"Buy the Way…" Insights on Integrated Marketing Communication

If you’re active on social media or have any Armenian friends and acquaintances, you may have heard of a recent war breaking out between Azerbaijan and Armenia. To give some context, on September 27, Azerbaijan launched an attack on the autonomous region of Artsakh (also known as Nagorno-Karabakh), located in the South Caucasus and populated and controlled by 98% ethnic Armenians (Toal, O’Loughlin, Bakke, 2020). In 1921, Stalin annexed the region to Azerbaijan to keep close relations with Turkey. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Artsakh fought to be united with Armenia, which in turn sparked a war that ended in a Russian-brokered ceasefire in 1994 (Armenia-Azerbaijan: What’s behind the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?, 2020) . After over 20 years, the ceasefire continues to be broken by Azeri forces seeking to regain control over the region. This time, the conflict is the worst it’s been since the war in 1988 which killed around 30,000 and displaced over 1 million people (Toal, O’Loughlin, Bakke, 2020). That should probably explain why you might be seeing posts on social media.

Now, what does integrated marketing have to do with any of this? We’ll get to that. I wanted to first mention an incident a friend of mine currently living in Yerevan (the capital of Armenia) shared on instagram. He was at the store buying essentials needed for a refugee center in Yerevan hosting families who have fled their homes in Artsakh as Azeri forces are now shooting missiles towards the capital city of Stepanakert. One of the essential items was adult diapers. He noticed that the cheapest brand was made in Turkey, and he asked the clerk to give him one that was not made in Turkey, the cost did not matter. That sparked him uncovering a severe issue: if Armenia was to ban all Turkish products, there would be an enormous rise in poverty, ending in a class war. Turkey has extremely close ties with Azerbaijan, and Rep. Erdogan has repeatedly supported President Ilham Aliyev saying, “Turkey would stand with all its resources and heart behind Baku (Azerbaijan President Aliyev thanks Turkey’s Erdogan for support, 2020). Therefore, one can connect the dots that if Turkey is sending ample military aid to Azerbaijan, while Armenia still supports Turkey economically by selling their products, Armenia in a way is on the route for self-sabotage.

Armenia is a land-locked country, having its borders with Turkey and Azerbaijan closed and relies on its relations with Georgia and Iran, which explains how Turkish products are imported. Calls for a boycott for Turkish products in Armenia have risen since the recent events, even though there have been multiple efforts in the past (Hergnyan, 2020). Sadly, Armenia imports significantly more than it exports. According to the Statistical Committee of Armenia, in the first six months of 2020, Armenia exported $374,000 worth of goods to Turkey, 72.3% less than in the same period last year. In the same six months, Armenia imported about $99 million worth of goods from Turkey (Hergnyan, 2020). Refer to the graph for a visualization of the data. Armenia’s infrastructure is not strong enough to completely halt the imports of Turkish products, and experts say this initiative could take up to ten years. Ten more years of Armenia supporting the country that does not recognize the Armenian Genocide, the event the founders of the Ottoman Empire’s Young Turks perpetrated 100 years ago, and continue to deny.

I hope other people like my friend in Yerevan have the same reaction when it comes to buying goods and essentials. Please consider supporting Armenian businesses at this time, learning more about the Artsakh and Azeri aggression, as well as donating to Armenia Fund at armeniafund.org.

Sources:
Armenia-Azerbaijan: What’s behind the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?. (2020). BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54324772

Azerbaijan President Aliyev thanks Turkey’s Erdogan for support. (2020). Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-armenia-azerbaijan-turkey/azerbaijan-president-aliyev-thanks-turkeys-erdogan-for-support-idUSKBN26L2CG.

Hergnyan, S. (2020). Purging Armenia of Turkish goods: The prospects and pitfalls of a nationwide boycott. Hetq. https://hetq.am/en/article/122296

Toal, G., O’Loughlin, J., Bakke, K. (2020). The fighting in Nagorno-Karabakh is about local territories and wider rivalries. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/10/02/fighting-nagorno-karabakh-is-about-local-territories-wider-rivalries/

Airbus, a French company, received permission to proceed on labeling their A220 narrow-body plane as ‘Made in America’ on the basis that they have an assembly location in Alabama. (Johnsson, 2020) This new label allows Airbus to circumvent tariffs while selling to US companies. With the growing competition between Airbus and Boeing, this new label is creating an opportunity for Airbus to take over more of the market share, especially with Boeing’s PR nightmare that is the 737-max.

