The election for the president of the United States has passed. Now we can finally stop seeing and hearing all of those negative ads. But can we? This week’s article is about marketers of consumer products learning from the political campaigns. Go to the link below and read the article. Write a reflective comment that shows you have read the article, expresses your views, and addresses my questions.
How do you feel about the tactic called “comparative advertising?” When is it appropriate to use this tactic? How would you feel if someone used the tactic against your company? How would you respond to the tactic? Describe an ad in which you have seen the tactic used. Go to the Dunkin’ Donuts site. I have provided a link below. Read their “comparative advertising” and tell me what you think of it. Send me one of their ecards.
Negative Advertising Article
Dunkin’ Donuts Site
15 comments:
I think the tactic called "comparative advertising is really stupid. There are certain times when tactics are appropriate but I dont think they should be. I would feel like my company is still good, because its just advertising and real customers would still keep coming so I'd still be in business. Most likely I would ignore the tactic because I find them very stupid. I really havent seen an actual ad that a tactic was used.
I think the tactic called "Comparative advertising" is sort of stupid. If someone were to use the tactic against my company I would get really mad. In responce to the tactic I would sabotage their company. I really have never seen an ad that used the tactic.
I think that the tactic called "Comparative Advertising" is a smart thing to do, because if you have a business and you have a rival company for a very long time, don’t you want to bring it down or at least earn more than it does? If you’re advertising something and you say something negative about your rival in your advertisment, then probably people are going to come to your company or business. Whether it’s on the internet or on buildings, it'll still get the peoples’ attention. If I had a company and I had a rival, then I would try to sabotage them.
I think the tactic called "comparative advertising" is smart because if I had a company and another company was competing with me I would try to bring them down and make my company look better so that people would go for my company. I would try to put as much advertisements on the internet, buildings and in news papers to make my company look good.
I think "Comparative advertising" is good for businesses who need a boost. I think that its acceptable to use comparative advertising during these tough economical times. I would be angry if someone used this tactic against me, but I would understand. If someone used this tactic against my company, first I would clear up the rumors, then I would fire back at the company. I've seen this type of advertising during the 2008 Elections. I saw an ad in which John McCain questions Barack Obama's readiness to be the president. I think Dunkin' Donut's advertising is humorous, especially the "Friends don't let friends drink Starbucks" e Card.
I think that "comparative adverstising" is good for a company because it helps a company reach a specefic standard that it needs to reach. I think that it is totally appropriate for these types of ads. I wouold be frustrated if someone made an add against my company like this because it would affect my company, but it is also a good thing because I would go and make an add against his company that is way worse than what he made about my company. I saw an add like this when McCain talks about Obama and how Obama was Muslim. This turned out to be a rumor so Obama needed to fix this so Obama made an ad against McCain, I would have done the same thing. I think that the Dunkin Doughnuts add is not tht bad, it is a bit funny and i think that starbucks should not take it in the wrong direction.
I once heard in a movie,Head Of State, that the best offense is to "kiss" the enemy rather than attack him. Like instead of saying that Barack's middle name is Husein so his the son of Saddam Husein show a video of Saddam Husein saying Yes We Can. These videos are more funny than negative. Negative videos make me sick because it shows how insecure they are.
I find that "comparative advertising" is smart but sleazy. Yes, it is easy to trash your rivals but it's not the honest thing to do. However, to succeed in the business world you can't always be kind; sometimes you got to do what you got to do to survive.
If it would happen to my company my only feeling would be frustration. I can not be mad because the truth is it is a dog eat dog world, especially in the business world.
'Comparative advertising' can be both a bad thing and a good thing. It is good because it may help you to detract buisiness from other companies and move it to your own. This will help you gain a lot more money for your own company and will put you ahead of your rivals. The bad side is, that if you do this, the other comany that you're comparing yourself to (Starbucks in this case) may be a big company with a fair bit of money that is willing to sue over this. They may verywell beat you in court and then all of that possible buisness is gone. There is also the risk of getting incorrect information which would also lead to a legal problem. I beleive that it is a better idea for companies to just advertise for themselves without putting down another company. It's safer.
I feel “comparative advertising” is not a right thing to do. It is appropriate to use this tactic when your company is really desperate for the money or just like the article said is would be good thing to use during economic crisis. I would really want to fight back if they did this to my company and I would not respond to their tactics, also I was curiouse can't they sue that company for making that kind of ads? I was really shocked when I saw one of the dounkin's ad, especially on the "Friends don't let friends drink STARBUCKS"
I was also surprised when I gound out that PC and Mac, Burgerking and MacDonald wre fighting with ads.
I think that the tactic called "comparative advertising" should be illegal, the reason is that companies should not say anything wrong about another company to get people to buy from their companies. I do not think that it should be appropriate at any time. If I owned a company and this tactic was used against me, I would definitely talk to the people that have to do with these kinds of wrong advertisements. I have seen this type of tactic used in many advertisements, especially for cleaning mixture companies, like “Dettol”, and "Fairy", and other Soup companies. However the ones that I have seen, they shade the name of the competitive commodity. They usually shade it, or do not put the name of it. I think that it is really wrong from them to advertise that.
Mr. Beyer I am sorry but I do not know your email adress as yet, which stops me from being able to send you one of the ecards that we have to send to you.
I think that "comparative advertising" is good because it prevents big businesses like Starbucks from gaining a monopoly in the industry and gives chances to smaller businesses. I think it is appropriate to use this tactic when a large corporate business has too much control in a given industry, in this case the coffee industry. Although I think that I will never be in position where someone does this to my company, I think that if it happened, I would feel annoyed, the type of feeling when someone blatantly criticizes or insults you. In response to the tactic, I would send out researchers to investigate whether or not the other company's polls were legitimate; then, I would do polls that would be a benefit to my company. One place I have seen this type of advertising used was on a prune ad in the US, where the ad said: "Ounce for ounce, bite for bite, better that bananas". I thought that this was a funny advertisement and it resonated with me, which is why I bring it up today. I think Dunkin's comparative advertising is quite bold, and I think it could be easily backfired by Starbucks, which, as we all know, is hugely popular.
I sent the ecard, Mr. Beyer.
The tactic called “comparative advertising” is appropriate when another company criticizes you. I would cry if somebody used it against my company. I would respond to this tactic in blowing up the company that did it. Dunkin' Donuts's comparative advertising is very lame.
I think that comparative advertising is what a lot of companies and political campaigners do obviously. Comparative advertising is strong way to change peoples opinions, because companies like dunkin' donuts are expected to make millions of dollars and use comparative advertising to eliminate other opponents so to say. I can't really say if it's inappropriate or not I don't think I don't know enough about this subject but I understand why companies are using comparative advertising.
Post a Comment