Of course sex sells. We’re used to seeing semi-naked celebrities and models prancing around on beaches or rolling around on beds to sell their own perfumes, or whichever international label they are paid to front.
Clearly it works, otherwise these individuals wouldn’t be given millions of pounds every year to be the face of these brands. But sometimes the advertising executives get it wrong, very wrong.
It’s all about the right celebrity for the right brand.
Alexa Chung for Mulberry? Yes, a great way to bring the youth market to a brand that was ageing and losing market share.
Emma Watson for Burberry? Maybe, the brand’s over 150 years old and is clearly looking at its positioning and Emma is receiving good coverage in the media for her style. I’m not convinced though.
Kate Moss for just about everything? Yes. Despite a rather public fall from grace over her drug use which resulted in her losing nearly all her contracts, the model is back – possibly bigger than ever. Her model credentials, edginess and wild lifestyle rumours blend to make her the ideal face for many labels. And have you noticed, she hardly ever speaks in public, so she’s not about to say something that’ll ruin a brand.
But Rihanna fronting a Nivea campaign? Really? When was that ever a good idea?
In my mind Nivea stands for wholesomeness, nurturing and heritage. Not three words I’d have ever associated with Rihanna, whose sexuality couldn’t be more overt, the complete polar opposite to the brand values in fact.
No wonder the new head of Nivea’s parent firm Beiersdorf, Stefan Heidenreich, has pulled the plug on that one.
Forget the explicit songs and raunchy videos, you could say they are/were her stage persona, like Beyonce’s Sasha Fierce.
But anyone who follows her on Twitter will know that she’s living life to the full, partying until dawn on various yachts in the Med and generally having a great time. She’s enjoying her limited time off from work and for some brands that’d be great. But, it’s not Nivea is it?