Although this saves Airbus a considerable amount of money in tariffs (Johnsson, 2020), will their new status have the same competitive advantage as an American company that is manufacturing in the U.S.?

Does the average consumer care if their product is actually ‘Made in America’ or just assembled in the US with foreign suppliers? The labels that people use (Country of Origin) to assist in their purchasing decisions have different definitions that what the reader infers by the text (Made in USA, 2020). Similar to the COO label, there is also a country-of-manufacture (COM) label that shows which countries the part has been manufactured, allowing for the consumer to judge the quality and regulations of the product based on their perceived standards of each country (Chen, Gao, Lui, Marther & Wright, 2020).
According to Kim & Pysarchik (2000), ethnocentric purchasing decisions are only a factor when the consumer does not already know the brand name well. As long airlines know the Airbus name, it does not actually affect their purchasing decisions.

Kim, S. and Thorndike Pysarchik, D. (2000), “Predicting purchase intentions for uni‐national and bi‐national products”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 280-291.

Chen, S., Wright, M.J., Gao, H., Liu, H. and Mather, D. (2020), “The effects of the brand origin and country-of-manufacture on consumers’ institutional perceptions and purchase decision-making”, International Marketing Review, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-08-2019-0205

Johnsson, J. (2020, September 14). Airbus Set to Unveil Made-In-America A220, Cutting In on Boeing’s Home Turf. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-14/airbus-set-to-unveil-made-in-america-a220-to-showcase-u-s-foray

Kim, S. and Thorndike Pysarchik, D. (2000), “Predicting purchase intentions for uni‐national and bi‐national products”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 280-291
Made in USA. (n.d.). Retrieved October 02, 2020, from https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/advertising-and-marketing/made-in-usa

One of the biggest problems that business owners and founders alike face when starting their business or organization is finding a way to make and market their brand. Paul Esajian of Fortunebuilders.com discussed how one of the biggest obstacles for businesses is forgetting one’s brand identity and losing integrity (2020). One of the ways he offers to combat this is by staying true to the brand’s vision and remembering that “how you do anything is how you do everything.” (2020)

But how does one build a brand? An important idea to keep in mind comes from Kathyn Wheeler’s 2020 Hubspot article How to Develop a Unique (& Memorable) Brand Identity In 2020. In it, Wheeler cites how Jeff Bezos establishes a brand identity as ‘what people say about you when you’re not in the room’ (2020). When developing a brand, it is important to remember that the branding does much more than just establish the name of the business. When one eventually establishes marketing practices to build their businesses’ prowess, that branding ends up becoming a key indicator from outside sources that determine whether or not they want to do business or partner with that specific business.

On a personal level, I am currently going through this current process with myself and my fellow co-founders. One of the initial plans we had when establishing our business was to use the term “Cracked” in our business name, since it is a trending term in the industry. However, since we noted that different individuals could interpret that word in a different connotation if they are not aware of that trend, it would be better to move on to a different name.

Each decision business owners make when creating their business and branding is key, as it can make or break their initial stage successes. One of the aspects Wheeler builds on is the notion that a brand also establishes trust and credibility through name and brand recognition, meaning that your initial branding can end up hindering or progressing your marketing progress as it advances in the future (2020).

Business owners and potential founders must do their research and determine how their proposed branding would fit in to the current market/industry, and how the general public will perceive their ideas. This can be done through focus groups, surveys, or any combination or creative idea. At the end of the day, the success of the business rides immediately on the first steps taken, as initial and effective branding can not only establish immediate rapport and credibility, but also provide a backdrop that allows for owners to consistently and constantly improve and grow their business.

References:
Esajian, P. (2020, July 12). 9 Ways To Overcome Your Business’s Biggest Obstacles. Retrieved October 01, 2020, from https://www.fortunebuilders.com/9-ways-to-overcome-your-businesss-biggest-obstacles/
Wheeler, K. (2020, September 2). How to Develop a Unique (& Memorable) Brand Identity in 2020. Retrieved October 01, 2020, from https://blog.hubspot.com/agency/develop-brand-identity

2020, a series that everyone wants to escape. Students feel less connected now than ever. Our world is at unease with social injustices. The Covid-19 pandemic seems to have no solution. College graduations are postponed. America is in an economic crisis. The list of tragedies is a black hole. 

In March 2020, big companies such as CMX Cinemas and Neman Marcus filed for bankruptcy. Scary…right? Graduate students of CMGT may be hopeless. The marketing industry is taking a turn due to COVID-19. Students dream of landing their dream job with their dream company. But how can one remain hopeful? Easy, adapt to these changes. Adjust with Covid-19, not to Covid-19. And, then we will survive as marketers in this crisis. 

