President Shill? Trump as Brand Influencer

I took a little break from blogging, and look what happens. The United States elects a man who knows nothing but self promotion, and profiting off the backs of others, to their highest office.

Trump is not yet in office, but is using his very big soap box to manipulate stock prices as a bully tactic to tell aerospace companies and automakers where to put their factories. (Although the corporations themselves say it's a coincidence.)

How is this a matter for "The Ethical Adman"? Look above. The PEOTUS is literally telling his followers to buy certain brands, as if he is a paid shill. Is this also "unpresidented"?

Welcome to the United States of America in the reality television era, where someone like Kylie Jenner can make up to $300,000 per post as a paid "brand influencer" on Instagram. Trump is part of this world — a world television viewers and social media users created — and he seems to think it's his job as future leader of the "free world" to punish and reward brands depending on whether they support him politically or not.

The most worrisome part of this phenomenon is Trump's open hostility towards certain media outlets. He used his first press conference since the election to call BuzzFeed a "failing pile of garbage" and CNN a "fake news site" from a position of ultimate power.

And that's not all:

Advertising, entertainment, politics, and the personal vendettas of a singularly unqualified president-elect: it's all one big stinking mess in 2017.

UPDATE: JC tells me that LL Bean has already stated it doesn't want Trump's endorsement.

The FDA treats Kim Kardashian's Instagram selfie as an ad campaign

Here's the text of the post, in full:

OMG. Have you heard about this? As you guys know my #morningsickness hasbeen pretty bad. I tried changing things about my lifestyle, like my diet, butnothing helped, so I talked to my doctor. He prescribed me #Diclegis, and I felt alot better and most importantly, it’s been studied and there was no increased riskto the baby. I’m so excited and happy with my results that I’m partnering withDuchesnay USA to raise awareness about treating morning sickness. If you havemorning sickness, be safe and sure to ask your doctor about the pill with thepregnant woman on it and find out more www.diclegis.com;www.DiclegisImportantSafetyInfo.com. 

It's been no secret that many celebrities' social media endorsements are for sale. Five years ago, I blogged about the brazenness with which their followings are bought and sold as commercial media.

Product placements are rampant on narcissistic selfie feeds with millions of dedicated followers, but somehow the United States government decided that this selfie crossed the line into pharmaceutical advertising.

After Ms. Kardashian posted this blatant endorsement to her 42.6 million followers in July, the US Food and Drug Administration sent a letter to the manufacturer of the anti-morning-sickness medication, demanding immediate elimination of the post:

The Office of Prescription Drug Promotion (OPDP) of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has reviewed the Kim Kardashian Social Media Post (social media post) (2015-0069-01) 1 for DICLEGIS (doxylamine succinate and pyridoxine hydrochloride) delayed-release tablets, for oral use (DICLEGIS) submitted by Duchesnay, Inc. (Duchesnay) under cover of Form FDA 2253. The social media post was also submitted as a complaint to the OPDP Bad Ad Program. The social media post is false or misleading in that it presents efficacy claims for DICLEGIS, but fails to communicate any risk information associated with its use and it omits material facts. Thus, the social media post misbrands DICLEGIS within the meaning of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and makes its distribution violative. 21 U.S.C. 352(a), (n); 321(n); 331(a). See 21 CFR 202.1(e)(5). These violations areconcerning from a public health perspective because they suggest that DICLEGIS is safer than has been demonstrated.  

... 

OPDP requests that Duchesnay immediately cease misbranding DICLEGIS and/or cease introducing the misbranded drug into interstate commerce. Please submit a written response to this letter on or before August 21, 2015, stating whether you intend to comply with this request, listing all promotional materials (with the 2253 submission date) for DICLEGIS that contain presentations such as those described above, and explaining your plan for discontinuing use of such materials, or, in the alternative, for ceasing distribution of DICLEGIS. Because the violations described above are serious and repeated, we request, further, that your submission include a comprehensive plan of action to disseminate truthful, non-misleading, and complete corrective messages about the issues discussed in this letter to the audience(s) that received the violative promotional materials. In order to clearly identify the violative promotional piece(s) and/or activity and focus on the corrective message(s), OPDP recommends that corrective piece(s) include a description of the violative promotional piece(s) and/or activity, include a summary of the violative message(s), provide information to correct each of the violative message(s), and be free of promotional claims and presentations. To the extent possible, corrective messaging should be distributed using the same media, and generally for the same duration of time and with the same frequency that the violative promotional material was disseminated.

