Presenters

Authority figures are those presenters whom we trust or like because they suggest good, nurturing, protective parents: the care and wisdom of a kind "Mom and Dad." Surrogate father-figures and mother-figures in TV ads commonly give advice and recommend products to buy.

Authority figures are not only the actual leaders of a group (political and military leaders, business and corporate executives), but also the highly-visible celebrities of our mass media and entertainment (certain coaches, actors) whose projected image is that of trustworthy parents -- "Dad" and "Mom" -- at their best.

Testimonials and endorsements from experts common use authority figures giving good advice. When endorsements are genuine, and within their expertise, they are often very useful to buyers. It is very convincing when experts can say, "I like... I use... I own."

But, most endorsement experts can be rented.

FTC guidelines define testimonials and endorsements as any message which the consumer assumes "reflects the opinions, beliefs, findings or experience of a party other than the sponsoring advertiser."

Advertising researchers have developed the concept of two "celebrity" factors: (1) how familiar, or well-known (the FAM factor), and (2) how well-liked (the Q factor) is that person. The ideal presenter would have high ratings in both factors, would be both well known and well liked: for example, Michael Jordan. But, someone can be very well known or notorious, but intensely disliked; for example, Adolph Hitler has a very high FAM factor, but a very low Q factor.

Constant research of this type is done by advertisers before selecting presenters. Yet, problems will still occur: popular celebrities will sometimes murder someone, or get caught in a scandal, or have a bad season, and their endorsement value will drop.

Friend figures are those presenters whom we trust or like because they suggest people we would like to be, to be with, or be liked by.

Such "friends" can range from realistic "plain folks" that we identify with, to fantasies of being known and liked by the celebrities, the "beautiful people" we see on TV and the movies.

Even fictional characters and cartoon animals can be friend figures. Met Life uses the lovable Snoopy and Charlie Brown so that we "feel good" about that huge insurance corporation. More commonly, "cute" animals and favorite storybook characters are used to sell all sorts of merchandise to children. This intense use of movie tie-ins, licensing, and franchising of childrens' characters (by Disney, Viacom, and others) started in the 1990s and is likely to be with us in the future.

Presenters should be appropriate to the product and the situation, but especially to the intended target audience. Different audiences (old and young, male and female) will have different ideas about who are their friends. Bart Simpson is not the same as Winnie the Pooh.

Many ads directed at kids will use "cool kids," playing around, using realistic language, and seeming casual and spontaneous. Roy Fox (in Harvesting Minds) documents that many kids in the schoolroom audience watching Channel One do not realize that these presenters (the "cool" kids) are actually actors and their words are scripted (or the scenes are edited from many takes) to give the feel of being "just like us" or "on our side."

Fox also notes that in such ads with realistic-seeming scenes (when only one or two quick glimpses of a Pepsi, or an athletic shoe, are seen), many kids don't think that this full 30-second "slice of life" context is part of the ad itself, but as a separate little program provided for their entertainment.

Advertisers do not expect many people to make conscious choices based on such images of authority figures and friend figures, to act like robots and buy a product just because some hero uses it. But, we do subconsciously imitate and model our behavior after people we like and admire: "aspirational behavior" as the advertisers say.

When Nike paid LeBron James, the young 1st draft choice of the NBA in 2003, $90 million endorsement money, it was an unprecedented risk. But, as marketing Professor David Carter, USC, said about this $8 billion dollar market "that depends almost entirely on teen age boys" that "if the James endorsement contract helps Nike preserve just 1 percent of that market share, the company breaks even." Certainly, it's the fantasy dream of every hoops player in neighborhood pick-up games.

In The New York Times Magazine (Sept. 21, 2003), Margaret Talbot's article, "Why, Isn't He Just the Cutest Brand-Image Enhancer You've Ever Seen?" describes some of the new ad campaigns using very young children, such as Reebok's ads showing a little 3-year-old basketball player, Mark Walker, shooting free throws, which was "meant to be a 'brand-image enhancer' that would make consumers feel warm and upbeat about Reebok and put them in an 'aspirational' mood." Relating the ad blitz centered on skateboarding prodigy, 4-year-old Dylan Oliver, she notes: "In extreme sports like snowboarding and skateboarding, there are no eligibility rules like those in the N.C.A.A., which prevent a young athlete who has accepted endorsement deals from playing college basketball or competing as an amateur. There are no age restrictions at all."

"That's what American meritocracy means, now, after all -- not that any child can grow up to be president but that any child can grow up to be famous enough to be a brand-image enhancer.... Sponsored kids are 'walking, talking, living, breathing billboards,' as Mike May, a spokesman for the Sporting Goods Manufacturing Association, puts it."

Most kids are unaware of how such "friend figures" -- people we would like to be, to be with, or be liked by -- are so carefully calculated by advertisers to persuade us to buy their products.