Are advertisers hurting their own cause by targeting Cricketers in cheeky commercials?

Left side of my brain said, ‘It is tongue-in-cheek and shrewd, yet very clever and timely’ and the right side shouted with a counter argument: it is a mean, mean world that means only business. No one is for anyone, and everyone in here is in it to make a quick buck, at whatever cost.

Here, I am referring to the fresh commercial, perhaps aired for the first time today, of online sale and purchase platform (better call it e-commerce) Quikr. The commercial begins with a monologue by a policewala who rants about the corruption in Cricket and appeals to Cricketers not to sell their integrity and instead sell their old belongings on Quikr. The camera pans out the next moment and appears a bowler rubbing a Cricket ball against his right thigh (a clear prototype of Sreesanth).

The policewala hurriedly holds bowler’s head from behind and smashes it into water in the bucket that is kept in front of the bowler (here you will for sure be reminded of Chloromint commercial with a tagline ‘Dubara Mat Poochna’). The policewala in Haryanvi tone utters exact words that news channels have been playing out over and over again – spot-fixing karega, towel latka ke bookie ko signal dega, blah blah…

Well, like my left brain indicated, some will say it is a sharp piece of advertising - very timely and relevant - and will have viewers’ eyes lit up. I am sure people will take notice of it like I did. But, another aspect to look at it is whether it is a mere cheap tactic to ride the wave and tweak it to your own benefit. These are the same sports celebrities who you run after weeks and months to pay obnoxious sum to endorse your product and appear in your commercials. We all know it is a phase which too shall pass in Cricket. And these are the same Cricketers who after a big tournament win will bounce back and be the poster boys again. Will they then take it on their ego and make the whole industry pay with their tantrums?

Are such quick wit strategies in favor of the advertising industry? By doing this, aren’t we confusing our consumers and breaking their trust in our endorsers, who here are Cricketers? Or is it a hint in the direction that Cricketers are no longer advertisers’ first choice and that they are willing to sacrifice them? In my view, it is a matter of debate which has the potential to become a talking point of the night in News hours on news channels such as CNN IBN and Times Now.

I would like to end this blog with a thought I shared with my colleague the other day – in today’s world of media and glare it does not really matter how you are being talked about. What really matters is whether you’re being talked about. And, for sure, Cricket and Cricketers are!