Introduction
Shock advertising is one of the effective marketing instruments, which is aimed at addressing particular social issues while advertising the brand, and Benetton is of the clothing is one of the companies, which utilizes this tool (Yeshin, 2006). Despite having positive aims of increasing awareness of social issues, shock advertising might damage the company’s image and violate human rights. The primary goal of this essay is to evaluate the Benetton’s shocking advertising strategy regarding ethics, efficiency, and acceptability in the world. Speaking of Benetton’s advertising objectives, the primary goal was to inform the audience about the existence and significance of the social issues, which take place in the world. In this instance, the advertisements were aimed at reducing the spread of AIDS, negative outcomes of smoking, and child abuse (Lancaster & Massingham, 2011). Increasing the social awareness of these political and social matters was the primary goal of Benetton’s marketing campaigns.
Analysis
It remains evident that shocking advertising has both negative and positive effects on society concerning ethics. Nonetheless, one of the advantages is the ability to educate people about the existing social and political problems, as these issues play a significant role in modern society. Addressing these issues will contribute to the creation of awareness of the presence of these social and political matters in society. Despite having positive intentions, the advertisements might rather offensive to some members of society due to the presence of shocking images. It is apparent that using these advertisings might be one of the primary reasons for the problems with the law due to the violation of human rights.
In my opinion, these types of advertising are not acceptable for advertising purposes, as it creates misconceptions about the company’s values and vision. Moreover, as it was mentioned earlier, it questions the company’s ability to comply with the commonly accepted ethical principles, as these shocking images are used as an instrument to attract the attention of the public. Furthermore, some of the images might be offensive to the other members of society due to their shocking nature and portrayal of controversial situations, which take place in the world. It remains evident that modern society has to be aware of these issues, but it is entirely unethical to use images and social problems to attract attention to the company. Speaking of journalism, it could be said that it is an entirely different sphere, and it is supposed to deliver information about the positive and negative trends in society. In the end, I think that is relevant to use this type of image in journalism to increase people’s awareness of social and political matters. Nonetheless, the application of these images in advertising is unacceptable due to the questionable intentions of the company while showing them to the public.
Nonetheless, companies such as Abercrombie & Fitch and Calvin Klein also utilize the principles of shock advertising in their marketing campaigns (Larson, 2009).
These companies claim that these advertisings will help create positive changes in society and develop new perceptions about these issues. Additionally, the company’s create the perception among the customers as being ethical and caring about the changes in society. Nonetheless, the shocking advertisements often lead to scandals since a similar situation occurred with Barnado (Cozens, 2003). Nonetheless, the utilization of shocking advertisements is one of the ways to deliver the message to the members of the society. In this instance, the application and active utilization of this marketing instrument will be efficient for such organizations as PETA. Attracting attention to the cruelty of animals and prohibitions of these violations is one of the goals of PETA, and using the shocking advertisements will be efficient in this context (Larson, 2009).
Nonetheless, it seems that Benetton understood the vulnerability of these tactics, as nowadays their advertising campaigns do not portray the cruelty of the modern world and various social issues (Benetton Group, 2015). It could be assumed that the primary reason for the change is the understanding that the portrayal of the cruelty of the world is not the most appropriate approach to creating a positive image of the brand. Moreover, it remains evident that utilizations of the shocking images had an adverse effect on the company’s revenues and success, as it was the driver for continuous complaints and issues with the law. In my opinion, changing to the ‘normal’ advertising is relevant, as it will contribute to focusing on clothes as the key element of the company. Additionally, this approach helps avoid negative consequences related to possible lawsuits and negative publicity.
Conclusion
In the end, shocking advertising is an effective tool, which is actively used by some brands to promote their products. Nonetheless, despite having positive intentions, it causes significant damage to the company’s reputation and revenues and the members of the society, as the images are disturbing. In turn, companies such as PETA should utilize shocking advertisements since this method to deliver information corresponds with the initial goal of the company.
References
Benetton Group: Media and Press. (2015). Web.
Cozens, C. (2003). Barnardo’s shock ad sparks 300 complaints. The Guardian. Web.
Lancaster, G., & Massingham, L. (2011). Essentials of marketing management. New York, NY: Routledge Publishing.
Larson, C. (2009). Persuasion: Perception and responsibility. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Yeshin, T. (2006). Advertising. London, UK: Thompson Learning.