Lara Logan did a very interesting and well put-together segment on Michael Jackson’s legacy and estate tonight on 60 Minutes, and after it was over, the show suggested interested viewers might want to check out “one of Michael Jackson’s most personal items: his handwritten manifesto” on 60 Minutes Overtime. And this 60 Minutes Overtime spot, they told us, was being sponsored by Pfizer. Yes, that Pfizer: the drug company.
Wow, a Michael Jackson news curio piece being sponsored by a drug company? Michael Jackson died from pharmaceuticals, so I’m not so sure that a drug company sponsoring a piece on Michael Jackson’s legacy is such a good idea. Um, you know, because it reminds me how dangerous pharmaceuticals can be, and it makes me think that Pfizer is being especially cynical and insensitive to his memory, and also not very perceptive with regard to their own public relations when they do such an inappropriate advertising sponsorship. I have made plenty of inappropriate advertising sponsorships and tie-ins for products and movie combinations as a joke on this blog, and I must say, this one really takes the cake for this type of absurdity! Only, I’m not so sure his fans will appreciate the irony.
So I think the lesson here is this: If you are sponsoring a news segment, a movie, a TV show, etc., try to make sure that the thing you are sponsoring and attaching your name to doesn’t make people think bad things about your company or product, whether by accident because the story makes your product look deadly, or by seeming callous or cynical with the association you’re creating between your product or company and the subject matter you’re sponsoring. You know, like a Slasher horror movie being sponsored by a carving knife company, or The Texas Chain Saw Massacre being sponsored by a chain saw company. Or a news segment on the environmental impact of the Gulf oil spill being sponsored by an oil company or lobbying group. Or a piece on a dead pop star who died from pharmaceutical drugs being sponsored by a pharmaceutical company. You know, something like that.
You get the idea, right? Because I think you might just find that if you sponsor the wrong thing that makes people think badly of your company, you might just be paying to sponsor your own PR disaster. But don’t let that stop you if you’re determined to make your advertising opportunities work against your company.
BTW: Here’s a previous post of mine on silly movie advertising tie-ins and product placement if you’d like to see some more (fictional) examples of inadvisable advertising sponsorship opportunities:
