"Buy the Way…" Insights on Integrated Marketing Communication

A new Payments Journal article finds recurring subscription models cost people significantly more money than they realize. Subscription services—including everything from gym memberships and magazine subscriptions to content streaming and monthly retail deliveries—are by now a familiar part of the consumer landscape. But a survey of 2,500 U.S. consumers found more than four in five believed they were spending less on recurring monthly subscriptions than they actually were. The article suggests that by separating the recurring expense from the consumer’s purchase intention, spending is essentially camouflaged. Further, encouraging customers to sign up for auto-renewing memberships at least partially lifts the burden of a seller having to actually close the sale. The responsibility instead lies with the consumer to stop the transaction.

And yet, another new study (Savary & Dhar, 2020) finds that consumers may retain subscriptions they don’t use or need because they fear the impact of ending the subscription on their identity. Sure, this reasoning sounds implausible compared to a competing theory—that people are just too lazy to cancel subscriptions. However, evidence abounds that people will devote great time and energy to saving money. Who hasn’t heard stories about drivers using more gasoline to find a marginally cheaper price per gallon? Maybe the failure to cancel a recurring subscription really does have roots in something beyond simple apathy.

Savary & Dhar (2020) suggest that subscriptions (like other retail purchases) often support and telegraph facets of a consumer’s identity. And when people have limited confidence in the portion of their identity being supported by the ongoing subscription, they may pay to maintain it even if it isn’t providing the explicitly promised benefit. According to a report on the article, canceling such services can feel like giving up on a desirable or aspirational part of themselves.

All that dry, academic language translates to this: Canceling a gym membership might imply throwing in the towel on health, fitness, and body image. Letting a magazine subscription lapse may feel like surrendering some aspect of knowledge or expertise. Canceling a fashion box may suggest a retreat to a plain, “basic” aesthetic. So, many consumers keep paying even if they aren’t using what they’re paying for.

Even despite this tailwind for subscription marketers, growth in the subscription retail model appears to be leveling off after a decade of explosive growth. McKinsey suggests that the model likely peaked in 2016, with investment deals related to subscription-box models falling dramatically in 2017 and 2018. An article from early this month even argues that subscription-everything retail may eventually come to represent a specific (and bygone) era in time.

“The subscription box service may someday become an icon of 2010s nostalgia, much like what America Online was to the ‘90s and gelatin-enveloped tuna was to the ‘60s.”

Arthur Zaczkiewicz, WWD

In fact, a recent survey finds the subscription-services industry in retrenchment and increasingly defensive. Key decision-makers are shifting from an emphasis on customer acquisition to customer retention. Fortunately for these marketers (if not, necessarily, for consumers), an appeal to identity insecurity could be just the nudge to keep consumers paying for a service they don’t really need.

References (non-hyperlinked)

Savary, J., & Dhar, R. (2020). The uncertain self: How self-concept structure affects subscription choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 46(5), 887–903. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucz022

By Jose Gallardo

Now a days, you can find the fitness trend to be all over our feeds. Almost everyone we know has posted a story about working out or their plans on getting fit. On this path some people decide to start taking supplements without being properly educated on these supplements. Some people get to dependent on supplements so they start taking all these pills without the proper nutrition, fitness program, and I say again KNOWLEDGE. So how safe are supplements ?

Zelman, MPH, RD, LD, describes that one can get all of their minerals, vitamins, carbohydrates, proteins, and fats from the food they consume. Zelman explains that the nutrition data about foods are intensely known, yet still being researched for more nutrition. This nutrition data can still help consumer choose what combination of foods to intake in order to provide a healthier lifestyle, without the need of supplements.

Zelman, does make the argument that particular individuals should take supplements such as pregnant women, the elderly, and people with food allergies because consuming food will not have the same effect in nutrition as it would on someone who was not in this criteria.

Rachael Rettner, illustrator for Life Science, describes that fat burners have little proof that they really do work, which is counter to what is being advertised. Rettner explains that fat burners can even be harmful to ingest on the consumer because the combination of ingredients, which have not been researched, may have a serious harm on the consumer. Think about it like this, if we know what is in a clear glass, such as a glass of water, we will drink it right? Now think of another clear glass yet we do not recognize the smell of the unknown liquid and it just looks different than something we would drink. Would you still drink it? So why would someone take fat burners without knowing the ingredients in these pills!

Caroline Cederquist, M.D. and writer for the Huffpost, shows that some supplements advertise the wrong ingredients. She explains, ” a particular brand of supplements was labeled “gluten free” and when it was tested to see its purity the test showed that these pills had wheat and other potential allergens not listed on the bottle.” Just imagine being allergic to one of these ingredients and you think it something else versus the supplements that are labeled “gluten free.”

