December 6, 2010

Michael Jordan, The Old Spice Guy: Why Characters and Celebrities Can’t Humanize Your Brand

published this at 8:07 am

A Celebrity Doesn’t Humanize a Brand

cooltext443809558_authenticity

I don’t watch TV much, but lately when I do this Hanes commercial with Michael Jordan keeps cropping up.


Does this commercial “humanize” Hanes? Of course not. It’s a traditional celebrity endorsement and if anything, it makes the celebrity look smart and the customer look informed, but not so socially adept. We may want to ibecome a bigger fan of Michael Jordan, but do we want to join a group of the guys who act like the guy talking to him?

Is the commercial really about making a relationship with Hanes or with the celebrity who wears Hanes? I say Hanes built a commercial about humanizing Michael Jordan, not Hanes.

The Old Spice Guy and Mr. Clean

Last year when the “Man Your Man Could Smell Like” Old Spice Campaign came out, everyone I knew passed on it on to someone else. We sat at lunch at SxSW sharing it on our iPhones because the clever copy and innovative camera work made it fun and worth talking about.


And then, the Old Spice Team at Wieden and Kennedy knocked our socks off when the Old Spice Man started answering comments with YouTube Videos.

But did the Old Spice Man humanize the brand? Again, I think not. What is the Old Spice Man? A celebrity work for hire? A human Mr. Clean? A character we can make a relationship with?

We’re still not making a relationship with Old Spice or the people who work for the brand.

Why Characters and Celebrities Don’t Humanize a Brand

Being human is about having humanity — a benevolent compassion for other members of the species. That’s a job that doesn’t stay on a TV screen, in a magazine, or on a website. It’s a relationship that goes both ways. It responds to questions, finds solutions, picks up the phone, answers the email, and celebrates great ideas.

As much as they add personality and glamour, even a sense of the way that people who run the brand want to relate with us, characters and celebrities can’t humanize a brand. They are cardboard cut outs of people not real people we can form a relationship with.

Here’s just a few things they don’t do.

In other words, characters and celebrities don’t build relationships. They keep the brand conversation all about the brand. Humans who only talk about themselves, think about themselves, and work to promote themselves are considered lacking in humanity as well.

It takes real people who love their work and care about real customers, who work with real vendors, partners, and customers to reach real customer goals and solve real customer problems to humanize a brand.

Celebrities and characters don’t do that. People like @AmberCadabra @GeorgeSmithJr @ZenaWeist @vick08 @bsimi @connieburke and @LionelatDell do.

What brand do you know that’s done a great job at showing its humanity?

–ME “Liz” Strauss
Work with Liz on your business!!

Buy the Insider’s Guide to Online Conversation.

I’m a proud affiliate of

third-tribe-marketing

Filed under Marketing /Sales / Social Media, Successful Blog | 17 Comments »


C'mon. Let's talk!

17 Comments to “Michael Jordan, The Old Spice Guy: Why Characters and Celebrities Can’t Humanize Your Brand”

  1. December 6th, 2010 at 8:43 am
    Jennifer Windrum said

    Amen. Not only do they not humanize a brand, I think celebrities are becoming less and less effective on behalf of companies in our social world. I get so tired of people saying, “We just need a celebrity to help us get attention.” You may get that attention for the span of the campaign, but then who carries the torch? It still all comes down to real people. Real stories.

  2. December 6th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
    Connie Burke said

    Thanks for the very kind mention, Liz! I’m honored…and thanks for letting me know my humanity was showing ;-)
    Great post.

  3. December 6th, 2010 at 2:03 pm
    Mary McKnight said

    But the brands you are talking about do not use celebrity endorsements for a social purpose and nor should they. Hanes, for example, does a lot of outreach in the blogging community and has run myriad social contests and campaigns through their agency which have been extremely successful online. Just ask Simon Salt, he has managed many of them. Celebrity endorsements are more of PR strategy aimed at generating more non paid mentions/images of their product in celeb hands. All endorsement deals are written such that anytime Tiger wears athletic apparel or Britney sips a soda the apparel is Nike and the soda Pepsi. It’s a smart PR move for brands win saturated markets with consumer loyalties over .8. It’s not really a social marketing strategy. That would be foolish – what brand in it’s right mind would want to have Britney or Lindsay conversing with consumers or potential consumers on their behalf?

  4. December 6th, 2010 at 2:32 pm
    Nick Kellet said

    It’s old school to use celebs. Old media thinking. Easy comfy lazy thinking.

    Nobody has to be vulnerable. Nobody gets hurt. We don’t need to expose yourself on video. Use a star. #fail

    Apple does this well.

    Who’s better or to talk about ?

    Who is going to compel you to buy and more importantly to internalise the beliefs of the brand

    Star or Expert?

    Be brave. Risk screwing up, but get in early. Go real.

    Yes we like Celebs, so go make your own. From within. It’s probably you, so quit the excuses.

    Is Johnny Ives a celeb now. You bet.