Here is a chart showing how top brands are doing during this pandemic.

In red and yellow are the failing brands. Today we are focusing on brands that took immediate action, highlighted in green. It is crucial to not only know how they succeeded but to apply it as a CMGT student so we can prosper as future employees and as students. 

In no specific order these tips will guide you to success during COVID-19.

# 1: Understand your customer’s concerns and address these concerns effectively.

Here are the shared concerns of COVID-19: 

Needless to say, people are scared. Successful companies are easing their worries. Moreover, their marketers are helping the company prosper while minimizing anxiety nationwide. Lego, highlighted in green (table 1), is a prime example of Tip #1. Lego’s released a statement on social media platforms using the hashtag #letsbuildtogether. They united their customers through a simple hashtag, which led to an engagement increase of 14%and a 3 percent rise in net profit to 8.3 billion kroner. What can we learn from this? Be authentic, show the consumers you care through addressing those worries. 

#2:Build a solution for the consumers.

This tip goes hand and hand with knowing your customers; you have to know them before offering a solution. Four Season’s, a luxurious high priced hotel, lent Covid-19 response workers a free of charge stay in New York. Now you may think, why is this important? Simply, the Hotel will directly be associated with love, positive emotions, and compassion. Zhong, a famous researcher, found that both worker’s performance level and health improved through small acts of kindness, not through big raises or reduced workloads. Thus, a significant profit business such as The Four Seasons will be remembered. Not only will workers have gratitude towards them, but the population will. 

#3: Unify people.

More now than ever, people are feeling lonely. Even by not attending in-person classes, I can relate to being overwhelmed at times due to the lack of social connection. A research article found that with the public health measures of social distancing, there is an increase of loneliness and social isolation. Warner Brothers utilized social media engagement throughout this pandemic. They linked a word fill in the blanks, in which the audience could fill in what they want to see from Warner brothers. The achievement showed pre-pandemic engagement was 24 engagements per mention, it then rose to 30.6 per mention. WHO and Global Citizen announced a TV special on April 8, 2020, “One World: Together At Home,” bringing support and unification worldwide. From the eye-catching title, it is prominent that they want to bring people together. During unprecedented times, markets need to provide comfort and demonstrate that they can be a shoulder to lean on. 

It is essential to use to understand what you have felt during this pandemic. Do some self-evaluation. Provide transparency through your authenticity. We will all get through these times together as students and future marketers. Turn these bad times into good times, “and by connecting your brand to those times, you’ll maximize love”. 

Fight On! 

Sources: 

Carbon Neutral. What is it, where did it come from, and what does it really mean for the future?

Companies across the United States are starting to pledge their loyalty to environmental environmental issues. Most companies claim their supply chain, products, or services will no longer cause environmental distress by the year 2030. Large companies such as Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Starbucks, and more have recently said their company will take a long look at their environmental footprint and hope to make large changes in the future. Although on the surface this seems to be a positive change there is much more happening behind the scenes of these decisions.

Over the last 6-12 months many large corporations are popping up with messages stating they will be carbon neutral by the year 2030. When I first heard these claims my first thought was, “Wow, this is great news!”, as I’m sure most individual’s reactions would be. After the 4th or 5th company headline that declared the same carbon neutral by 2030! I started to wonder, why now? what even is carbon neutral? and why 2030? Sadly, my excitement that more brands were becoming conscious of the environment was quickly squashed when I was reminded of United Nation’s Sustainable Development Agenda. The United Nations (UN) met in September 2019 and called for immediate action to ensure the betterment of the world by 2030. One of the essential things discussed was large corporation’s negative effect on current environmental issues. The UN questioned the possibility of charging these corporations who were not committing to a low-zero carbon footprint. Although the UN has not publicly stated that they will begin to charge corporations for their negative actions, they have made a timeline clear and it is the year 2030.

After realizing the connection I began to shift through more articles on the topic of carbon neutrality and companies starting to use marketing to seem more environmentally-friendly. For a company to be considered carbon neutral it must be removing the same amount of carbon dioxide (the gas that is currently thought of to be a large cause of climate change) that it is putting into the atmosphere. It sounds simple on the service but as most things, it is not. Companies are not necessarily changing their productions to be “more sustainable” but instead most are purchasing carbon offsets credits from B2B environmental groups which in turn will put funds into sustainable research or projects that the company wishes to be linked to. Not as green as it originally seems. So why are companies not fighting against UN possible new policy? It is simple, outward positive marketing and overall corporate greenwashing.

