Dove is at it again…flying in the face of convention, that is. Many of you will be familiar with the Real Curves campaign used to launch Dove’s firming lotion. It was noteworthy because it featured “real” women instead of impossibly slim models. Earlier this year, the brand took the campaign into “enemy territory” by advertising on the male media niche of the U.S. Superbowl. Now the brand is undermining the foundations of the cosmetic industry with its new TV ad, Evolution.
The ad portrays the transformation of a model from an ordinary-looking person to a physically- and digitally-enhanced icon of female beauty. The message is loud and clear: what you see on billboards and in magazines is not real, but fake.
The ad closes by reminding viewers of the Dove Self-Esteem Fund and exhorting viewers to participate in the Dove Real Beauty Workshops for Girls. (Click here to go to the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty site.)
At the time this post was written, Evolution had been viewed over 65,000 times, and received an average rating of 4.5 out of 5.
To my mind, the Dove campaign is one of the most sophisticated marketing campaigns out there. Dove recognizes that a brand needs to stand for something and does so in a way that seems genuine, not contrived. But in taking on the glamour of the cosmetics industry, the people behind the campaign have taken it to a new level.
The cosmetics industry, among others, drives sales by creating a fantasy. The advertising models portray a perfection that is unobtainable to the vast majority of women. Most simply accept the hyperbole or buy into the glamour, secretly hoping that they will look and feel better if they use the products. But others – particularly adolescents– take these stereotypes at face value, and when they don’t measure up to these impossible standards, they think less of themselves.
Dove’s new ads resonate with the target audience, whether they are bothered by the hype of the cosmetics companies or not. The ads strike a chord because, at some point, almost everyone has wished they could change something about their appearance. We may tell ourselves that beauty is only skin deep, but its tough to truly believe it when we are bombarded with images of superficially attractive women (and men) every day.
(Of course, standards of beauty change over time. The tiny size zero of today would be considered deformed by earlier standards. Just think of works by Peter Paul Rubens, which featured full-figured, voluptuous women, not anorexic ones.)
In taking a stand against the image of the “ideal woman,” Dove proves that it is a not simply an advertised product, but a real brand, one with which people can feel a real emotional connection. By adopting the realistic “this is how it is” approach of the Evolution ad, the communication moves beyond traditional advertising to proselytize on behalf of its potential consumers. Most companies would ask “How can I make you buy more?” But the people behind the Dove campaign have asked “What can we do to make life better for you?”
There is little doubt in my mind that the Dove campaign will help make the brand successful and drive sales; the real question is whether it will succeed in turning the cosmetic and fashion industries away from their vision of perfect beauty as a sales driver. What do you think?
(29 votes, average: 2.83 out of 5)
Loading ...
November 2nd, 2006 at 3:28 am
Appealing to the better nature in people particularly if it is a ‘truth’ will always resonate. But this is not flattery or reassurance, it is a slightly uncomfortable challenge. In the case of Dove there is an added benefit of not talking down or patronising the viewer, so the idea seems to gain additional power. Not all brands could get away with it - but those that ‘walk the talk’ can expect to succeed and Dove is carving out a valuable and meaningful position. The buyer might well be proud to be seen taking a Dove product off the shelf and may even refuse the paper bag to put it in so she is seen to purchasing the ‘real thing’.
November 2nd, 2006 at 5:57 am
Of course it won’t. Many women have been using make-up to change their natural beauty since the Roman times and earlier (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/5129102.stm).
Curiously, in most of nature it is the male who puts on the colorful show to impress the female (think of the peacock). But for us, for some reason, it has always been the woman.
The fashion and cosmetic industries aren’t creating that desire, they are exploiting it.
Otherwise you wouldn’t have need to put “and Men” in brackets.
November 2nd, 2006 at 9:43 am
In my opinion, the landscape of consumers and their motivations is broad enough for “opposing” positions to be equally persuasive for different audiences, and in some cases, for the same individual.
Thinking both empirically and personally about the appeal of brands inviting us to “indulge” vs. those saying “be healthy / shape up,” there seems to be room for both (particularly in the US where we seem simultaneously obsessed with self gratification and self improvement?).
Though Dove has and will continue to win with this strategy, purveyors of the beauty myth probably don’t need to worry or even adjust.
November 2nd, 2006 at 10:06 am
I quite like the Dove campaign - but it’s fake real. They are not doing it to help shift attitudes in the cosmetic and fashion industry. They are doing it to sell soap. Ie if it didn’t sell soap they wouldn’t do it. If it is working then great, good luck to them. But lets not pretend they are trying to start a social change movement for women, which a lot of their PR and other material is trying to suggest.
