Running
head: SHOULD BRANDING ADVERTISEMENTS COMMUNICATE 1
AUTHENTICITY?
Should Branding Advertisements
Communicate Authenticity?
Tony Tien
National Central University
14 January 2015
Author Note
This paper was prepared for Expository
Writing course, instructed by Dr. Mei-Ya Liang
Abstract
Nowadays,
our living and society are bountifully teemed with diverse types of brands in
society. Brands are no longer just images of a corporation; they are the first
critical factor to distinguishing a company among others, which is directed by
customers’ inclination and brand’s authenticity. A brand symbolizes the idea,
culture, products and even the spirit of the owner organization by connecting
and amplifying audience’s memories with them. As a customer in the twenty-first
century, these visual effects of the enterprise brands are the least unusual.
Yet, daily consumption has become an indispensable citizens’ culture that it is
time for each citizen to explore whether the customers and marketers care and
examine the authentic value in brands. In hope of creating more equal and
mutually known consumption environment, we feel obligated to analyze situations
in both customers’ side and markets’ side for formulating authenticity in
branding communication with comprehension of consumption.
Should Branding Advertisements
Communicate Authenticity?
The communication of brands is
one of the most direct media channel to customers by incorporating intangible
ideas; normally, due to flooded information bursting into this era, people have
gotten used to receiving conveyed messages without deeply pondering the
implication behind unless the circumstance is needed (Joseph, 2014). However,
the shocking gutter oil scandal happening in September 2014 has smacked most of
customers in Taiwan into deliberation of thinking of the value of brand. The
myth of national brand’s authenticity has been dismantled since most of the oil
producers were labeled a national identification, i.e. Good Manufacturing
Practice (GMP), indicating the products are totally safe and under the
standards by the Food and Drug Administration while the truth turns out to be
the opposite. Such a collapse in Taiwanese industry of food has caused
questions emerging for rethinking: What makes customers blindly but totally
trust the brand or identification; why an inauthentic brad is able to relay so
much fake authenticity information to the audience; should we boycott the brand
communication?
While there are cases of
inauthentic brand pretending to be authentic, there are also cases showing the
failure of true authenticity. For instance, the Heinz is a food enterprise emphasizing
naturally manufacturing and eco-friendly products. The ingredients and
materials the brand expresses are all authentic. Much to astonishment, when
Heinz started selling new product, cleaning vinegar, the customers opted for
not trusting it. No matter how useful and green the new vinegar was, the Heinz
label came off as a sign of inauthenticity to most customers. The idea of a
ketchup company selling cleaning vinegar seemed neither appetizing nor useful.
It’s inauthentic to customers (Bastein, 2012). Here brings out another question
that why the truly authentic brand is not trusted by the customers either?
Since both cases lead to a negative end, we are offered the issue for discussion:
If a brand will eventually fail, then whether it is necessary for a brand
communicating authenticity or not?
The issue of branding actually involves
different aspects, including (1) the method of branding: the strategy and
tricks that marketers use in developing brands, (2) the mindset of customer:
their inner desire and interest, and (3) the necessity of branding: the perfect
timing for launching campaigns. Each of them is connected together and expected
to take much effort to figure the cause and effect. From personal perspective,
the crux lies in the way of communication and the aim for authenticity. There
could be several complex circumstances possibly affecting communication. By
analyzing detailed key factors behind and ahead the brand, we might be able to
distinguish the necessity of authenticity.
What is a brand and what it conveys?
According to The American
Marketing Association (AMA), it defines the brand as “a name, term, symbol or
design, or a combination of them integrated to identify the goods and services
of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of
others sellers.” Generally speaking, the existence of a brand is to convey a
clear business message of the corporation, striking a chord in target audience.
To achieve such successful extent, the message usually has to contain the trait
of introducing complete information of products and service, the confirmation
of credibility, the motivation of buyers, and concretion of user loyalty (Lake,
n.d.).
To cultivate a successful
brand, a wonderful design is the initial point. There's more to crafting a
brand's visual identity than just placing a name in a square and calling it a
day. Logo designers are in high demand, and it's for good reason — a logo is
often a company's first impression, one that can impact a customer's brand
perception, purchase decisions and overall attitude toward a product (Rothfeld,
2014). Several killer steps to design a brand, such as being unique enough to be
distinct logo out of cliché, understanding the story behind the logo to increase
audience’s recognition, and properly choosing the color to represent brand’s
personality and charisma, etc. should all be taken into account for building up
façade of authenticity.
However, with further category, a brand, like
a double-edged sword, could be classified as brand identity and brand image. As
the one able to be controlled and constructed by the enterprise, a brand
identity is consisted of the color, image, name and the value that a firm
wishes to build up for customers identified over competition; namely, brand
identity seems to be a company’s weapon for exerting in business battlefield.
