Full time PR, part time cheerleader, Beth Kay, writes on Wolfstar Consultancy website:
Companies like Herbal Essences and CoverGirl have been giving out free samples at national cheerleading competitions and Gatorade sponsored ‘hydration breaks’ at cheerleading camps across the US. And it doesn’t stop there. Old Spice have been targeting high school football players and department store giant Macy’s Inc. sent templates of T-shirts to elementary schools encouraging students to design shirts and enter their designs in a contest.
The idea is that these teens are people that other students admire and look up to and are therefore ‘mavens’ in their own rights. And we all know that teenagers LOVE to talk. Nearly half of teens talk about personal care and beauty products, compared with just 29% of the general public, according to a study by research firm Keller Fay Group.
I personally hope that the trend catches on, most of all because I am a cheerleader myself. Anyone want to give me some stuff to talk about?…Anyone?… Prada?
I thought after the first paragraph she was going say how awful it was but she’s actually in favour.
Later, in the comments, she says:
Being only two years out of my teens I know that I for one would have no problem with people giving me free stuff when I was at school.
For the record, I don’t agree. And my comments are there too.
Also it is worth pointing out that while the examples are American this is an English Leeds-based consultancy suggesting, it appears, that such tactics are fair game for UK schools.
Anyone else any thoughts?
8 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 7, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Ethics, cheerleaders, schools and word of mouth marketing
[...] mouth being used for youth marketing has sparked off quite a debate both in the comments and other blogs. It has also flagged up quite a few issues, which I’ll deal with in [...]
April 7, 2008 at 4:49 pm
Beth Kay
Thanks for your comments Ourman,
I’m glad to see that I have sparked off a debate as I think that this is an important issue. See Stuart’s post on the Wolfstar website.
http://www.wolfstarconsultancy.com/2008/04/07/ethics-cheerleaders-schools-and-word-of-mouth-marketing/
I do have to point out however that I feel you have missed my sarcastic and humorous tone to the end of my post, as is found in most of my posts. (The reason I wanted it to catch on was to be taken with a pinch of salt)
Also I wanted to add that these were totally my opinions and NOT of Wolfstar and yes, it may be controversial but I loved getting free samples of products in my teens and its not as if I was being given cigarettes or alcohol. I feel that being able to trial a product and make your own decision about it is a better way of marketing to youths than the glamourised way that adverts that they see on the TV, push ideas of how we should be or look do.
BUT in terms of a professional viewpoint, I totally understand how ethics and guidelines MUST be followed and that the effects of what brands are marketing must be taken into account.
I have nothing against a brand sponsoring a SENIOR high school student’s football game, and giving them a free product at half time. But maybe because that’s because I’m not a parent yet.
April 7, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Abby
Interesting you should pick up on this when this is also happening
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/consultations/conDetails.cfm?consultationId=1547
It’s a shame that many students would only see this as cool “free stuff” and not the start of advertising and commercialism taking over their everyday life. Even if companies were to do something more worthwhile to try and win their future customers (I’m sure school uniforms with sponsors on can’t be too far away) it still rankles with me. In the library world we rely on the odd donation here and there, but these ‘freebies’ come from our library members or academics who want to pass on the information, and not from the publishers, or retailers with alternative motives.
April 7, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Seb Mysko
“Why should competition organisers regulate? That’s like putting pushers in charge or regulating drugs. They’re the ones that should be regulated against.”
A tad drastic, but we always enjoy and appreciate your comments ourman. I’ve joined the debate at http://www.sebastianmysko.com.
April 7, 2008 at 9:24 pm
ourmanwhere
Okay here goes…Beth - sarcastic and humorous maybe - but I think it is actually an issue that is of real importance. More so than just..duh..give me free stuff. As for these being your opinions and not those of your employers…it was on your employers’ website and the disclaimer came afterwards - but fair enough.
I am sure, however, that if a sparkling post by yourself was being picked up by the Guardian and being lauded as genius then your bosses would be basking in the reflected glory. Surely the whole reason of a consultancy having a blog is to display a) that you’re down with the whole blog thing and b) the range of personalities, expertise and opinions you offer.
if I employed your agency and you were working on my account then you would bring these ideas to the table. Again - fair enough maybe customers might welcome them.
But your views ARE the views of the consultancy. You are part of the consultancy, right? There might be other views too but yours is a valid one.
Seb - I don’t think it is remotely drastic. What do drug pushers classically and most hideously do? They hang around school gates trying to get individuals hooked so they become long term customers. They might even give out some free samples to create the habit. Perhaps if the cool kids are all taking drugs then others might try them too. Ring any bells? You’re trying to create a market, right?
