedly works. Unfortunately, celebrities may not always act with the best interests of the brand in mind or the celebrity may suffer a run of bad luck. Either way, a link between the celebrity's real-life profile and the endorsed brand is unavoidable.
Conduct due diligence on the celebrity and do not underestimate the value of media training and education about the brand. The contract can be the most important document for the success of a campaign. Many impose minimum obligations as to conduct, entitling termination if behaviour falls below an agreed standard. The contract should also clearly identify what will give the right to terminate or suspend the contract, and the rights of both parties after termination. This may include payment penalties for the celebrity.
In the event of a PR disaster, the brand can then either distance itself or work with the celebrity to remedy the situation quickly and efficiently. But make sure you have options available to give you flexibility. The key is to plan carefully, assess risk, then be innovative.
(The writer is a partner at CMS Cameron McKenna)
THE CONSULTANT
Rupert Merson
Companies keen to recreate the magic of the early years or give a reassuring sense of the personal will often turn to personalities. At the heart of Virgin is a man with a beard. If a live person is not available, a dead one will do -- witness Colonel Sanders or Lenin; or even a fictional one such as Ronald McDonald.
Product association is slightly different. Sharon Stone has been useful because we all know she's older than we think, and Dior has been trying to shift anti-wrinkle potions. Ms Stone's days were always numbered, of course. Dior existed long before her, and would have disposed of her long before she began to look like Mt Rushmore.
Where the association is between personality and brand, severing the ties can be problematic. Where the association is between person and product and is skin-deep the relationship can be terminated easily. Thus, the only face Dior and the Chinese will be losing over this episode will be Ms Stone's.
(The writer is a partner at BDO Stoy Hayward)
THE ACADEMIC
Roger Martin
The pitfalls are limited because the good news about celebrity endorsement is that companies always have the option of sacking the celebrity and propagating the following sort of message: "We had no reason to believe that Sharon Stone would say something as ridiculous as she did. But of course, we all know that she is a celebrity because of her beauty, not her brains. So, we are very sorry for the harm she has caused. We have sacked her immediately and will have nothing more to do with her."
As long as Dior distances itself from Ms Stone and gets a new relatively mindless but distinctively beautiful celebrity, it will be just fine. In essence, both the customers and the company wink at one another. Customers understand it is silly for them to be influenced by a star who is promoting the product solely because he or she is getting paid to do so, so they are not too fussed by the celebrity misbehaving. And the company understands that it does not really matter which celebrity it uses and simply apologises and serves up another.
(The writer is the dean of the Rotman School of Business at the University of Toronto)