On the other hand, with few right to control, the brand image reflects the
individual and collective evaluation and judgment regarding the performance of
brand communication. It derives from the customers and directly orientates
these outside environmental opinions to the firms, enabling them to map out the
direction of improvement to maintain brand status in the commercial
battlefield. For better knowing how the brand effects target or gets swayed by
opponents, the former, brand identity, is often under detailed examination, and
then adjusted by business to strengthen the durability of effectiveness.
In addition, provided by the
knowledge in the field of management, three intangible influence and effects
springing from individual or surrounding have deviated the way we cope with
information during communication (Hsu, 2011, p. 389): (1) the process of
deciphering: once when the sender and accepter hold different values towards
the messaged relayed, the expected effectiveness might be hardly reached and
understood; (2) interest problem: The selective perception and deliberate
neglect often occur once information accepter is not intrigued in the very topic,
failing the communication; (3) attitude and trust problem: if the accepter has
already made the prior hypothesis or chosen the side of standpoint, they would
get no trust in or not be willing to understand certain information due to the
bias bearing in mind, causing them to twist and wrongly define the sender's purpose.
According to the conditions above, sometimes
the influence of advertisement communication does not purely come from the
sender. The accepters also play a key role in the middle of communication and
realization of authenticity, depending on their personal condition and
cognition.
In short, the essence of communication is to
bridge the gap in the perceptions the target audiences have about the brand. All
creative, planning and execution tasks are meticulously carried out to ensure
high impact and effectiveness. No matter in which way a brand appears in the
era of information, brand is to dialogue with the crowd and communicate
realistically in order to leave an authentic impression on the target group and
to inspire the world around them with responsibility and commitment. The
effects it brings along with include corporate culture, incredible data and
message, sustainable and innovative products, trustworthy service, enthusiastic
employees and thousands of fascinating ideas for a lively future.
How do customers
shape authenticity in consumption?
The nature of authenticity in consumption has
been contested and viewed differently in customer’s side and marketer’s side,
i.e. one wants to purchase fine products they adore and the other wants to
profit money and reputation from products. However, the common desire to search
for authenticity in product and service remains the same. For customers, the assessments
of authenticity in objects underpinned by consumer's goal is based on the
concept that consumers actively seek for authenticity to find meaning in their
lives, and in abreast with personal goals, preferred brands and experiences
that reinforce their desired identity. Furthermore, there is widespread
agreement that authenticity is a socially constructed interpretation of the
essence of what is observed rather than properties inherent in an object (Beverland
and Farrelly, 2010). In other words, the different interpretations by
individuals come from personal goals, impacting which features of authenticity
is significant and relevant to oneself.
To understand different viewpoint towards
authenticity, Michael Beverland and Francis Farrelly interviewed 21 informants
from diverse background and showed them 100 pictures and brands with
descriptive questions. The overall and organized responses of participants
indicate that three primary and goal-inspired accounts — i.e. (1) senses of
being practical (e.g. whether the product is useful), (2) morality (e.g.
whether the product is organic) and (3) participation regarding individuals'
subjectivity (e.g. whether I have great experience) — that play a part in
processing images and messages. The individual expressions reflect more widely
held social views or dominant myths, demonstrating informants’ desire to
respond to the dominant sociocultural norm; prevailing cultural factors give
rise to the standards that are applied in the conferring authenticity to
objects, brands, and experiences (Beverland and Farrelly, 2010).
Ross, one of the informants in quest,
considered McDonald’s authentic despite that this corporation has been infamous
for raising debatable health issues and concerns. The reasons he thought of
McDonalds as authentic are the positive experience of consumption that allowed
him to get same product, such as hamburger or milkshake. No matter if the
product is likely to cause obesity, Ross felt confirmed to get a “real” product
and treated same way each time he wanted. Thus, in this case, his authenticity
towards McDonalds is contingent on his consumption judgment — McDonalds may not
be an authentic product when seeking something healthy, but it is when one
desires fast food. The differences of the experimental results depend on
personal experience, interest and value. Precisely speaking, these accounts are
viewed as being representative of self-relevant conceptualizations of
authenticity rather than as a by-product of personality traits. The consumers
construct and shape personally useful notions of the authentic in their
favorite and comfortable way.
