Surrogate Advertising: Celebrity Endorsements and Ethical Responsibility
More and more celebrities from movies to sports are seen endorsing ‘extended’ brands from Gutkha makers in this celebrity-enthused country
Akshay Kumar and Shahrukh Khan’s entry in a Vimal ad which had historically featured Ajay Devgan took many by surprise. Not just that these were big names in the Industry, but also because while Shahrukh Khan was considered to be too big for ads by gutkha brands, Akshay Kumar has always been seen promoting healthy lifestyle and eating habits. He is even the brand ambassador for the promotional campaign run by the Government of India for women hygiene. Of course, many years back he promoted Red & White cigarette, but we had all left that behind us long back, or so we thought.
But the trio finds themselves in an illustrious company. Top actors from the industry like Amitabh Bachhan, Salman Khan, Ranveer Singh, Mahesh Babu, Tiger Shroff are endorsing Gutkha brands too. Some of the celebrties who were associated with gutkha brands in past are Hrithik Roshan, Anushka Sharma, Priyanka Chopra, and Saif Ali Khan.
However, movie actors promoting ‘unethical’ products like alcohol, cigarettes and gutkha brands is nothing new. But what took people by surpie this IPL season was not the average Bollywood actor promoting gutkha brand, but even some of the most celebrated and well respected cricketers joining the band wagon. Seeing legends like Sunil Gavaskar and Kapil Dev promoting a gutkha brand really got the chatter around the legal and ethical aspects of endorsing substances that are banned for promotion.
Well, with gutkha ads ruling the roost on TV, digital and billboards, we often ask ourselves — “Is this really allowed? How are these celebrities selling a dangerous product like gutkha to people?”.
Let’s quickly look at laws that govern promotion of products like gutkha in India. The Cigarette and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (COTPA) prohibits the advertisement of cigarettes and other tobacco products. Section 5 of COTPA states that no person shall engage in any form of advertisement for these products. Section 5(3)(a) of COTPA prohibits any person from endorsing cigarettes or tobacco products under any contract or deal, or in exchange for gifts, prizes, awards, or rewards. Furthermore, the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994, contain amendments that regulate the advertisement of prohibited products such as cigarettes, alcohol, wine, or tobacco.
Despite such clear rules and regulations, how are brands are able to circumvent and promote their brands of gutkha and pan masala? The answer lies in the mix of what is widely known as Surrogate Advertising, and a marketing strategy known as Brand Extension. Surrogate advertising is the practice of promoting one product or brand while intending to indirectly promote another, typically when direct promotion is restricted or banned for this product. So think of Seagram music CDs or a Smirnoff Event being marketed. In this case, music CD or the event is a surroagte to actually promote the alcohol by Seagram and Smirnoff. By doing this, Seagram and Smirnoff can promote their alcohol by restricting their promotion to music CD or packaged water bottle, while it is easily understood by the audience that what actually is promoted is their alcohol.
Brand Extension is what brands use in order to create surrogates to undertake surrogate marketing. Simply put, brand extensions are nothing but products which bear the same brand name, but belong to different product categories. For example, in the above picture, the same brand name “Dove” is used for different products belonging to different product categories. Let’s say hypothetically, if promotion of Dove Shampoo, which is a more profitable product, is restricted in India. The company then goes ahead and launches Dove Soap instead. The company then extensively starts promoting Dove Soap. This shall lead to higher brand recall and recognition of the “Dove” brand, which will in all probability also lead to a higher purchase and usage of Dove Shampoo. Thus, the company increases its sales of Dove Shampoo, while advertising for Dove Soap.
Hence, brands are able to circumvent the regulations in the country by promoting surrogate brands which are the extensions of the brands which they actually want to sell, using surrogate advertising. This helps them in maintaining the visibility of the brand, which adds to brand recall, recognition, salience and even loyalty for the ‘regulated’ product.
Gutkha brands which have roped in celebrities to promote these brands to audience also adopt the same manual. All of these brands have created legally accepted brand extensions
like elaichi and mouth fresheners, which are extended from the current brands of gutkha and pan masala. So for example, you have Rajshri Pan Masala as the main brand, but Rajshree Elaichi is what is promoted as surrogate brand. Since there is no restriction on promotion of elaichi, this is acceptable advertising, even though sublty it is actually promoting the brand Rajshri, which is strongly associated with its Pan Masala. Similarly, while Rajnigandha wants customers to buy its Pan Masala, what it promotes on TV is Rajnigandha mouth-freshner. This sly move gets the job done. People know what Rajshree and Rajnigandha are. And thus, the point is made by these brands, without breaking any law.
Clearly, what these celebrities are doing is completely legal as they are promoting what is legally acceptable as per the law. Until, the law catches up, there is no punitive measure that can be taken against these mega influencers who are promoting dangerous, or even life-threatening products to the audience, but what is conspicuous in this behaviour is the ethical standing and conscience of these celebrities. What is even more disheartening is that their involvement in surrogate advertising has not really impacted their own image or popularity among the audience. This phenomenon highlights the unfortunate reality that despite engaging in promotion of unethical products through surrogate advertising, these celebrities continue to enjoy widespread acceptance and support from their fan base.
Moving forward, it is imperative to strengthen and enforce existing laws, while also fostering a culture of ethical responsibility among celebrities. Awareness campaigns, stricter penalties, and active engagement of governing bodies are needed to discourage celebrities from promoting tobacco products and protect public health. Hopefully, our influencers would really influence us to be better versions of ourselves, and not push us to perils of life-threatening diseases for big buck.
