Let’s start by reviewing some of the best examples of manipulative advertising.
Advertising is an exercise in persuasion, and for a while, marketers were getting away with a lot of deception.
In the 1950s and 1960s, marketers were using cleverly arranged advertisements to fool consumers into buying products that were a complete mismatch with their needs, desires, and values.
Now, we’re in a world where more and more consumers are skeptical about the claims made by brands, whether products, services, or even political candidates.
In a world where the vast majority of consumers now have access to the internet, it’s become all the more necessary for marketers to present their products and services in a way that consumers can trust.
This is where manipulative advertising comes into play.
Here are some examples of manipulative advertising that you can use to get better results from your marketing campaigns.
1. Coke vs Pepsi: The Coke vs Pepsi controversy
First, let’s start by looking at the Coke versus Pepsi situation.
The case that sparked the controversy is this one, where Pepsi’s marketing team wanted to make a point about the differences in taste between the two brands of cola.
Coke and Pepsi were both selling their products in the United States, but the two brands sold them differently.
Coke was the brand that was sold in stores, where Pepsi was sold in stores and also in vending machines.
However, the two brands were different on the inside.
Coke was much lighter and sweeter, and it was sold to everyone, whereas Pepsi was sold only to adults.
The Coke marketing team wanted to draw the consumer’s attention to these differences, and they created a commercial that depicted the two brands as rivals, with one brand winning and the other losing.
Let’s break this down more.
The point, which the Coca-Cola marketing team was trying to make, was that Pepsi was just a bit sweeter and a bit lighter, making it more popular than Coke.
Therefore, the Coke marketing team wanted to say: “In this commercial, you see us trying to outdo Pepsi. But if you want to taste the real difference between our two brands, just try Coke.”
This commercial was a success, and the Pepsi marketing team was able to capitalize on this commercial.
2. The Coca-Cola Company vs. Pepsi: A battle that ended in a draw
The Coca-Cola Company also felt that the Pepsi team was using clever tactics to try to tarnish their company.
In 2003, the Pepsi marketing team created a commercial that depicted a man in a suit sitting on a throne in front of a Coca-Cola sign.
This commercial was very successful in pushing the idea that Coca-Cola was just a soft drink company and that Pepsi was the real deal.
On the other hand, Coca-Cola had their own commercial, which depicted a man in a suit riding a horse that was being chased by a Pepsi sign.
The two men were riding side by side and the Pepsi sign was clearly in the lead.
The commercial ended with a shot of one of the men with Coke branding on his hand.
Coca-Cola was able to capitalize on this commercial, which ultimately led to a tie between the two companies.
3. The Nike vs. Adidas: A battle that went all the way to the Supreme Court
Another case where a business is trying to capitalize on an existing social media trend was the “Nike and Adidas” case.
The case was between the Nike and Adidas brands.
The two brands were both famous for making sports shoes, and they were both competing against each other.
However, the two brands were also selling their products to different demographic groups.
Nike wanted to target men, whereas Adidas wanted to target women.
However, the two brands were both making money in an industry where there was a lot of crossover.
Therefore, the two companies were competing against each other via a tactic called deceptive practices.
In this case, the companies were both trying to get their products in stores or to consumers through other companies.
Both of their ads were aimed at drawing consumers to their stores, where their products could be purchased.
However, the companies were actually trying to deceive consumers by making it seem like the products were only available at the stores.
In order to pull this off, the two companies created a campaign where they sold the same shoes for different prices.
The companies were able to capitalize on the crossover of the two demographics by giving the shoes different prices. This was the tactic that ultimately led to a lawsuit and a drawn-out court case.
4. The “Pepsi and Coke” case
The “Pepsi and Coke” case is another case that illustrates the importance of manipulative advertising.
The Pepsi marketing team was promoting their brand in a way that was very different from the Coke marketing team.
This meant that consumers saw the two brands as being different, but they were actually the same.
One of the ways that the two brands were different was that they both had an advertising team.
The advertising team made the Pepsi brand look “cool.”
This meant that Pepsi was the more “artsy” and the Coke brand was the more “serious” brand.
The advertising team also made the Coke brand seem more “popular.”
This meant that Coca-Cola was selling products that were more popular among consumers.
In both cases, the advertising team made the two brands seem different in order to make them look more appealing to consumers.
5. The “Coca Cola and Pepsi” case
The “Coca Cola and Pepsi” case is yet another example of a business misusing the crossover of two different brands.
This case is similar to the “Nike and Adidas” case in that it was a crossover of two different demographics.
However, the “Coca Cola and Pepsi” case was more controversial, and it involved two brands that were trying to capitalize on a crossover.
This case was between Coca-Cola and Pepsi that were both selling soda products.
This meant that the two brands had different target markets.
Coca-Cola was selling to adults, while Pepsi was selling to children.
The Coca-Cola marketing team wanted to make the two brands seem different, and the Pepsi marketing team wanted to make Pepsi seem more popular than Coke.
The two organizations decided to run commercials that portrayed the two brands selling the same product, but with different packaging.
This resulted in confusion for consumers as to which brand was selling which product.
For example, Pepsi was selling their product in regular packaging, and Coca-Cola was selling their product in a special package.
The two brands were also selling their product for different prices.
The crossover of two different brands is a great strategy to help expand your reach to new demographics. However, it can also be abused in a negative way.
The crossover of two different brands can be a great strategy to help you expand your reach to new demographics.
Images by Freepik
Generated by AI