    Wow. That hit a chord. I need a coffee

  5. December 6th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
    IronShirtMeida said

    I don’t think celebrities are viewed as “Human”.
    I think the idea of the celebrity endorsement ad is to Superhumanize a brand. to take it into a conceptual position that aligns with the ultimate performer persona that Michael Jordan embodies. or to align with the ultimate in masculinity that is the old spice guy.
    I think the idea you are discussing above about two way conversations and true humanization is the role of a brand ambassador or brand champion who doesn’t have or seek celebrity status. They just have to have some serious pull with effecting change in the brand based on customer feedback.
    Just my two cents.

  6. December 6th, 2010 at 4:12 pm
    ME Liz Strauss said

    Connie,
    Delighted that you took the time to notice. You are a favorite member of humankind. :)

  7. December 6th, 2010 at 4:17 pm
    ME Liz Strauss said

    Hi Mary,
    I love the ways that the companies you mention are being social. I don’t discount their efforts in those areas one bit. I’m sorry if I mislead you think that was my point. I chose two popular video representations because I see so many companies now starting to bring back or invent characters and such to layer over their traditional efforts without giving true social a try.

  8. December 6th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
    ME Liz Strauss said

    Hi Nick,
    So glad that you alerted me to your comment. You’ve added to the point I was trying to underline.
    I so love getting comments. It helps me understand what I’m communicating and what I’m not.

    Thanks so much.

  9. December 6th, 2010 at 4:25 pm
    ME Liz Strauss said

    Hi IronShirtMedia,
    I agree with your position. However, recent conversations and listening to presentations from folks who described their “characters” as ways of humanizing their brand is what prompted this post. I think in some folks’ minds — people who mostly watch the social media world and measure it rather than participate — the line is blurry. I was feeling that for that larger group the line needed to be better defined.

  10. December 6th, 2010 at 5:25 pm
    Lionel said

    Thanks for the callout Liz. I am honored. :)

    Right off the bat, I agree with your theory 100%… celebrities won’t humanize a brand.

    That said, there is still a purpose in aligning a celebrity type with a brand. It can help bridge the gap between traditional marketing and social media.

    Totally agree there’s no substitute for building internal brand evangelists who work on behalf of customers as you suggest.

    But for me personally, I welcome support from marketing campaigns that get people talking like the Old Spice campaign did. It did raise awareness to customers who were less aware of the company’s social media efforts. In a way, these campaigns can help legitimize the use of social media to more customers, and open the door for more in the way of marketing funding.

    Still a long way to go here, but the intersection between marketing and social media is part of the evolution that needs to happen.

    Thanks again,
    LionelatDell

  11. December 6th, 2010 at 6:19 pm
    Simon said

    If there is more than one person at the early stages of blog it just doesn’t look right. However once your blog is established it is a very good idea to have guests make posts. I have never been a celebrity sort of person and would probably be the last person to find out I was talking to some ‘A’ lister!

    What really humanizes a brand is the person that created the brand and their individuality, it has become quite easy to spot the spam comments that appear on our blogs these days along with the blogs they link to. There are very few situations where celebrity endorsement will have more than a negligible effect on the product.

    Thanks for a great post, it certainly makes you think about what you are giving out to people and if it is totally worthwhile.

    Simon

  12. December 7th, 2010 at 11:46 am
    Andrzej said

    Assuming that celebs are to sell the products by making people talk and think about it would be hard to make them “humanize” brand.
    But in this cases I’m not sure who is their target group even. Who would identify with them?

  13. December 7th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
    Karen Goldfarb said

    Not sure I entirely agree with you. Yes, those ads don’t necessarily start an in-depth human connection that feels real, but humor is uniquely human.

    Also, TV ads are not the whole brand. Attention-getting is what TV ads are all about. Be arresting. Be humorous. Be interesting enough to stop someone from changing the channel for 30 seconds. That’s a big deal these days. It’s still a valid way into a brand. And celebrities can do it, artificial spokespeople can do it. Is it the only way to go? No. But it’s not entirely devoid of humanity.

  14. December 7th, 2010 at 3:48 pm
    Stephen said

    To echo some of the previous comments, I don’t understand what humanizing your brand has to do with anything. Presumably, the goal of Hanes and Old Spice is sell more product and make more money as a result. And it works – Old Spice’s sales have jumped significantly since the new add campaign was launched. I guess I’m not sure what your point is here. Sure, they’re not humanizing their brand, but why should they?

  15. December 9th, 2010 at 7:49 pm
    ME Liz Strauss said

    HI Stephen,
    Don’t misunderstand I value and admire these commericials as examples of great advertising.
    But as I said earlier, some folks new to the social web, have pointed to this sort of work as an example of humanzing their brand. My point was to merely set that idea in the right light.

    I still find email and direct mail powerful marketing tools as well. There, too, it’s an art to bring out the brand humanity using those venues and tools.

  16. December 9th, 2010 at 7:52 pm
    ME Liz Strauss said

    Hi Karen,
    I would hope that nothing humans build with creativity and art is devoid of humanity.
    If the idea is to make the “brand” human and social, these may be a start but they don’t humanize the brand. They’re still broadcast not conversation. I agree it’s a big deal today to be interesting, but the human side is also to listen and to be interested.
    Awesome examples of what they are. But not to be confused with relationship selling.

  17. December 9th, 2010 at 7:55 pm
    ME Liz Strauss said

    HI Andrej,
    I’m thinking they fall short of what passionate humans would do. :)

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

C'mon Let's Talk!