Trust, transparency and apology based ads – Tiger and Earl Woods and Toyota commitment ad.
Two recent apology based ads – by Nike and Toyota, try to reinstitute reliability and trust as part of a crisis management policy through very unique measures.
The magnitude of the issue is highlighted as for the first time transparency and trust outweigh product quality in corporate identity in the 2010 Edelman trust barometer.
Two important findings in the latest trust survey – in western countries trust and transparency in business influence corporate identity more than product quality. Trust in business has risen from 53% to 83%, while trust in media has fallen from 48% to 45%. Expert spokespeople and information sources are more trustworthy than messages through traditional media.
After a decade of recession, fraud, customers’ manipulations, repetitive breaches of privacy and trust, these numbers indicate a fundamental change to interactions between consumers and providers.
The new consumer is following trust agents of her choice to relate to a brand’s trustworthiness and reliability, therefore brands must use completely new forms of dialogs to gain credibility; all the more so in trust related crisis management situations.
Whereas in the digital world, building or abusing trust is facilitated by technologies and infrastructures, it is interesting to revert to the world of traditional goods and see this tendency as an indicator to a new kind of dialog initiated by companies whose trust and credibility barometers have dramatically sunk.
Tiger Woods is a golf brand. Nike is a mega brand. In the first Tiger Woods ad produced by Nike after the Woods infidelity scandal, Earl Woods, Tiger’s dead father’s voice is scolding him, while the ashamed Tiger Woods just stands there, listens to the questions poured, and doesn’t say a word.
The simplicity of a black and white ad featuring Tiger Woods wearing a Nike outfit, listening to his own father, should invoke a feeling of authentic remorse. Did you learn anything? What your feeling was? Asked the reworking of the father’s voice. But the scolded son does not utter a sound. Very powerful. You may like or dislike – but you can’t ignore the extreme effort, personal touch and powerful messages that were put into play.
Yet it raises questions that go beyond the reinstitution campaign of a fallen icon.
Tiger Woods is a business. A huge endorsement business that directly affects the companies who chose him. His personal acts cost him endorsement contracts with companies like Gillette, AT&T, Accenture and Gatorade that distanced themselves from him, while Nike, one of his major endorsing companies, stood by him.
Should a commercial company spear head the public “mea culpa” guilt driven star’s attempts to make amends? At the end of the day it’s about $ – lots of $. Tiger Woods is an industry. Nike’s standing behind its presenter during the crisis and their support of his comeback campaign, carry a very strong marketing statement.
Is an invocation of a dead father’s voice to scold a strayed son’s personal life an authentic trustworthy brand loyalty reinstitutioner? How questionable is the authenticity of past speeches of a dead person, enhanced by technological manipulations of voice recordings, in reframing an image?
What makes our trust? To what extent is a personal rehabilitation campaign sponsored and initiated by a commercial company trustworthy? Is it legitimate to work domestic issues with a dead father, who did not choose or approve his participation in this appearance, to enhance a commercial corporate?
Was it made to move us to re-embrace the Tiger Woods image with whom we do not directly interact, or is it a means to feed on the corporate identity and Nike brand?
What are the real relations between such a Nike produced ad and Tiger Woods’ redemption to commercial glory, now he is back to playing professional golf?
Do we buy it? Does it really matter? Do we hate it, resent the manipulation – but still talk about it and thus pave the way to what may seem the most extreme remorse.
Would this really enhance our loyalty to Nike, Gillette or any other brand Tiger Woods was endorsing at the time?
Another kind of apology advertising has been recently launched by Toyota. In the following commitment ad, Toyota tries to restore faith in their company, after the millions of cars recall, and promises to live up to its customers’ expectations for quality and safety.
This is a different ball game. It is no longer about sports shoes or shaving cream, it’s about quality, life endangering safety faults and a direct damage to the brand itself. Millions of cars’ recall for safety hazards are not like indirect projections on a consumers’ brands’ image due to an endorser’s fall.
Admitting directly we have messed up, harnessing all the workers as committed to amend and restore your faith in us, is a very straightforward act of owning the mistake and committing to do what is needed. This commitment ad, together with an open letter in the Washington Post from Toyota’s president that enhances the commitment ad, are very brave direct steps to reinstitute credibility, trust in the company and brand reliability.
No doubt the impact on consumer in an icon’s commitment to marital fidelity is a lot less endangering than the commitment to absolute future car safety. In either case it’s an indicator of a zeitgeist that cherishes transparency, trust and credibility – where companies must go to great length to show how meaningful they are in their declarations and marketing communication in order to regain trust.