November 2nd, 2006 at 11:12 am
Hi Nigel,
- keen demonstration, but aren’t you jumping to conclusions ?
- from my POV, the approach that Dove is taking today is more or less what “The Body Shop” has been doing for years. And did so well that L’Oréal bought it !
- more seriously, Dove with the help of Ogilvy has developed a neat message that stands out very well in a landscape very crowded with similar messages ; what is really surprising is that this type of message comes from such a strong brand …
- but after all, wasn’t Dove one of David Ogilvy’s favorite brand for whom he worked for a long time ???
keen thoughts,
R.
November 2nd, 2006 at 2:18 pm
There are two aspects that I would like to comment on: The “real” nature of the women depicted; and whether or not Dove is being a “Bad” competitor.
To the first point there are many clothing manufacturers offering items for plus-sized women (at least 35% of US female population, and growing). The women depicted are certainly large, but invariably glowing and gorgeous — not unlike Dove’s women depicted in Times’ Square. They are idealistic versions of overweight women. Granted, they are not anorexic, but a long way from the obese women they are targeting. So it’s all relative isn’t it — “fat chicks” get a new set of aspirational role models!
To the second point, I am reminded of Sanka’s advertising back in the 70’s and 80’s. Dr. Marcus Welby (the character depicted by the actor) asked people why they were so jumpy — seems they were consuming too much caffeine. The remedy being Sanka. And while it may have benefited Sanka it probably contributed to the demise of the canned coffee business. (Per capita’s have not gotten back to where they were, despite Starbuck’s changing the nature of coffee for a new generation.) So to your point — perhaps the cosmetic industry as a whole will be damaged. Or more likely, two years from now things will have reverted. After all, hope does spring eternal, and as long as there’s a good buck to be made, marketers will go for it.
November 2nd, 2006 at 3:03 pm
Well, I for one am glad to know that this Nigel Hollis is such a sensitive guy - but I’m not sure why altering the appearance of the model is such a big deal. Someone with an art background could probably provide some good reasons why they needed to enlarge her eyes and lengthen her neck. They are making her larger than life, anyway, to put her on a billboard. (At Mount Rushmore, the Presidents’ pupils are five-foot stalks of rock, and that’s not “real,” either, but it’s done to achieve an effect.)
Besides, they’ve been touching up photographs for years, since the days long before PhotoShop. I certainly would never begrudge anyone for having a zit airbrushed out of their yearbook photo!
Back to Dove: I give the Real Curves campaign two thumbs up for using healthy-looking women. (Though isn’t it ironic that they were advertising “firming lotion?”) I applaud Dove’s 2006 SuperBowl ad for its consciousness-raising value. But the Evolution ad is taking on a non-issue. As some others have noted, they are selling soap! It’s marketing! And what is marketing? Marketing is about convincing people to buy stuff they don’t need. How “real” or “fake” is that?
November 2nd, 2006 at 3:28 pm
The Dove campaign seems to work on several levels–but two stand out for me.
First, the depiction of real women with real imperfections leverages personal identification, familiarity, social proximity (as opposed to distance) — in short, these are highly approachable women. As such, they (and the brand) are likely more socially appealing and less threatening–just the sort of folks you’d invite to your party (see “Is your brand a party animal” from October 18). While perhaps not Dove’s intent (I suspect it was), this depiction (coupled with the “social causes” of the Real Beauty campaign) is ideal for fostering the sort of favorable consumer-generated media that marketers desire. Thus, Dove’s Real Beauty campaign is a strong case study on how to foster multi-media campaigns–including consumer-generated media.
Second, while Dove may be borrowing heavily (no pun intended) from The Body Shop’s and others’ ideas, the mass of the brand and it’s importance to the market may affect the structure of the cosmetics market. That is, the paradigm for competing successfully in this space may shift relatively toward cosmetic “enhancement” as opposed to “optimization” in consumer choice (of brands, products, and prices paid). So, while the idea may not be new, the fact that a major brand has adopted the strategy may have repercussions throughout the segment.
Finally, a question…Why is it that up to the time of this posting that only men have commented?
November 2nd, 2006 at 4:11 pm
maybe the women are at a real beauty workshop?
November 8th, 2006 at 3:24 am
First off, I can’t agree with ‘that’s just marketing, they sell things, that’s it!’ kind of attitude. Any marketing message strong enough (or aiming to initially) to leave the field of sales enhancement and go to that of culture is should be analysed as such, with no ‘discounts’ for its marketing origin. If it impacts people, it’s sociology, not pure marketing anymore. I think anyone can think of numerous examples of that kind.
