Quiz3 (2)

Justin Benedict

Quiz 3: Dove and Axe Do Axe’s marketing messages, in which young, thin, attractive girls find any man who wears an Axe scent to be sexually attractive, make those of the Campaign for Real Beauty less truthful?

There is a clear expectation of consistency of message and cohesion between that message and the actions of all subsidiaries of a parent company. This is something that is absent in the Unilever corporation’s subsidiaries Dove and Axe’s respective “Real Beauty” and “Bom Chicka Wah Wah” marketing campaigns. This has lead to extensive media backlash headed by the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood (CCFC) and other groups who were angered by the hypocritical messaging of the campaigns. This may be the result of either a lack of internal oversight, or the presence of a corporate culture that lacks responsibility and consistency.

Regardless, the Axe campaign, which perpetuates stereotypes of gender and sexuality, illegitimatizes the “Real Beauty” campaign to some extent. The “Real Beauty” campaign now seems dubious, as one must now question whether Unilever actually believes any of the messages it is distributing to impressionable consumers around the world.

With this being said, the “Real Beauty” campaign, while tarnished by association, still holds value to Dove’s target audience as well as the public in general. An extensive campaign attempting to unify the global community on the basis of changing stereotypes is a great thing, and further examination of the “Real Beauty” campaign shows its true nature as a socially responsible campaign. Through the digital elements of the campaign, women were invited to engage with the brand and contribute to the conversation. Dove also created many progressive initiatives to supplement digital interaction, including panel events, partnerships, emotionally charged videos and the creation of the “self-esteem fund” which resulted in positive global outreach, exposing the issues with current beauty ideals in an effort to promote women’s selfesteem.

What is also concerning for Unilever, is that this oversight transpired during the shift of corporate marketing strategy, from traditional to self-generating publicity. This form of publicity relies heavily on digital media’s ability to instantaneously provoke engagement from the public.

Digital campaigns cannot rely on the public to not figure something out or connect the dots. If Unilever’s statement claiming that both campaigns sought to build the confidence and selfesteem of consumers is true, the “Real Beauty” campaign is proactive and socially responsible.

While the satirical approach to the Axe campaign justifies the embellishment of its product’s benefits, it does not justify the conflicting and stereotypical message which it conveys to young men. Exposure to the connection between the two brand’s in the media has resulted in a perceived lack of truth and validity in both, and unfortunately, this Dove campaign will carry a negative association with Unilever.

To what extent should the CSR element of Dove’s message, which relates directly to important issues of self-esteem and self-worth for women, influence any responsibility Unilever might have to ensure its other brands do not contradict these messages?

As the 109th largest corporation globally with a $132 billion evaluation that operates in 14 categories of consumer goods, Unilever has an extreme impact on the global consumer (Forbes 2016). With this impact comes an inherent responsibility to operate, advertise, market and engage the public in an ethical and progressive manner. Therefore, conflicting messages in these two subsidiaries can have a direct negative impact on the consumers who interact with the brands and purchase their products. Fundamental to CSR is its function as progressing society through initiatives and actions. While Dove’s “Real Beauty” campaign conveys a socially responsible message, Axe’s “Bom Chicka Wah Wah” campaign did not, and instead perpetuated stereotypes.

While Unilever maintains that it is successfully marketing to the two separate target markets effectively, and promote confidence and self-esteem, the hypocritical messages of the two campaigns overshadow this fact to a large extent.

While the Axe brand is responsible to some degree for the content of their marketing messages Unilever is still responsible for the oversight they may have prevented these conflicting campaigns. In regard to corporate structure, Unilever is the parent company of both Dove and Axe. In other words, Unilever owns the majority stock in both companies and to some degree controls the management and operations of those companies through the board of directors.

Unilever is responsible for ensuring cohesion and consistency of message values, even if communicating to different publics. While Unilever may defend the Axe campaign’s marketing as satirical, the depth of the digital media elements such as “Axe effect” tracking and customizable women stray too far from the ideas expressed in the “Real Beauty” campaign.

It is also important to consider the branding changes implemented, as we have seen Unilever make clear efforts to increase the perceived affiliation between the company and its subsidiaries among consumers by increasing the presence and prominence of Unilever’s logo on the packaging of its products. If Unilever were to develop the two brands as distinct and unrelated, and diminish the perceived connection between the two, the hypocritical messages of the two campaigns would be more acceptable. Instead, the actions of Unilever have worked to strengthen the connection between the two brands. Regardless of future efforts, the media exposure that resulted from these conflicting campaigns have made the Axe and Dove brands publically affiliated, something Unilever must be more considerate of in future marketing efforts.

WORKS CITED: Unilever on the Forbes Global 2000 List. (n.d.). Retrieved March 26, 2017, from https://www.forbes.com/companies/unilever/