Back to 2013, Lego corporation was accused of
fortifying racism of the Orient through its “Jabba’s Palace set,” part of Star
Wars franchise (see Figure 1). According to the claim of Turkish Cultural
Community (TCC), "The terrorist Jabba the Hutt likes to smoke a hookah and
have his victims killed… It is clear that the ugly figure of Jabba and the
whole scene smacks of racial prejudice and vulgar insinuations against Asians
and Orientals as people with deceitful and criminal personalities,"
implies Lego's "inauthentic" fabrication and value of toys. Through
diverse lens of culture, the cultural gap and collision easily comes under fire
of debate. What concerns me for Lego’s authenticity is its quality durability
and entertainment usage rather than morality occasion. Due to the past positive
experience with Lego's products since childhood, I still remain positive
authenticity for Lego, not impacted by implicit racism offends.
As a whole, it is inferred that authenticity
is uncertain when standards to distinguish between genuineness and fake turn
out to be not absolute but variable by individuals. The logic of such thinking
is that it counters presupposed universal standards. As the findings above
clearly show, different personal goals and standards enable people to find
authenticity in a range of objects, brands, and events that others may deem as
fake (Beverland and Farrelly, 2010). We could also identify the consumer,
instead of being passive information receiver, as an adept, creative, and
capable producer of authenticity against a background of societal norms.
How to manage
brand to preserve the values?
For marketers, the durable values of brand
amongst customers is the key to maintaining a brand’s appeal and authenticity;
otherwise, even an influential brand might plummet to nothing but the least
favorite overnight due to increasing loss of support of customers and endorsers.
The brand values (see Figure 2), as William Neal stated (n.d.), are the general
perception of customers referring to the assessment of physical and readily
identifiable features (e.g. the fast and standardized food of McDonalds),
intangible and intrinsic values associated with brand name (e.g. high social
status and eminence of Louis Vuitton), and the price or cost (the always
price-low of commodity of Wal-Mart) of the brand. To maximize the brand effect
to seize more profits, brand managements must take good care of these
components above, thereby knowing better to refine its marketing operation to
hold on to supporters’ loyalty and attract more recommendation.
Mainstreaming a brand to secure customers’
purchase and everlasting revenues might be the ultimate stage where brands
develop, but marketers must first understand the value system underlying this
adoption and then fit the marketing program to these values (Beverland and
Ewing, 2005, p. 385). In the case analysis of Dunlop Volley, it used to be the
most striking Australian hippest teen shoes brand in late 20th century.
Resisting alluring attempt to quickly capitalize on mass markets for bigger
profits has assured it to preserve credibility and loyalty in customers,
procrastinate the diffusion process into mass marketplace and prolong
profitable period in niche market to enhance brand repositioning. Four key
constituents are identified in case analysis to extend fashion cycle of brand
values: rejection of hard sell, being authentic, targeting alternative
distribution channels and the appropriate of timing getting into mainstream.
The strategy of marketers back then was to
target the small audience with high ability of economic consumption and, for a
period of time, they all stick to producing teen shoes and through brand
communication to make it applied to teenagers’ subculture, which is reflected
on the product’s design and advertisements’ slogan. It is Dunlop’s customer-led
view in marketing to make them get access to filter deeply into teenagers’
market segments before jumping into the mainstream mass marketplace and selling
out products to reap profits. As such, the Volley has achieved product parity
with Nike and other big brands for all but a few extreme uses, such as
professional marathons (Beverland and Ewing, 2005, p, 386 ).
Consequently, the marketers should manage
brand by interrogating brand values into customers’ consumption preference’s
life style as long as possible and provide chances to participate in developing
a new brand identity with creation of authenticity. Once customers feel
exploited and they perceive the brand diffusing into the mainstream at speedy
pace, they are likely to forsake the original preferred brand to go seek for
another “authentic” one that matches their taste the best. Hence, it’s decisive
to adopt a soft approach, according to Beverland and Ewing (2005), to view
brand as “a two-way conversation rather than a top-down communication exercise,
and most significantly, help the brand reposition in market properly to
innovate customers such as a desire for individuality, creative expression,
identification among peers and a search for authenticity” (p. 391). The less
commercial intent and more authentic compassion towards the communication
recipients, the possible it is to strike a chord for customers’ sense of
identification.
How to formulate
brand authenticity with comprehension?
Currently, the diversity in
contextual society has offered customers plenty of options during consumption,
further impacting their demands and emphasis in reference to corporate brands.
For illustrating the way to formulate authenticity, two ways of different
perceptions for customers distinguishing authenticity should be taken into concern:
modern and postmodern perception (see Figure 3). The modern perception,
according to Pedersen (2013), refers to customer’s tendency of external
objectivity in authenticity based on external excellence such as natural,
ethical, honest and sustainable features of objects (brands), while the
postmodern one constructing authenticity based on internal subjectivity of
individuals, including emotion, culture and personality (p. 2).
