Filed under: Comment
Remember a while back I talked about that ridiculous ad Eva Longoria had done for Magnum Ice Cream?
Well it’s just dawned on me that ever since our little Latino babe became an Ice Cream Ambassador, she’s morphed into a frumpy, middle aged soccer Mom …
BEFORE
AFTER
Coincidence? I don’t fucking think so …
If I were her hubbie, I’d be suing the hell out of Magnum and getting her down to Weight Watchers pronto.
OK … OK … so she ‘claims’ her weight gain is to do with her role on the program “Desperate Housewives”, but regardless of that, it’s hardly great for Magnum given her fat face is all over the gossip magazines while her once svelte like bod promotes their high-fat pleasure
Goes to show that celebrity endorsement requires more exploration than simply aligning with a [once] pretty face.
[PS: Germaine Greer, you can send your hate mails to either cynic, Google or Sunshine – there’s a tray for them at each office π]
30 Comments so far
Leave a comment
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
” Goes to show that celebrity endorsement requires more exploration than simply aligning with a [once] pretty face.”
mad man meets jenna jameson. I think u got something Rob
Comment by niko November 12, 2008 @ 7:49 ami got divorced for less than this campbell. well done you sexist fuck
eva is a fucking hottie isnt she. sorry i mean “was” a hottie.
dont slag me off ladies, campbell the neanderthal man started it
Comment by andy@cynic November 12, 2008 @ 8:38 amIt was nice knowing you.
Comment by John November 12, 2008 @ 9:23 amMary would like a quiet little word Robert.
Comment by George November 12, 2008 @ 11:12 amOh shit.
PS: So it was nice knowing me was it John? Pity the feeling wasn’t mutual. π
Comment by Rob November 12, 2008 @ 11:22 amif she’s a frumpy middle-aged soccer mum, i’m martha dumptruck from heathers…
rob – please re-calibrate your fat chick/skinny chick standards. mary – go for the jugular π
Comment by lauren November 12, 2008 @ 11:33 amIt’s not my fault I’m an Adonis.
[I can’t even write that with a straight face!]
Comment by Robert November 12, 2008 @ 11:35 amDespite slipping into 1950’s male mode, you raise a valid point about celebratory endorsement.
Too many companies seem to choose their brand ambassadors based exclusively on physical appearance, fame and lifestyle habits without acknowledging their day jobs may require them to undertake activities that undermines the carefully constructed image the brand chose them for in the first place.
It would be nice to think people could separate fact from fiction but with evil people like you planting negative seeds in our innocent minds, it is something that should be considered in the endorsement planning stage.
Comment by Lee Hill November 12, 2008 @ 12:56 pmThanks Lee. I think. π
Comment by Rob November 12, 2008 @ 1:59 pmHi Five (^5)
Best laugh of the day. Satire is where this blog needs to be Fo Sho.
Comment by Charles Frith November 12, 2008 @ 2:29 pmCharles is back, things are looking up.
Back to Robert.
I didn’t realise the movie “Dead man walking” was a biography of your life, or your life up to the point Mary gets her hands on you. I mean gets her hands around your neck. (Hello Mary, I hope you and the girls are really well.)
I agree with Charles, I like these posts but I am worried Lee can see some business value in them. π
Comment by Bazza November 12, 2008 @ 2:42 pmYou finally say something sensible Baz – things ARE looking up with lovely Charles being back.
Hello matey – great to see you, it’s been too long and I hope you’re good, happy[ish] and well.
And Baz, may I point out Lee is a very senior businessman in a company that is widely regarded as a pioneer in brand and customer loyalty development so you should spend less time taking the piss and more bowing down to his brilliance – especially when it relates to something I said π
Comment by Rob November 12, 2008 @ 3:17 pmRob , Now you corrupting & taking over Google too ! [ mail tray ]
Comment by bhaskar November 12, 2008 @ 3:42 pmI’m trying Bhaskar … I’m trying very hard … π
Comment by Rob November 12, 2008 @ 3:44 pmThe only ambassadors worth having are your employees and customers.
Celebrity endorsement is futile because you’re layering your product/service with another “brand” which is human and therefore unlikely to be consistent or coherent and secondly will elicit different reactions in different customers. Companies must remember that the unknown numbers of people they piss off will weigh heavily on the effectiveness balance sheet (TM pending).