Corporate greenwashing is a phrase that began in the 1960s which means that a company’s advertising and/or marketing plans are trying to make the consumer imply they are an environmentally-friendly option. For example, H&M was under fire in 2018 after releasing a Conscious Collection in which the marketing explained the collection’s sustainable fabrics and production line. Sadly, the company could not back up these claims and were not able to show any proof that this collection was any different than ones previously. Examples like this are showing up more frequently with the push for sustainable living and individuals wanting to decrease their carbon footprint. Companies are beginning to slap words such as climate positive, organic, chemical-free, or green to attract these individuals to their products. These claims are often just vague enough that it is near impossible for legal action to be taken. Although some companies are releasing specific “sustainable collections” others are declaring their entire company is now an environmental advocate.

I have personally been juggling my thoughts about these claims and the reality behind them. My hope is these companies (such as Apple, who I proudly discuss their supposed environmental efforts) are truly making changes to create a better and more sustainable future, but I also see the reality of what is already beginning. I wonder if it is ethical for these companies to declare their willingness to be carbon neutral by 2030 without giving the footnote of the UN’s possible demand for it? Is it okay for companies to take the positive press and possible greenwashing of consumers? At this point in time I think it is important for consumers to push companies to give us more answers than questions. I do think it is harmful for companies to jump on the carbon neutral bandwagon without making genuine change in their own production. My first thought is what happens once the sustainable “trend” dies down throughout company advertising and marketing? Will we be in a worse place than when we started?

Although I ran through a lot of different topics around sustainability and corporations I’d love to hear your thoughts on any of them. Do corporations owe their consumers honesty? Is greenwashing real, and do you think it’s ethical? What do you think will happen by 2030?

Resources:

Decade of Action – United Nations Sustainable Development. (n.d.). Retrieved September 27, 2020, from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/decade-of-action/

Greenwashing – Definition, Seven Sins, and Example. (2020, May 28). Retrieved September 27, 2020, from https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/greenwashing/

Nguyen, T. (2020, March 05). More companies want to be “carbon neutral.” What does that mean? Retrieved September 27, 2020, from https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2020/3/5/21155020/companies-carbon-neutral-climate-positive

As much as I like to avoid discussing anything political, especially during peak campaign times, I found the intricacies of how these campaigns are crafted to be relevant to much of what we are learning in class. In a recent study conducted by Pew Research Center, it was found that most Americans feel that political ads should be banned from being displayed on social media. 54% of Americans felt that social media companies should not work with political advertisers, while 77% of Americans went even further to note that they should not be served advertisements based on their online activities.

While there has always been controversy, especially recently, about how consumer analysis and behavioral data should be used in the ways of manipulation of advertising, political advertising may have taken it a step further. When U.S. citizens are targeted with political advertisements, it can affect the outcome of the country, democracy, and the way of the world. It’s much different than a shoe retailer targeting a teenage girl to purchase the heels she put in her online shopping cart a week back. Or a person looking to switch their internet provider. Political ads focus on much larger issues that span past a day, week, or month of consequences.

However, on the other side of campaign management, 45% of media companies such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, or TikTok, feel that political advertisements should be allowed on their platform. People 65 or older were particularly not interested in seeing political messages. When looking at the ethics of these advertisements, is it ethical for social media companies to allow political advertisements on their website? How can social media ensure the accuracy of their advertising claims?

Social media companies are making lots of money off political candidates who have open checkbooks without a concern about how their advertisements could impact their target audience. Within 2020, it’s anticipated that $1 billion dollars will be spent on digital advertisements, with over 59% of that on Facebook alone. There is a clear monetary incentive for social media platforms to allow these advertisements, but where do we draw the line?

As advertisements seem to fall into one of six categories as discussed by Deshpande & Keinan (2014), social media advertisers have a valid platform to allow political advertisements because they do follow a lot of the same tactics as typical campaigns. For example, looking at the presidential candidates as brand personalities, we see the same brand personality traits apparent in each campaign message that we do with other forms of campaigns such as product or employer marketing. The ads aim to be sincere, provide excitement about changes or consistency, showcase competence to do the job as a presidential leader, show they are sophisticated enough to run a country, and show ruggedness through their toughness to beat their competitor. Because political advertisements follow the same campaign outline as retailers, grocery stores, tech companies, manufacturers, or other services, is it fair to limit advertising? The argument could be made that these advertisements are meant to inform and therefore provide a positive reinforcement to society.

