I guess my big question is what would you do if you were being pressured to remove your commercial from the air during a show? Is it worthwhile to submit to the pressure of parental groups? Why is it so necessary to respond to them and do they really have enough power to hurt your business?
-----------------
It is interesting that you mention Skins. Originally it was a teen drama in the U.K. The content in the British version has more sex, drugs, etc. However, the British advertisers and audiences did not have the reaction to the show that American advertisers and audiences have had. The British version of Skins was on TV for at least 4 seasons, if not more.
As an advertiser, submitting to pressures from parental groups is only in the best interest of the company. although the Tiger Woods example is different in many ways, it is similar to how the companies endorsing Tiger Woods reacted. As soon as Tiger made a mistake his sponsors immediately tried to "save face."
Businesses, especially ones who market to children and teens (like Skins sponsors,) want their product or service to be associated with a positive image. So when parents are angered, it is the parents that have the money. I guess I can understand the quick reaction by sponsors, however I have always been partial to the idea that, "Any Press is Good Press." Skins has recieved more notice from being provocative than it would have as a sub-par MTV drama.
No comments:
Post a Comment