External Spokespeople: Risk or Reward?
When a celebrity or influencer aligns themselves with a brand, they also align themselves with that brand identity and what they stand for. It also works the other way: brands open themselves up to the identity of the external spokespeople they hire. We all remember Jared from Subway and his ultimate arrest.
While not all endorsements fall by the wayside, attaching a carefully curated brand to an external source can prove disastrous. OJ Simpson was the face of Hertz for nearly 20 years when he was arrested on murder charges. That endorsement deal quickly ended following the notorious criminal trial. Paula Deen is another example - after she was exposed for her racially charged rhetoric, her personal brand faced a backlash. The brands with which she had deals - Walmart, Smithfield Foods, Target, QVC, Home Depot, and more - quickly distanced themselves by terminating their contracts. Although these incidents both occurred outside of this decade, the after-effects of such a PR nightmare have morphed into something much greater because of the large impact social media and popular culture have on the perception of public figures.
The now infamous phenomenon of ‘cancel culture’ has magnified the risk associated with endorsement deals and aligning with external spokespeople. Audiences are holding brands to higher standards. If a celebrity endorsing a brand happens to find themselves under fire from the media from an insensitive comment they made in the past, the brand sponsoring them could be considered at fault as well. Companies today have to take everything into consideration regarding potential sponsorship opportunities as one misstep could lead to their brand being equated with sexual assault allegations, racist remarks, or prejudice against minority groups.
Brands are being held accountable for their endorsement choices, both good and bad, perceived through the lens of modern culture. As the Black Lives Matter movement gained momentum, for example, consumers are evaluating brands’ efforts to incorporate diversity into their normal advertising and marketing activities. Brands that proactively promote equality and take these initiatives seriously are held in higher regard.
Louis Vuitton Moët Hennesy (LVMH) is an example of a brand that has successfully demonstrated its commitment to diversity. LVMH is the parent company to many exclusive brands such as Christian Dior, Veuve Clicquot, and Rimowa. In early 2018, Virgil Abloh was named the artistic director of Louis Vuitton’s menswear collection, which has become wildly successful and extremely sought after. Abloh is the first Black designer to head Louis Vuitton’s men's division, pushing his creativity from his own brand Off-White into arguably one of the most influential high-fashion houses. Abloh has helped change how men’s fashion is presented during fashion week by booking a large range of people from many different backgrounds to model the season’s fashions. This move has pushed consumers to question why this has not been done before and forced a microscope on other brands that are not emulating exclusivity. LVMH is also home to Rihanna’s brand Fenty, which happens to be the first-ever brand founded by a black woman under the LVMH umbrella. Bernard Arnault, chairman, and chief executive of LVMH, has made an effort to promote inclusivity and diversity within his billion-dollar conglomerate in order to ensure long-term growth and success.
For LVMH, the individuals they selected to be the face of their various brands ultimately proved successful in part because the decision was motivated by culture as much as it was fame. Virgil, for example, came up with Kanye West, a creative-driven individual who had deep ties to urban and pop culture. His appointment to Louis Vuitton was a statement of diversity but also drove the brand in a new direction. The same can be said for Rihanna: more than a pop star, she is intertwined in modern culture bridging a gap between two distinct communities. The choices were intentional and served a clear, beneficial purpose.
The endorsements or alignments that carry the greatest risk are those that lack such purpose and focus on insubstantial relationships such as fame. If you choose a “face of the brand” based on fame alone, the opportunities that it backfires are great.
In 2014, a video surfaced showing Ray Rice, pro-football player for the Baltimore Ravens, punching his then-fiancee in the head and knocking her out cold in an elevator in Atlantic City, NJ. The NFL quickly terminated his contract after TMZ leaked the footage from the elevator camera, and many brands who held endorsement deals with Rice terminated their contracts with him immediately. VertiMax, a jump training program, was not so quick to terminate their contract with Rice though, as CEO Michael Wehrell initially stood by Rice despite seeing the video firsthand and wanted to wait until more information was released regarding the situation before making any decisions regarding any current contracts. The company soon announced that their goals did not align with the present relationship they shared with Rice and quickly dropped him.
When a brand such as VertiMax stands by their client and their wrongdoings, specifically with Ray Rice, it sends a subliminal signal that reads, “by not severing our relationship with Rice, we condone domestic violence and assault, and put our contract with our client above the hearsay.” This tactic may be more appropriate in a different context where such incriminating information is not public or still under investigation, but regardless, aligning your brand with such controversy and negative press without taking the proper precautions of protecting your brand's credibility is not highly suggested.
