Ad Age reported today that Pfizer--"under Congressional pressure"--will pull its Lipitor ads that featured Dr. Robert Jarvik. The ads indicate clearly that he is a user of the product, but they are also somewhat misleading. I for one was always under the impression that he is a practicing cardiologist, not just the inventor of an artificial heart (http://www.adage.com/).
But then I also thought the ads gave the impression that he is a rower, a sport that we in Philadelphia take very seriously. Alas, not true either. The agency used a body double. But why did it take Pfizer so long to pull these ads? The New York Times first reported on this advertising snafu on February 7, 2008 (http://www.nytimes.com/).
Actually, I thought the ads featuring Dr. Jarvik undermined what they were supposed to do in the first place--achieve credibility for the product and establish authority. His reptilian features and arrogant manner did little to inspire confidence in me. And the use of a medical doctor to hawk product bordered on an area that lies somewhere between the Distasteful and the Unethical.
Now, whatever Pfizer hoped to achieve is further compromised.
Take away: Marketers beware of using endorsements--celebrity or otherwise. They often backfire or fall out of fashion or go into rehab. But if you do use them, for heaven's sake, don't compound the problem by letting a good storyboard idea overtake the truth.
The whole world is whining
-
For 25 years now, the Edelman PR company has issued its Trust Barometer.
This year, it’s all about grievances. It’s Festivus every day, the world
around....
15 hours ago
No comments:
Post a Comment