The Hindu Business Line : Shock marketing backfires, or does it?

Though a guerrilla marketing attempt by a company was mistaken for terrorism in Boston, with its own consequences, the jury is still out on whether the company was hurt.

The term guerrilla marketing often describes shock tactics used to get high visibility for a product at minimum cost. The term is quite unfortunate in today's sensitive security environment. True guerrillas may bristle at the dilution of the sanctity of their acts, and some attempts at generating shock in marketing circles can also get easily mistaken!

A recent case in Boston is quite illustrative. Cartoon Network, a unit of Turner Broadcasting System (TBS), hired an advertising firm, Interference Inc. that has a reputation for publicity stunts.

The task was to place small lighted battery-powered boards representing a cartoon character from a show `Aqua Teen Hunger Force,' at various public places in Boston and nine other cities around the US. The objective, of course, was to generate publicity for the show.

On January 31, when these were placed and soon spotted, alarm bells started going off among security personnel in Boston. The first one was identified at about 7-50 a.m. The Boston police mistook them for terrorist devices and called the State Bomb Squad. A part of a subway line was shut down and as one was spotted near an over-bridge on the highway, a section of the highway was also closed.

A few others were located in other parts of Boston. The cartoon characters were summarily exploded. With all precautions taken, the city heaved a sigh of relief. By early afternoon, the authorities get word from the corporations concerned that, oops, it was all part of a marketing campaign. Now the real fun starts.

The police went after the perpetrators on the ground, and promptly arrested two young men, aged 27 and 28, who were sen placing the "suspicious devices" around the city. The mayor appeared gravely in front of the cameras and pronounced the city safe again.

Meanwhile, carrying placards and chanting slogans supporters of the young men turned up outside the district court where the two were being charged.

Grave, comical drama

The next day, the newspapers printed a picture of the two grinning at the cameras. Having been hired reportedly for $300 (Rs 13,500) a piece to place those cartoons, the men perhaps did not realise that they were the public face of a drama at once grave and comical. Further, one of the young men is reported to have said that their boss had asked them to keep quiet about the whole thing.

That is what guerrilla marketing is all about but it certainly did not help matters. Clearly, the matter had reached a point when the guardians of people's safety couldn't have a good laugh. In addition to having red faces, what about all the expense that had been incurred with police vehicles swarming the city and bomb squads suiting up? One had to take it to its logical conclusion.

When it comes to security, the US, in general, is quite jumpy. It is a safe practice not to joke with airport security guards if the buzzer goes off when you pass through the check-point having inadvertently forgotten a key in your pocket.

You are apt to be whisked off and questioned till after your flight takes off. There is even a law that says that any attempt to try a hoax is a criminal offence. This is to take care of smart-alecks who try to fool the security guards with toys that look like weapons.

Sensitive Boston

Boston is particularly sensitive to such pranks. Since it was the place where the hijackers of the September 2001 attack on the World Trade Centre in New York City took-off, the city has been trying hard to change the reputation of being lax on security. Thus, while the police in the other cities where the marketing tactic was tried seem to have had a hearty laugh and gone back to spotting speeders on highways, the good uniformed folks in Boston were `taking no chances.'

Do we laugh or give the police a bonus? After they spotted the first one and discovered that it wasn't a bomb, could they have relaxed a bit? Almost to re-affirm their reaction to the events, the newly elected Attorney-General of the state rushed to the fore establishing her credentials. She said she would be pressing charges against the two miscreants, against the companies that hired them and anybody else involved for all the inconvenience caused to the public and for fooling the public officials. So there. You do not mess with Boston.

TBS, the parent company, took out full-page ads in newspapers apologising to the public. It sounded suitably contrite. It is also reported to have called the state officials to apologise. But this is a free market and everything has a price. So, the papers have since announced that a settlement of $2 million (Rs 9 crore) has been agreed to between the state and the company.

Part of the money is to cover costs of the police and others responding to the bomb reports, and some for security and emergency preparedness programmes. Therefore, everyone is going to get a share.

The State Police, the subway transit authority, the city of Boston, the neighbouring city of Cambridge, the Coast Guard, roadways authorities, and so on. I recommend that some of it go towards humour training but I am sure nobody will listen.

The fate of the two arrested youth is still open, as I write this piece. If only they would stop grinning and if the cheques from the company reach on time, I am sure they will be let off with a warning. Almost ten days after the incident, it claimed its first corporate victim.

The general manager of Cartoon Network, who had approved the marketing campaign, quit, taking responsibility for what happened. "I deeply regret the negative publicity and expense caused to our company as a result of this campaign," he said. Very unusual, since senior US executives who are being sacked usually quit only for `personal reasons' while collecting a few millions on their way out.

There is a saying among the public relations folks that there is no such thing as bad publicity! Though the guerrilla marketing was mistaken for terrorism marketing in Boston, the jury is still out on whether it hurt the company.

The cost of a 30-second spot on television during the Super Bowl (when two football teams compete annually for the championship and when the advertising rate are at their steepest) this year was $2.6 million (Rs 11.7 crore).

Therefore, for the penalty TBS paid, its accountants may still deem it worthwhile. Word has it that surveys report no negative impact on the ratings of the cartoon show from the entire hullabaloo; indeed more people have started noticing it.

(The author is a professor of international business and strategic management at Suffolk University, Boston, US. He can be reached at cgopinat@suffolk.edu)

More Stories on : Marketing | Insight | American Periscope | Advertising

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
`Incredible' opportunity

Wages of disparity

Selective taxation to curb inflation

A crime that beggars description

Backlash of globalisation?

The funding of the Fund

Shock marketing backfires, or does it?

Bank for farmers