Comment by John November 12, 2008 @ 6:38 pmYou are right Mr Dodds – however that is sadly not as clear cut in Asia, especially Japan, where the majority [and I’m talking people, not only brand owners] still believe a famous person associating with a brand is a sign of quality and aspirational value.
I know … I know … don’t shoot the messenger!
[This issue is without doubt one of the most frustrating elements of working in Asia, and I consider myself lucky I’ve only had to do 2 bits of work with some 2-bit ‘star’. Saying that – I would happily of changed my tune if I’d got VB to agree to having Angelina Jolie front the campaign we were developing, but as we all know, life’s just not fair – ask any investment banker π ]
Comment by Rob November 12, 2008 @ 6:49 pmAre we sure that this research is correct and not concocted by agency people who long to meet celebrities?
Comment by John November 12, 2008 @ 7:09 pmHave to disagree there Mr Dodds. Perhaps ambassador is not the right word, but celeb stewardship is of value to clients and to the public.
If you live in south central LA for instance, who you gonna look up to? fellow customers (not likely) employees will most likely have some biases (they think u bad news).
So in a way the Powerfull “I did it so can you” rolemodel template is very usefull if done correct.
Stephon Marburry (b-bal player of NY Knicks) did it the right way, he attached his name to 10 dollar sneakers. thus giving kids cool affordable shoes)
Granted it’s a different take than selling icecream, but the point is, common folk don’t see the brand Longoria or Jolie, they see what they want to see in her (latina, strong chick, mother of 8, what ever). Succesfull/flawed people are a mirror and a goal.
So if done correct, with the correct backstory and action that is about more than the product, but also about culture, I say go for it. And if flawed, well that’s ok. Most people will forgive a good person for a fuck up. Humans are like that.
Comment by niko November 12, 2008 @ 7:11 pmIf every ad featured Angelina I’d be inclined to agree with you Dodds, but some of the ‘stars’ that brands shove in the faces of the unsuspecting customer means that sadly there is abit more to it than just autograph hunting.
Mind you, there was that legal case involving an employee of Dentsu who said his boss wanted the Russian tennis player in the Canon ads because he fancied her. Plus the times Andy took 2 rather glam ‘stars’ out for lunch under the guise of discussing a television campaign when really he thought he was going to get his end away.
And no, he wasn’t married at the time.
As for you Niko, I agree – but I still think it’s the ‘lazy brands’ way to create awareness because those who create will always be more powerful than those who simply borrow. Then Toyota are the biggest car company in the World and their whole mantra has been ‘perfecting others brilliance’ so it shows I’m talking absolute twaddle. As usual.
Comment by Rob November 12, 2008 @ 7:19 pmNiko
1) $10 shoes were the true differentiater there and if he endorsed a product he was wearing on court (he’s a user of the product for real).
Comment by John November 12, 2008 @ 7:25 pm2) Human forgiveness is one thing, forgetting is another.
That’s what the judge said to you isn’t it Mr D?
[That’s point ‘2’ not number 1, obviously!]
Comment by Rob November 12, 2008 @ 7:32 pmHe had a faulty brand perception.
Comment by John November 12, 2008 @ 7:38 pmIs that what the women say to you too?
PS: Charlie the explorer is back – have you said hello? [That is not connected to the sentence at the beginning of this comment!]
Comment by Rob November 12, 2008 @ 7:49 pmMr D, u saying Eva don’t lick a Magnum for real?
Comment by niko November 12, 2008 @ 7:57 pmMr D, u saying Eva don’t lick a Magnum for real?
Comment by niko November 12, 2008 @ 7:59 pmI’m saying that licking chocolate-covered ice-cream is not her chief purpose in life. Certainly not from her perspective.
Comment by John November 12, 2008 @ 9:31 pmstop trying to be mr sensitive new age fucker dodds its embarrassing and still wont get you doing the beast with 2 backs. not with a human. even a fucking sheep might have to think twice. unless theyre welsh. welsh sheep are slappers. i hear
Comment by andy@cynic November 12, 2008 @ 10:05 pmandy’s right you know..so I’ve heard as well
Comment by tom Jones November 12, 2008 @ 10:24 pmi’d still fuck her but*
*please note this is not a double t
Comment by TT November 13, 2008 @ 2:28 pmAnd this is why the account now lives with us…hopefully no more celebs.
Comment by Will November 13, 2008 @ 8:53 pm