So, what do you say? Do you think political advertisements should be allowed on social media platforms?

Since its onset, the Coronavirus pandemic has affected almost every business industry and has undoubtedly ravaged Hollywood, forcing it into a freefall.

The film industry is known for its gig economy that hires freelancers of various backgrounds and expertise. As a result, freelancers and film crew were initially the hardest hit as hundreds of thousands of crew workers lost their jobs overnight as productions in progress were postponed or canceled – affecting both television and film productions. While television productions have slowly began to resume taping and  film permits issuances returned, while following strict Los Angeles County health protocols, the film industry continues in despair.

The summer Blockbuster season, one of the two annual periods when movie studios release their biggest and most expensive productions was completely canceled as movie theaters remained closed. Consequently, studios are bleeding dollars in the billions as they continue to withhold and delay release of some of the most highly anticipated releases and franchise Blockbusters. Warner Brothers had originally committed to releasing Wonder Woman 1984 in June 2020 but has since postponed the release to the holiday blockbuster season instead. The Candyman reboot, showing trailers in theaters beginning in February, was originally set to release in June 2020 as well and has since been pushed to a 2021 release. Most notably, Universal’s James Bond film, No Time to Die, Paramount’s Mission Impossible 7, Marvel Universe’s Black Widow and from Sony, Greyhound and Ghostbusters: Afterlife, have all been pushed back.

I recently sat down with former Sony Pictures Entertainment President of Domestic Marketing, Christine Birch, (via Zoom) who confirmed that the studios “are bleeding money in the billions. That, alone, can set them back for years to come.” When asked if she thought that they could recover, she said, “The livelihood of Hollywood has been threatened by technology for years now and it has endured. The current way of doing things has just always been upended and we pivot.” She expressed that, in the interim, studios should take stock of what marketing tools they have before them and use those to bridge the gap until things are back up and running. One of those tools being the ‘Direct to VOD’ platform.

Birch left Sony Pictures Entertainment back in 2018 after 30 years as a marketing executive, having been the mastermind behind the success of some of the biggest blockbuster marketing campaigns for Oscar-winning films such as The Help as well as other blockbusters such a  Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, Spider-Man: Homecoming, and Peter Rabbit just to name a few. Currently the founder and CEO of The ROYGBIV Collective, a new consulting firm that provides media and lifestyle companies with positioning, creative branding, messaging and overall vision, Birch continues to work on marketing campaigns as a consultant.

As we discussed all of the films on the rosters at all studios which we anticipated but that have been pushed back, Birch mentioned that she conducted focus groups and consulted on the recent direct-to-VOD release, Antebellum, starring Janelle Monae. “I loved the movie. The best thing that Lionsgate could have done was release that film on demand.” She went on to talk about how the focus groups didn’t seem to grasp the subject matter of the film due to some missteps is positioning. “Janelle Monae is a global star! They should have led that campaign with ‘Janelle Monae as Veronica Henley’! She should have been on every talk show’s virtual couch, every podcast and radio show. This was this movie’s time and they didn’t listen. They missed the opportunity to reach Get Out status,” referring to the surprise blockbuster status of the Jordan Peele film with a similar social horror racial undertone. She also mentioned that the design of print media for the film was lazy and how they “basically copied the Silence of the Lambs” concept. “All of these (marketing) elements are interconnected. Integrating marketing strategies is what makes people aware of the film. They should be doing that six months ahead of the release, at the least, and the way you position it communicates to them why they need to see that movie.”

Is there a formula for marketing and releasing film, especially with the current constraints on the industry, that can bridge the gap to survival for the film industry? That’s the million-dollar question! I posed that question to Birch expecting a lengthy answer with points on positioning and marketing, but her response was quite simple. In a quiet and serious tone, she replied, “Use the tools at your disposal, even if no one else is using them. You have to be creative. You have to know your audience and how that film fits the zeitgeist. That thread is your reel. Reel them in!”

References

Jordan, M. (2020, August 12). Movie theaters are on life support – how will the film industry adapt?. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/movie-theaters-are-on-life-support-how-will-the-film-industry-adapt-143877

Trenholm, Richard. (2020, September 24). Coronavirus movie delays: New release dates for 2020 and 2021 blockbusters. Retrieved from: https://www.cnet.com/news/coronavirus-movie-delays-2020-2021-blockbusters-new-release-dates/