Cari Nierenberg, writer for WebMD, shows that too many supplements can be harmful for the body. Nierenberg shows how to much vitamin C or Zinc can cause nausea, diarrhea, and stomach cramps. Furthermore, Nierenberg quotes David Katz, MD, that an over “consumption of supplements can cause difficulty in sleeping or concentrating, nerve problems such as numbness and tingling.” If over the counter pills that can be bought in any vitamin store such as GNC, the Vitamin Shoppe, or the mom and pop supplement stores can make you go numb unintentionally, why would someone continue to take them ? Just to be able to post a picture on Instagram?

An article from Consumer Reports points out that supplements are not regulated by the Federal Drug Administration. This means that supplements are not required to warn the consumers about anything in the bottle because the FDA does not require supplements to have warning labels, unless they contain iron. Consumer Reports details how some companies will not put warning labels on the bottle because the company feels it will not be a serious harm to the consumer. We should be able to dictate would be safe or not safe for us right? The supplement companies have took that deciding factor away from their consumers. Yet few people really know that supplements do this, as well as supplements not being regulated by the FDA.

Overall, we as consumers need to be aware how companies such as in the fitness world market their products. Like mentioned early, some people just take supplements without being knowledgable on the product, the company, or the FDA regulations on the supplement. Be careful and be knowledgeable if you do decide to partake in supplements.

The Academy Awards gave the best animated short award to “Hair Love,” an animated story about a black father doing his young daughter’s hair on a day when she wanted a special hairdo, and the dad has no idea how to actually style her hair.

This storyline and win are significant on so many levels. The animated short is a touching engagement between father and daughter. The father is not skilled or experienced in fixing a little girl’s hair – and “Hair Love” has some fun animation of the liveliness of the daughter’s African American curly hair giving it a character and personality all its own.

The film is especially poignant because black fathers are rarely depicted in loving, caring, fatherly roles, such as this one, let alone a dad fixing his little girl’s hair. An ad that I’ve long loved is one produced by the AdCouncil where an older woman sitting insider her home hears some voices from outside.

The camera switches to the outside where an African American man appears to be cheerleading. As the scene opens we see his daughter in a cheerleading outfit holding her pom poms and he is practicing her cheers with her.
https://youtu.be/N8YczeG0PJs

The “Hair Love” film’s director, Matthew A. Cherry, a former NFL player, said during his acceptance speech that they wanted to “normalize black hair” through this film.
During the acceptance speech Cherry talks about the CROWN Act, which stands for “Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair,” a movement to protect against discrimination against hairstyles or hair texture.

It’s a topic brought to light recently by Texas student DeAndre Arnold, who was suspended and told he couldn’t participate in the school’s graduation ceremonies because of his hair, his dreadlocks. The school district said its objection to the teenager’s hair is not the style, but the length and that it falls below the T-shirt collar length limit.
The Texas school district said it has had the hair length policy in place for decades, according to a report in the New York Times. That the policy has been in place for that long may signal that some updating is necessary. How does this young man’s hair length have an effect on what he does or his potential in the future? What does his hair have to do with anything that would be reason enough to ban him from his graduation ceremonies?

I related to this topic on a couple different levels. When I was in elementary school I was part of the “safety squad,” who would help students cross the street safely, and remind them to not run in the halls, and such. As a reward for our efforts the school offered to take us to see a movie during school hours – we would be excused for anything we missed during that time. We were told to wear our “best clothes” and given a time and place to meet where the bus would pick us up to go to the movie theatre.

I showed up wearing my “best,” which may not have been everybody’s best because I grew up the proverbial poor girl in a rich neighborhood. But it wasn’t even the quality of what I was wearing. It was the fact that I was wearing slacks, not a dress or skirt. The time period is 1971-1972, and it was still not quite acceptable for girls to only wear pants. As a girl with four older brothers I was a bit of a tomboy and didn’t own a dress or a skirt.

I was told that if I didn’t change my clothes and wear a dress or a skirt that I would not be allowed to get on the bus and go see the movie. I explained that I didn’t own a dress or a skirt. My friends who wanted me to join them said I could borrow something, they just wanted me to join them.

I didn’t understand then, and I still don’t understand now why that should be an issue. I refused to change my clothes. I was not allowed to see the movie. And I still don’t regret it.
I support DeAndre Arnold, his locks, his heritage, his independence, and his rights.

