Whose brand is it anyway

Endorsers and brands navigate the trouble spots in their relationship under the unrelenting gaze of social media

Recently, when a video featuring actor Shilpa Shetty showed the PepsiCo-owned Tropicana brand in the background, it caused a stir on social media and some embarrassment for ITC since the actor is the endorser for its B Natural juice brand. Endorsing one brand while being seen with a rival drew flak all around until the company clarified that it did not hold Shetty responsible and saw it as a genuine mistake. However, the video raised a few issues about the do’s and don'ts of brandendorser relationships in an age when the harsh and hawkeyed glare of social media is always upon them.

K V (Pops) Sridhar, industry veteran and founder and chief creative officer of Hyper Collective says, “Morally it is wrong for brand ambassadors to be seen publicly with a competing brand. Apart from legal clauses, the celebrity also has a moral duty towards the brand and should endorse it while taking extra care that that he or she isn’t photographed publicly with competing brands.” He believes that it damages the public perception of the brand and obstructs the career of the celebrity. However where they may have got away with it earlier, today there is no escape.

Credibility is the key ingredient in a brand-customer relationship and comes from being consistent and true to the brands being promoted. But there are no laws to ensure that and it is only the fear of public outrage that keeps brands and endorsers on their toes, say experts.

The Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) recently issued guidelines which holds celebrities responsible for the claims made in an advertisement. It further puts the onus on the brand and the advertising agency to make sure that the celebrity is aware of ASCI’s code. Sandeep Goyal, founder, Mogae Media says, “Bodies like ASCI have no teeth. They can suggest a lot of things, but till there is a fear of the law, there is little hope for anything to stick. It boils down to self-regulation, which depends on how seriously endorsers and brands take their responsibilities.” Whether it is a conflict of interest as seen in the ITC-Shetty example, or accountability for the communication sent out by the brand, celebrities and ad agencies, self-regulation is the only factor at play.

Fear of public outrage and the possibility of hampering future ties with the brands are also driving endorsers to be more responsible. Brands are also getting tougher with the contracts they sign. “Nowadays, contract clauses include terms like not being photographed in the public with competing brands which earlier was not there. But one cannot really help if he or she is photographed with a competing brand and it is put up on social media to create controversy,” says Ambi Parameswaran, founder Brand-Building.com.

Digital media demands greater accountability from endorsers and brands. Harish Bijoor, founder Harish Bijoor Consults, feels that whether ASCI’s guidelines are taken seriously or not, there is a case to be made for the accountability. “Ultimately, they (celebrities) are the ones selling the brand, and it should be at least partly their responsibility to make sure the promises they make (on behalf of the brand) hold water,” he says.

Ambi points out that celebrities must be more careful about what they post on public platforms. “It shouldn’t have brands that are in conflict with the ones the person endorses. In case it happens, someone (the company) needs to remind the person and discipline him or her,” he says. More than the brands however, fans on social media are the ones doing the disciplining today, pushing endorsers and their image management teams into a state of constant alertness.

The constant threat of outrage is making the relationships between brands and endorsers more fraught with risk. Both are being more demanding in their agreements. While brands are drawing more stringent clauses into their contracts, celebrities are commanding a higher price and laying down more conditions for their involvement. Bijoor says, “Contracts are becoming more watertight when it comes to endorsers’ appearances and use of products. However, there are things out either’s control, and in that case, the two have to sit across the table and resolve the issue.”

It is not as if endorsers have not crossed the line when it comes to brand endorsements in the past, but today these are more likely to be called out and censured. For example actor John Abraham was the face of Yamaha Bikes, but featured in the action thriller Dhoom which showed him riding bikes from Suzuki. However, this was more than 10 years back and did not make news in a big way. Goyal says, “When Hrithik started endorsing Acer laptops. He was clicked carrying his Apple laptop (MacBook) multiple times. That’s a clear conflict, but not many noticed.”

Another issue in maintaining brand-endorser credibility is finding the right fit. “At times, it is evident that the endorser does not use that brand. That is where the communication matters,” Goyal says. He makes the point that fans are not willing to suspend all belief when it comes to endorsements as they may do for a movie. And it is the increased scrutiny from such fans that are going to drive endorsers and brands to walk the line between real and role play very carefully.

“Morally it is wrong for brand ambassadors to be seen publicly with a competing brand”

K V (POPS) SRIDHAR

Founder & chief creative officer, Hyper Collective