This piece is written by Chris Hussey, Marketing and Community Relations Manager here at KWWL.
Do you find this offensive?
Some people have. These new promotional spots are for KWWL’s Mobile Text Alerts. Then again, you probably gathered that after watching them both. Like I said, some people have found them to be offensive. We’ve received a few emails and a phone call, with people saying that they found the spots to be in poor taste.
What if I told you that actual Billy Mays commercials are still running? Would those be offensive to you as well? What if I told you that the Mays family and his longtime business partner endorsed the airing of these commercials? Would that change your opinion if you knew that his wife and close friend felt that Mays would have wanted his life’s work to continue? Well, that’s exactly what happened. You can read the details of that here.
Part of the production process when coming up with a way to promote something or someone here at KWWL is Idea Generation. Just like brainstorming, ideas and concepts are batted around and developed to see if they can accomplish what we need them to do. When the idea came up to do an infomercial-style pitch for our new Mobile Text Alerts, the first thought that came to mind was Billy Mays. The modern master of the infomercial pitch, Mays’ style is unmistakable. You know when you were watching a Billy Mays commercial. You couldn’t escape it. His booming voice. His jet black hair and beard, and his trademark blue shirt and khakis. It was all part of a polished image that sold millions of products.
Immediately after this idea struck us, the most important question was raised: Would this be insensitive?
After researching it, and reading the linked article above, we felt that it wouldn’t. If Mays’ own family was going to continue to use the work of the actual man after his death, then a parody of the man couldn’t be offensive. We also found these spots done by Mays, where he parodied not only his style, but himself as well.
I can stand here and tell you that the spots were presented and produced out of respect for Mays and his style, as we knew that a lot of people liked Mays and his approach. No intention to show disrespect for Mays was ever intended, but as the title of the post reads, offense is in the eye of the Beholder.
The dilemma of course comes in the fact deceased celebrities are seen, parodied and commercialized all the time. Does that mean that all of these representations are just as offensive? Many years ago, John Wayne pitched for Coors beer, long after he was dead. Audrey Hepburn did an ad for the Gap 13 years after her death and most recently, Chris Farley was seen helping out DirectTV. The debate over that particular spot became a bit heated, and you can read about it here and here. The list goes on and on with many more celebrities being used after their death.
So, where is the line? At what point is that threshold crossed? Is there even a line to begin with? While I’m not certain there is a hard and fast answer, I think the majority of the answer does lie in the intentions of the person or people behind the item in question. Are they mocking or degrading the late individual? Is there malice behind their efforts? Or are they using the beloved aspects of the deceased? For example, in the John Wayne ad linked above, it seems clear to me that Coors is capitalizing on Wayne’s tough guy image to appeal to men in their effort to sell beer.
It’s a tricky issue, but ultimately what I feel is most important is that we’re getting a reaction. That doesn’t mean this was strictly done for any kind of shock value, but this promo was produced to be noticed. To stand out from the crowd, and the fact that it does generate opinions from people does indicate that it is effective. I would love to and am happy to continue the debate in the comments below.
Thank You.
Posted under KWWL Staff
This post was written by jjarvis on December 4, 2009
1 Comment