New York Times, DeAndre Arnold and his dreadlocks:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/01/us/DeAndre-Arnold-dreadlocks.html

Matthew Cherry wins Oscar: http://wgntv.com/2020/02/10/chicago-native-matthew-cherry-wins-oscar-for-best-animated-short-hair-love/

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28668599/former-nfl-wr-matthew-cherry-wins-oscar-short-animated-film

Cherry on the CROWN act
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/09/entertainment/crown-act-oscars-trnd/index.html

On Superbowl Sunday, Verizon aired a 60-second ad highlighting its 5G technology while honoring first responders. The ad starts out mentioning how 5G would help first responders and then shifts to saying “But this isn’t a commercial about what 5G will do. It’s about what 5G will never do.” It then showed images that highlighted the courage, risk, dedication, and sacrifices of our first responders. It seemed like the right combination that gives the viewers the warm and fuzzies that will last. It was effective on the surface.

Unfortunately for Verizon, many of its viewers have a long memory. Many have not forgotten the incident during the 2018 Mendocino Fires during which the company throttled the Santa Clara County Fire Department’s “unlimited” high-speed internet while the fire department battled the largest fire in California’s history. The backlash was fierce. A quick search under “Verizon Commercial” on Twitter revealed scathing responses. “A Superbowl commercial isn’t gonna make us forget that”, one of the tweets said. 

According to an article by CBS news, the Santa Clara County Fire Chief, Anthony Bowden, said Verizon throttled their services to a crawling 1/200th of its original data plan. In the same article, Verizon admitted that they made a mistake in the way they handled communication with their customer.

What seems to be an effort to make peace and bring honor to first responders became a scathing memory of the company’s disregard for public safety. “#Verizon: The network more people rely on … until California is ravaged by wildfires and your provider decides to throttle the connectivity of those firefighters you just honored with that Superbowl commercial. **exploitive**  you VZ.” said @LeviRobischon.

This goes to show that good intentions of corporations are not always received well by its viewers. They say it’s impossible to please everyone and this ad is certainly an example of that.

Picchi, A. (2018, August 22). Verizon throttled firefighters’ “unlimited” data during California fires, lawsuit claims. Retrieved from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/verizon-throttled-firefighters-unlimited-data-during-california-fires-lawsuit/

Lam, K. (2019, February 10). Verizon Super Bowl ads honor California firefighters after accidentally throttling data speeds. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2019/02/03/verizon-super-bowl-ads-honor-california-firefighters-after-controversy/2765137002/

@colhoneypots. Feb 2, 2020. Twitter. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/colhoneypots/status/1224135641702600705?s=12

@LeviRobischon, Feb 2, 2020. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/LeviRobischon/status/1224135440392785920?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Abercrombie & Fitch has long been known for being a brand for the slim and slender. So much so that the company’s former CEO was so critical of heavier women that the brand didn’t design clothes in a size XL or larger. To make this sad reality even worse, the quotes implicating Mike Jeffries were far more harrowing than the general criticism about the brand’s discrimination.

“He doesn’t want larger people shopping in his store, he wants thin and beautiful people,” Robin Lewis of The New Rules Of Retail said. “He doesn’t want his core customers to see people who aren’t as hot as them wearing his clothing. People who wear his clothing should feel like they’re one of the ‘cool kids.’”

These comments come across as disgusting and childish, and by all means they are. So what changed, where Abercrombie & Fitch is now pandering to the audience they once so openly isolated?

A compelling article from AdWeek highlighted that after over a century, A&F is finally trying a new marketing approach. The lead of the article goes as follows:

“This year, Abercrombie & Fitch is taking another step to ensure it’s no longer the exclusive outfitter for the thin, popular girls and bronzed, muscular jocks that ruled your high school in the early aughts.”’

‘Face Your Fierce,’ the campaign highlighted in the article, is specifically targeted towards Abercrombie & Fitch’s new fragrance. The campaign features highlights plus-size and LGBTQ+ models that were previously ignored by the brand, and that has drawn mixed responses by the public.

On my end, I can’t help but think that it’s too little too late for Abercrombie & Fitch. My journey with A&F has dated back over a decade, back to when I used to go into the store and immediately be inundated with the pungent scents of their signature fragrances as you perused the aisles. Even then, shopping at Abercrombie & Fitch had a certain allure. And now, all of these years later, the brand is trying to reverse the exclusivity that it so infamously built its brand upon.

However, I can’t help but notice that the CTA to ‘Face Your Fierce,’ while could be perceived as unabashedly empowering — almost seems demeaning giving the brand’s history. Embracing your body at its current and/or most comfortable size shouldn’t be revolutionary — it should be natural.

Putting politics aside, I have a serious question – can you openly and blatantly disrespect your boss in the name of ‘honesty’?

My goal here is not to make this a political conversation – I think this act goes way beyond that. But before we go any further, let me state the background of this situation. 