This is serious stuff. By treating the Instagram post as a paid ad, the FDA is bringing the full weight of its authority not on citizen Kim Kardashian, but on the company that they assume paid her to shill for them. As I'm sure you know, pharmaceutical advertising is heavily regulated. One of the most onerous parts of that regulation, for advertisers, is the endless list of risks, contraindications, and possible side effects. The FDA points out specifically that the drug has not been studied in women with hyperemesis gravidarum. Omissions like this can can prove tragic.

Since this time, the Instagram post has been removed. Furthermore, the manufacturer admitted to media that it was a paid endorsement (duh!) but that Ms. Kardashian really does take the drug and it was prescribed by her doctor. The Independent quotes Thomas Abrams, the director of the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion at the FDA, saying that the manufacturer is complying with the warning.

An FDA Q&A page states that the emergence of social media has "complicated the job" of promotional regulation, stating "we generally do not have authority over statements made by independent organizations or persons—what we call third parties—unless they are acting on behalf of a company." They also mention that this isn't the first time they have intervened.

This should be an important wake-up call for certain advertisers using celebrities as "native advertising" channels. As the line between advertising and earned media blurs, the regulators have learned to simply follow the money.

Yes, that cool Iggy Pop Amnesty campaign was unauthorized

It happens all the time. And the creatives may have meant well. But just because you have a clever idea for a celebrity endorsement, and access to Photoshop, doesn't mean you can use their images without permission! No matter what the cause.

Last week, I wrote about this campaign on Osocio. With the tagline, "Torture a man and he'll say anything," witth Iggy Pop confessing, “Justin Bieber is the future of Rock and Roll,” The Dalai Lama declaring that “A man who doesn’t own a Rolex by age 50 has wasted his life” and Karl Lagerfeld stating “A Hawaiian shirt and flip-flops are the height of elegance.”

Clever, yes. But suspicious. While Iggy happily shills for PETA, The Dalai Lama seemed like a stretch. Conclusion: "What I’d really like to know is if the celebrities had any say in the use of their images."

Well, guess what? Pitchfork reports that Iggy and His Holiness, at least, had no say in the use of their images.

From Amnesty:

To generate awareness about our campaign against torture, Amnesty International Belgium French speaking section used an image of Iggy Pop without his authorization.
Even though we acted in good faith, we would like to apologise to Iggy Pop for having done so. 

The overall goal of this campaign is to try to influence people’s ideas on the use of torture. According to surveys, a shocking number of people believe that “torture may sometimes be useful” ; more than 36% of people even think that torture is justified in some cases. This is unacceptable, and we illustrate this reality with the message that a man who is tortured will say anything in order to escape this awfulness, using provocative images and statements to attract public attention. We would therefore also like to make it clear that the statement attributed to Iggy Pop that he believes Justin Bieber is the future of rock and roll does not represent Iggy Pop’s personal opinion but was part of the creative process for this campaign and was intended to be ironic.

For the launch of our latest campaign against torture, the image of His Holiness the Dalai Lama was used by our section (Belgium french speaking) and was widely shared on the internet. Although the Dalai Lama was not the target of the campaign, we understand that this image has caused particular concern in some quarters. We have therefore chosen to remove this picture from our digital material in order not to cause any further upset and ensure people’s attention remains focused on the real aim of this campaign : to stop torture. 

We apologise for any upset caused by this image.

Using celebrities without permission is common practice worldwide, especially in countries that don't have strong legal ties with the celebrities' countries of residence. But to hijack an image — one that, for better or worse, is the celebrity's brand — for an organization of such high prominence, for an important cause, and in an EU country, is idiocy.

Don't worry, Amnesty. I blame your agency. Who was that, anyway?

Mexico's breastfeeding campaign big on breasts, feeding not so much

Via La Grande

The text in the banner says, ""Don't turn your back on them ... Give them your breast."

The women are model and actress  Camila Sodi, TV presenter Cecilia Galiano, boxer Mariana "Barbie" Juarez and  actress Maribel Guardia. All are famous in Mexico.

NPR points out that while breastfeeding rates in Mexico are among the lowest in Latin America, the causes have more to do with a society that is not supportive of working women breastfeeding, and one in which formula companies ply their trade among rich and poor alike with little or no regulation.