That said, I suppose an anti-glamour ad campaign for Dove soup is not going to make impact that big. The whole glamour stuff is advertised not only through ads - it’s made into lifestyle by women mags, movies, books etc. For ‘back to basics’ approach to succeed there needs to exist strong latent demand for this change - women watch the ads, say ‘aha, that’s it!’ and forget that glamour nonsense plagueing them. If there’s no such thing at the moment, we’re talking about ‘yet another soup ad’ with ambitions. And my money are on the latter variant. As I see it women, while understanding that glamour has its flaws, are content with it as a whole. I see non-glamour women mags failing to gain any significant audience, for example. It’ll take more than a single campaign to make a change - Dove’ll sell their soup no the discontented and that’s it. But a avalanche of blog posts on the subject can surely help drive the point through.
As for votes on YouTube… you are dealing with Internet here, used for the most part by younger, better-educated audience. You can expect them to vote against most things bandwagon, right?
November 13th, 2006 at 12:20 am
But does the campaign move Dove from a premium product, pitched at high-incomes - to a mainstream product pitched at the masses. Do we know what the long term brand strategy is around this campaign?
November 17th, 2006 at 3:37 am
Quoting Nigel: “the real question is whether it will succeed in turning the cosmetic and fashion industries away from their vision of perfect beauty as a sales driver.”
Whether Dove succeeds in eliminating the “vision of perfect beauty as a sales driver” really depends on how one defines perfection. I, for one, think the vision of perfect beauty will always be a sales driver for both women and men. People hate feeling like they’re settling for something. They would rather feel like they’re celebrating what they are, and I think that’s what Dove tried to accomplish with this campaign. Their message wasn’t “It’s okay if you’re not perfect, and by perfect we mean having vital stats of 36-26-36.” Rather, their message seemed more like “There are many ways of being perfect, many ways of being glamorous, many ways of being beautiful.” And this message isn’t new; it’s been around for years. Gwyneth Paltrow sent a positive message to all flat-chested girls around the world when she appeared on the covers of magazines in elegant tube tops. Monica Bellucci and Kate Winslet are similar examples for women with actual hips. There are countless other examples of women who are considered beautiful by many and yet are nowhere near model proportions.
That said, I do think that Dove’s campaign is commendable and it’ll most likely be successful at driving sales. That’s because it hit a market nerve that’s been tingling for some time. Dove didn’t invent something new; it capitalized on something that was already there.
November 19th, 2006 at 11:58 pm
But if consumers traditionally pay more for “visions of perfect beauty” (quote: Stef, above) will they pay more for “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”? I’m just interested in the effect this has on the Dove pricing model medium to long term.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:32 pm
Well, I have to admit that I was not expecting this post to generate quite so much comment! Thank you all for sharing your thoughts.
It seems to me that there are a couple of important themes running through the comments.
OK, let’s agree, Dove would not be pursuing this agenda if they did not think that it would generate more sales for the brand. That’s what marketing is all about - creating intangible value that allows a brand to command a price premium and increase sales.
In this case Dove is seeking to do so by tapping into a longstanding issue that others have tapped before. I think that proves that the issue is a very real one.
But what is the issue? To my mind it is not just about shape and beauty. It is about self-esteem. The cosmetics industry appeals to our desire to look our best but, in doing so, creates the belief in many that they are not “acceptable”, never mind beautiful. This belief can be actively damaging to peoples self-esteem. By taking the stand that there is more to beauty than shape or glamour I believe that Dove is going beyond just selling soap to creating a supportive and positive persona for their brand.
Lastly, as Frank points out, there will always be a divide on this subject. The divide will be between three groups. Those that aspire to achieve the beauty touted by the cosmetic industry and who believe they can achieve it, those who aspire but don’t believe they can live up to it, and those that draw their self-esteem from inside not from appearance.
December 15th, 2006 at 8:21 am
An update on the success of the Evolution ad:
CINCINNATI (AdAge.com) — With not a penny of paid media and in less than a month, “Dove Evolution,” a 75-second viral film created by Ogilvy & Mather, Toronto, for the Unilever brand has reaped more than 1.7 million views on YouTube and has gotten significant play on TV talk shows “Ellen” and “The View” as well as on “Entertainment Tonight.” It’s also brought the biggest-ever traffic spike to CampaignForRealBeauty.com, three times more than Dove’s Super Bowl ad and resulting publicity last year, according to Alexa.com.
May 7th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Dove campaign does not convince me at all.
First of all, who can define what is ‘ideal’ and what is ‘real’? Does this mean that women who have both, slim figures and pretty faces are not ‘real’?
It is all about emotion.
Cosmetic companies make marketing campaigns to match the aspirations of their target audience and make them feel better by using their products. Dove is doing the exact same thing, but simply taking a different approach. Women will buy their products and feel better as they walk away feeling like a ‘real’ women.
End result: they all feel better and beautiful