The 2020 State of the Union address was held by President Trump on Tuesday, February 4th. This speech is given by the President every year during a joint session of the Congress. Both the House of Representatives and Senate come together, Republicans and Democrats, to join the leader of the country and hear what his goals and ideas are for the upcoming year. Overall it doesn’t matter what your opinions are or whose side you’re one – this event is about the country as a joint union. As of recent, there has been some tension around the presidency and Trump himself particularly with the impeachment trial that was in progress. Nonetheless, he is still the President of the United States and deserves respect where it’s due. 

During his speech, the two individuals in the presidential line of succession sat behind him – Vice President Mike Pence and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. They were on camera a majority of the time and are expected to exhibit a professional decorum. Speaker Pelosi was unhappy during the entire speech which was expected since she wants to impeach the President. Yet the bottom line is she is a professional politician in a high priority position that represents the whole country – a certain level of class es expected from her. Cameras caught Pelosi making tiny tears in her copies of the speech and preparing them on her table prior to her big “drop the mic” (Turley, 2020) moment (Chasmar, 2020). 

As soon as President Trump said his final words of the evening and concluded with “God bless America,” all you could see behind him was Nancy Pelosi tearing up his speech piece by piece. The cameras were focused on the President and those behind him so there was no missing her action or looking away – it was a shocking moment. Immediately social media and news posts were covered with the video of this and people began their comments. By the next morning, this news was everywhere. All news sources, no matter what party they are said to favor, commented on the “pettiness” (Today Show, 2020) and unprofessionalism of Pelosi’s behavior. This has nothing to do with politics!

Pelosi tried to defend her actions saying that they were “completely, entirely appropriate” (Wu, 2020) and continued to put down the President and his actions. An op-ed editorial on The Hill (2020) mentioned that she brought down the decorum of her branch of the government through these actions (Turley, 2020) and the moment will not be forgotten (yet likely not for good reasons). 

This situation was slightly taken advantage of since Pelosi cannot simply get fired from her position. Ultimately, can you blatantly disrespect the people who employ you if you don’t agree with them?

References: 

Chasmar, J. (2020). Nancy Pelosi pre-ripped pages during SOTU speech, Trump campaign says. Washington Times. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/feb/6/nancy-pelosi-pre-ripped-pages-during-sotu-speech-t/

Lapin, T. (2020). Nancy Pelosi ‘pre-ripped’ pages of Trump’s SOTU speech, video shows. New York Post. https://nypost.com/2020/02/05/nancy-pelosi-pre-ripped-pages-of-trumps-sotu-speech-video-shows/

NBC News. (2020). Video shows Nancy Pelosi ripping Trump’s speech in preparation for tearing it in half | NBC News. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GR5Z6bKRp9A

Today Show. (2020). Pelosi was ‘incredibly petty’ to rip up State Of The Union Speech, analyst says | TODAY. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNL76Qxy-1s

Turley, J. (2020). Nancy Pelosi should resign. The Hill. Retrieved from https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/481598-nancy-pelosi-should-resign

Wu, N. (2020). Nancy Pelosi says tearing up Trump speech ‘entirely appropriate,’ says president seemed ‘sedated’ at SOTU. USA Today. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/02/06/impeachment-nancy-pelosi-says-trump-remains-impeached-forever/4677577002/

Amid the passing of Kobe Bryant and eight others in a fatal helicopter crash on January 26, 2020, a brief interview clip published on February 6, 2020 featuring CBS Morning Anchor Gayle King and WNBA legend Lisa Leslie, has caused up a ruckus among the social media world. Within this interview, King brings up Bryant’s rape charges that were held against him in 2003. Back in 2003, this case caused a media frenzy, and also put a damper on Bryant’s athletic career. Bryant was accused of raping a 19-year-old-woman in a Colorado hotel where Bryant was staying awaiting knee surgery (Blynn, 2020). However, a year later, the case had never made its way to court and Bryant’s accuser had declined to testify in court; followed by requesting a public apology from Bryant (Daily Mail, 2020).

According to Daily Mail.com, King asked Leslie if Bryant’s legacy had become complicated because of the assault charges in 2003. With Leslie knowing Bryant since she was 18 years old (Daily Mail, 2020), Leslie quickly responded with no. Although, within the Twitter world, many celebrities and fans had taken to their own accounts to showcase their feelings about the comment King had made.

Images were taken from Daily Mail.com. Rapper 50 cent posted the clip below:

Followed by some fan accounts on twitter:

King has since taken to Instagram to issue an apology as she is “mortified” by the backlash she is now receiving. Below is the link to King’s Instagram response about the interview if you wish to view it. https://www.instagram.com/tv/B8OJfE7Jzri/?utm_source=ig_embed

Thank you

References

Daily Mail.com. (2020). Retrieved from: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7979187/Oprah-says-best-friend-Gayle-King-received-death-threats.html