Will saying, "Look! These sexy celebrities want you to give your breasts to your baby" be an effective way to turn this around? Unlikely. The whole idea that breasts only serve to turn us on is part of the problem in societies unfriendly to breastfeeding. This will probably only make things worse.

Here are some larger images of the ads, via mujereselsalvador.com:

1979: O.J. Simpson's 'third leg' sells boots in Playboy #TBT

When I was scanning an old NORML ad for today's Osocio post, I stumbled across this bizarre pre-Photoshop ad for Dingo Boots.

The copy, "the man's all legs" refers to the fact that then (as now) he held the record for the highest single season yards-per-game average in the NFL. But considering this ad was placed in a 1979 Playboy magazine, you have to wonder if the old "third leg" pun was in play.

People younger than me, who only know OJ Simpson from his murder trial, may not realize what a huge deal this man was in the '70s. I still have my original copy of The Book Of Lists that gives the results of an August, 1976, Ladies' Home Journal poll of children's "Top 10 Heroes And Heroines."

Here are the results:

Girls
1. O.J. Simpson
2. Neil Armstrong     
3. Robert Redford
4. Elton John
5. Billie Jean King
6. Mary Tyler Moore
7. John Wayne
8. Chris Evert
9. Katherine Hepburn
10. Henry Kissinger

Boys
1. O.J. Simpson
2. Elton John
3. John Wayne
4. Chris Evert
5. Neil Armstrong
6. Joe Namath
7. Henry Kissinger
8. Robert Redford
9. Gerald Ford
10. Mary Tyler Moore

Times sure have changed.

Thanks to Kerry for the ad

Are soft drinks now off limits for celebrity endorsement?

Design student spec work, via Behance

Pepsi has long had a close relationship with "pop" stars: David Bowie, Tina Turner, Michael Jackson (before his hair caught on fire)... and show can forget this conspicuous consumption of advertising budget?



It just seemed natural that musical celebrities would go for the big sponsorship money. But suddenly, things are changing.

Adweek reports that Katy Perry, she of the whipped cream bazooka boobs, is taking heat from health groups over a summer Pepsi promotion tied into the MTV Video Music Awards.

In an open letter to the singer, the Center for Science in the Public Interest and six partners compares today's soft drink celebrity endorsements to the cigarette ads of yore: "'Drink Pepsi and you can be cool like Katy Perry,' is the takeaway message for your young fans. 'Live for now' and worry about the health consequences later."

They also produced this video:



I'm no fan of pushing too much sugar on kids. But have these people ever seen a Katy Perry video?

Pakistan bans condom ad for all the wrong reasons

It meant well. Josh ("Strong") Condoms are an initiative from DKT International, a not-for-profit organization that supplies and promotes condoms in several countries for family planning and HIV/AIDS prevention. They run social marketing campaigns in DR Congo, Ghana, Mozambique, Brazil, India and Pakistan.

The Pakistan TV ad stars Mathira Mohammad, a performer and media celebrity known for her frank (for Pakistan) on-air comments on sexuality and male-female relations. In this TV spot, a man for whom Ms. Mohammed is, presumably out-of-his-league manages to marry her. In a display of sexism painful for Western audiences to watch, she becomes his doting and servile wife, attending to his every need. Why? Because he uses Josh Condoms.

Here it is:



While there are many things about this ad that I find annoying, Pakistan’s Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMBRA) actually found it "indecent". Last month, the regulator sent a letter that effectively forced TV networks to stop airing the ad.

TV.com paraphrases PEMRA:

This commercial is against our religious cultural values, PEMRA said. PEMRA Spokesman Fakhruddin Mughal said that there will be serious action taken against such immoral commercials. 

According to NBC News, the ad also took a beating on social media for trivializing the real need for access to contraception in Pakistan.

An Express Tribune blogger, Zahra Peer Mohammed, wrote:

I have seen many TV shows and adverts that reduce women through various means, be it money, good looks, status and so on. However, this advertisement has to be the most lewd description of how one can secure a woman’s affection through sex. ...
This disgustingly tasteless addition to the ad has no place in a conservative society like our own. The topic of family planning and sex education is taboo in Pakistan and this was a very important subject matter that needed to be handled with delicacy. 

This ad just made it dirty.

And here I just thought it was sexist and dumb.