For some reason, liars are funny. At least, when it’s obvious they are lying. In marketing, we get accused of lying all the time. In fact, my wife is convinced we’ll burn in Hell, just for being in marketing biz. But when liars are used for comedic effect, the result can be some advertising with impact, and longevity.

Perhaps the most famous liar of the last 20 years of advertising has been the Joe Isuzu character brought to life by by actor David Leisure and created by the NY ad agency, Della Femina, Travisano, and Partners. The Isuzu spots featured Liesure’s Joe Isuzu as an over-the-top pitchman, willing to say anything, no matter how outrageous, to sell a car. Here are some examples, thanks to Wikipedia:

• “You have my word on it.”
• “If I’m lying, may lightning hit my mother.” (“Good luck, Mom!” appears on screen!)
• “It has more seats than the Astrodome!”

The spots were subtitled, allowing the car company to categorically deny the outrageous claims, and to correct the misstatements (thus keeping them out of hot water with the Federal Trade Commission). The spots were funny and raised Isuzu’s brand awareness from practically nothing to a point where they were mentioned in the same name with Nissan, Toyota, and Mazda.

Recently, a new series of spots has begun making waves, this time for the Glade brand. They star actress Dori Kelly as a kind of pathological liar-cum-Mom-next-door. She’s a beautiful, obviously upper-middle-class homemaker/mom/wife, who charmingly puts on airs every chance she gets, initially denying her fondness for Glade brand scent product (candles, air fresheners, et cetera), and then sheepishly acknowledging her use, when caught in a lie. Each spot follows the same basic plot: Dori lies about using Glade products to make herself look more elegant/successful/productive/whatever; she gets caught in a lie; she’s embarrassed, then smile and turns to the camera to deliver the final pitch line, “…and yes…they’re Glade,” as if their origins as a Glade product should surprise and delight the audience.

Obviously, what Glade is combating here is their belief that there is a perception in the market that Glade products are not sophisticated, nor will your friends approve of your using them, instead of some more expensive brands. I’m not sure if that perception is really a factor in the marketplace, but I can tell you that what Glade is trying to do is to swim upstream, instead of simply creating a new brand, which would have been the easier path to success.

Think about cars for a second. Is a Lexus better than a Toyota? Is an Infiniti better than a Nissan? Not really. Lexus is made by Toyota, as Infiniti is made by Nissan. Neither luxury brand is marketed in Japan. Those vehicles are simply a part of their parent companies’ lines. But both companies made wise decisions when they chose to create separate and distinct brands for their up-market cars, rather than attempting to convince consumers that their brands were suddenly competing with Mercedes, instead of Chevrolet and Ford. The public tends to pigeonhole brands in categories that fix their worth against their competitors. Toyota competes against brands like Chevy, Buick, Ford and Mercury. Lexus competes against Cadillac, Lincoln, BMW and Mercedes. Doesn’t matter if they are the same vehicles under the hood. Perception is King.

Now think back to Glade. Is it worth spending millions to convince people that Glade is not an econo-brand, but is, in fact, able to run with the “big dogs” in the scent industry? I think not. You can’t be cheap and expensive at the same time. There’s really no such thing as a bargain luxury brand. Luxury is always expensive – you pay for quality. If you get quality on the cheap, logic dictates there must be something wrong with it.

S.C. Johnson (the parent company of Glade) would have been far better off coming up with a new name for upmarket products, even if the products are the same things as what they market under the Glade brand. I’m sure there are some who will believe the marketing, and buy Glade to try and “fool their friends” into thinking that they are buying expensive products. I doubt any of their friends will be fooled.

Still the commercials are interesting, as while the use of a spokesliar will get a lot of attention, it’s always a risk to make your product spokesperson out to be a liar. If they’d lie, it’s only a hop, skip, and a logical jump to the idea that the company itself may be lying. Unless you don’t mind the public thinking that you’re lying, when you say your products are the best.

This entry was posted on Saturday, October 18th, 2008 at 3:40 pm and is filed under advertising, marketing.You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.