Abby - I believe schools should be commercial free zones. Under resourced schools can easily come under so much pressure to push products in returns for necessary supplies. It’s also an excuse for government to under fund schools and force them to make up the difference in commercial tie ins where kids are not necessarily the beneficiaries.
It’s hard to imagine what products would be reasonable. Anything unhealthy that can be consumed only makes the situation worse regarding obesity. Anything fashionwise creates competition, peer pressure and boosts unwanted “pester power”. Make up? Really? Do we want our young people to be bombarded with the shallow messages of cosmetic companies.
Kids will be marketed to. There are a lot of good reasons to market to them. Give them condoms. Tell them to exercise. Tell them to vote. To fight racism etc etc. But rampant commercialism? No - I don’t believe it is reasonable. They get enough of that elsewhere and I don’t believe it is conducive to creating an environment to learn in and enjoy equality.
I mentioned No Logo and I recall some incredible examples in that book. In particular a kid expelled because he wouldn’t wear a sponsor’s logo. Is that reasonable. Can kids opt out of commerical tie ins or would there be too much financial pressure on schools to make them wear the Pepsi t-shirt or whatever.
Sorry, I respect your opinion on this but disagree. I understand the areas can be made grey but I still see it pretty much as black and white and am totally against it.
April 8, 2008 at 7:40 am
Stuart Bruce
Just to pick up on the point about the difference between a company’s view and its employees. You’re right as a consultancy people employ us because of our ideas, expertise, experience, ideas and opinions. But on 99.9% of issues we don’t have a corporate ‘opinion’. That would mean we’d have to have discussed it, agreed it and minuted it. On most things we haven’t, therefore we have a collection of opinions.
Beth didn’t try to ‘distance’ Wolfstar from the post, because she was asked to. It was her decision because it was the truth and she just wanted to clarify it.
As MD I’d defend Beth’s opinion to the hilt, despite the fact I have far more doubts about it than her, although not quite as many as you!
April 8, 2008 at 8:17 am
ourmanwhere
Again fair points Stuart. However, I would argue on one point: the blog is there to showcase your opinions.
Okay so you have now said it is not your “corporate” opinion - but you can’t have it both ways and it is on your “corporate” blog. You can’t promote yourself via your opinions and then deny them later.
I work in the public/political sector - and blogging may be an option for us in the not too distant future. There are parts of me that would welcome the freedom you have for people just to sit down and type and press publish.
That would never happen for us and that would lose a lot of the spirit of blogging as a result.
However, everything you write is out there and represents you. Good on you for backing Beth - and good on her for having an opinion - albeit it one I don’t agree with.
It wasn’t a conversational piece - it gave an opinion, not both sides, and it argued in favour of commericalisation of schools. There was no suggest that this might not be a win/win for all. You were promoting the practise not debate.
In the end your part of the “coversation” is either valid or it isn’t. You can’t promote yourself with the good stuff and distant yourself from anything more controversial.
However…THIS is good. The debate - the rethink - the “how do we make it work” regarding a corporate or a public sector blog. The piece was worth it (and it was worth it anyway) just for this.
Today’s newspaper might be tomorrow’s chip wrapper - blog posts just become Google fodder.
If she hasn’t already I’d love it if Beth would read No Logo. Then again you might want to hide it from her - it was after reading it than I stopped working for an agency and took off around the world. But I think it is as valid a bible for a marketeer as it is for a activist.
April 8, 2008 at 9:46 am
minxlj
“It’s a shame that many students would only see this as cool “free stuff” and not the start of advertising and commercialism taking over their everyday life.”
That’s exactly my thought - companies know damn well how much purchasing power children and teens have, especially over their parents. A fair amount of them also have a lot of disposable income, and this is a godsend for commercial companies. Too many kids are growing up greedy, obsessed with material possessions yet lacking the basic life lessons they should have - manners, decency, empathy. Kids’ social lives revolve around who has what, how much it cost and how much they can get - it was the same when I was at school and I detested it then! There are a few companies promoting worthy causes and issues with their products, sure, but it’s still based on profit. I’d like to see more companies rewarding decent kids and not just throwing free stuff at them to raise their own profits.
“The idea is that these teens are people that other students admire and look up to and are therefore ‘mavens’ in their own rights.”
Again, giving free stuff to the cheerleaders, the popular kids…what about the lonely ones, hiding at the back? The kids in need of help? This is adding to the undue attention that certain groups of teenagers get whilst others remain ignored.
Another thing that bugs me is celebrities being given free stuff. I read something the other week that George Clooney took a shot at these people telling them to give the freebies to people who need and deserve them. He’s doing the decent thing, yet it’s sad that he seems to be in the minority.