Thus, in order to create customers’ loyalty
and the demand for brand authenticity, companies need to know their preferences
and related resulting factors; marketers must gain an understanding of how to
create brand authenticity in modern and postmodern perception respectively
(Pedersen, 2013, p. 2). For the modern perception, it is sender oriented that
does not admit the consumers’ as being active participants of constructing
brand authenticity (Pedersen, 2013, p. 11). The only source for customers
perceiving authenticity solely comes from external qualities of brands in the rational
thinking process. With further distinction, products highly paying attention to
the heritage and utility comprised within a brand mostly belong to fall in this
perception category, such as fine wine or fine water. In contrast, the
postmodern perception deems a brand as simply not a lifeless brand but an
animated entity with characteristics. Customers start forming a holistic
perspective for the creation of meaning in a brand as something subjective
based on emotional values (Pedersen, 2013, p. 19).
In 2013, Coca-cola company, as an instance
for the postmodern perception, launched a commercial campaign with the slogan:
“If crazy is being nice to strangers- Then call me crazy- Have five everyone.”
In this message this company has transformed their core value into conveying a
sense of emotional advocacy for happiness that’s easy to be understood; most
significantly, the very advertising is no longer product-focused but tangible
in norm and interpretation absorbed by customers. Provided by the example of the
postmodern strategy above, Coca-cola has adjusted its marketing leverage to
construct customers’ positive affirmation and familiarity in their brand,
thereby formulating the authenticity. It is a highly contextual process in
which customers are vigorously co-constructers all along.
Gilmore and Pine (2007) once implied the
transitional change from the modern tendency to the postmodern tendency, namely
meaning customers today live in a world that is becoming increasingly staged
but also increasingly unreal, thus customers choosing to buy or not buy is
dependent on how real they perceive an offering to be (p. 1). The decisive
reason causing such change lies in the growing existence of social process or,
to be more specific, social constructivism. It indicates that customers are
getting used to incorporating knowledge and culture into making contact with
brands; the authenticity determined by individuals has a lot to do with
people’s interaction in the course of daily social life, which has challenged
the viewpoint of unbiased objectivity during consumption in the past era. The
marketers should value the nature of social constructivism to obtain further
knowhow about constructing real brand authenticity rather than always bragging
the brands’ excellence via those overused mass media channels.
Conclusion
Conclusively, in the future, the corporates
and marketers seem obligatory to think of customers as neither the modern or the
postmodern type, but instead think of understanding what the customers want for
their best in the relationship with corporates as “purchasing partners” during
consumption (Pedersen, 2013, p. 28). It is affirmative to communicate authenticity
in branding advertisements, but the key is grasping the perfect timing and
precise identification of customers’ needs. In other words, the effectiveness
to render authenticity realistically depends on what the customers buy from the
company and how they view the merchandise in mindset.
References:
Austin,
R. (2014, September 8). Taiwan reels from gutter oil scandal.
The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/
Bastein, J. (2012,
September 25). The road of authenticity is paved with false intentions.
[Web log post]. Retrieved from
http://drivebranding.com/the-road-to-authenticity-is-paved-with-false-intentions/
Beverland,
M., & Ewing, M. (2005). Slowing the adoption and diffusion process to
enhance brand repositioning: The consumer
driven repositioning of Dunlop
Volley. Business Horizon, 48, 385-391.
Beverland,
M., & Farrelly, F. (2010). The Quest for Authenticity in Consumption:
Consumers’ Purposive Choice of Authentic
Cues to Shape Experienced
Outcomes. Chicago Journals,36(5), 838-856.
Gilmore,
J.H., & Pine II J. B. (2007). Authenticity:
What consumers really want.
Boston, USA: Harvard Business School
Hsu, S.
(2011). Management. Taipei: Dong-Hua
Joseph,
J. (2014, October 1). Beloved brands connect emotionally to lead the pack.
[Entrepreneur]. Retrieved from http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/237890
LaCapria,
K. (2013, January 25). Lego Racism? Star Wars Set Said to Be Racially
Offensive. Retrieved from http://www.inquisitr.com/494973lego-racism-star-wars-
set-said-to-be-racially-offensie/
Lake,
L. (n.d.). What is branding and how important is it to your marketing strategy?
[About]. Retrieved from
http://www.about.com/
Neal,
W. (n.d.). Modeling Brand Equity. [Web log post].
Retrieved from http://www.sdr-consulting.com/article12.html
Pedersen,
T. (2013, December). Brand Authenticity in modern and postmodern
consumption. [Web log post]. Retrieved from
http://pure.au.dk/portal/files/69756266/Brand_Authenticity_f_rdig.pd
Rothfeld,
L. (2014, May 1). Seven killers tips for logo design. [Web log post]
Retrieved from http://mashable.com/2014/04/30/logo-design-tips/
