An interview with Reza Mikaelzadeh, director of the Ugen Graphic advertising center
Where both the celebrity and the client lose the game
Long live Jamshid Meshaikhi, one of the first popular actors of Iranian cinema, whose face on advertising billboards announced the first appearance of cinematographers in the field of advertising after the revolution.
With this move, he somehow broke the taboo of winning advertisements by superstars and popular figures as a brand and exposed himself to the positive and negative reflections of this move among people and mass media. From that time until now, this movement has continued from time to time by other prominent figures and celebrities, and perhaps the last one was Navid Mohammadzadeh’s entry into this arena in recent months. This movement and appearance of the actor has always been hijacked by different opinions
. Some consider it as a help to the field of domestic production, and apart from the commercial aspect, they praise this partnership, and some criticize the way it is implemented, and there are some who always disagree and have a problem with it. We decided to have a conversation with one of the experts in the field of advertising, who has many programs and studies on the presence of celebrities in the world of advertising, to see from an expert perspective, the features and disadvantages of this advertising method for both brands, celebrities and products. What has been
Let’s get to the point right at the beginning, we would like to know if you have any plans with cinematographers and celebrities to appear in advertisements during your work or not?
For several reasons, this story has not happened yet. First of all, I believe that it is very harmful and dangerous for cinematographers to enter this field in a sensory and emotional way, and more than that, it is problematic for the advertising industry. In addition, I have been studying and observing for several years and I have been and still am very strict in accepting this. For about two years, together with a team of experts, we have started designing under the title ((Celebrity Branding)) and we plan to plan and implement services in this field. I want to ask a question to get more specialized into the discussion, what do you think is the difference between a logo and a brand?
I imagine that a logo is a logo of a company or an institution, while a brand is related to the whole of that activity.
This question opens a good perspective for a better understanding of advertising. Regardless of the academic definitions, in the popular definition, a logo is a sign ((without sense)) and a brand is a sign ((owner of sense)), that is, the difference between the two is having and not having ((sense)). The important thing is that there are many in our country who academically translate and teach branding and advertising from foreign sources, but with great respect for these friends, I consider it necessary to emphasize the special importance of ((culture)) and ((geography)) and ( (race, society and psyche)) in advertisements.
Reza Mikaelzadeh has been working in the advertising industry since 1377 and has worked as a researcher and consultant in various fields of advertising, and apart from advertising issues in the field of performing arts and its integration with the advertising industry, he also has opinions and experience.
Let’s get to the point right at the beginning, we would like to know if you have any plans with cinematographers and celebrities to appear in advertisements during your work or not?
For several reasons, this story has not happened yet. First of all, I believe that it is very harmful and dangerous for cinematographers to enter this field in a sensory and emotional way, and more than that, it is problematic for the advertising industry. In addition, I have been studying and observing for several years and I have been and still am very strict in accepting this. For about two years, together with a team of experts, we have started designing under the title ((Celebrity Branding)) and we plan to plan and implement services in this field. I want to ask a question to get more specialized into the discussion, what do you think is the difference between a logo and a brand?
I imagine that a logo is a logo of a company or an institution, while a brand is related to the whole of that activity.
This question opens a good perspective for a better understanding of advertising. Regardless of the academic definitions, in the popular definition, a logo is a sign ((without sense)) and a brand is a sign ((owner of sense)), that is, the difference between the two is having and not having ((sense)). The important thing is that there are many in our country who academically translate and teach branding and advertising from foreign sources, but with great respect for these friends, I consider it necessary to emphasize the special importance of ((culture)) and ((geography)) and ( (race, society and psyche)) in advertisements.
• You certainly know that different and sometimes critical opinions have been expressed about the presence of cinematographers in the field of advertising, especially since it seems that there is a lot of repulsion in our country.
Our society is in transition, we have heard this description a lot and we even use it, one of the aspects of this story is passing the tradition and getting approval from circles towards technical analysis and review. Therefore, the advertising presence of many figures faces resistance or support due to emotional analysis, if this issue is not an emotional approach at all.
The economy of this program is very important, where and how it is done, because with a purely emotional lack of planning, both sides lose this game and do not get a positive result. Our celebrities need professional and specialized advertising consultants. Many times, wrong guidance has caused harmful results that cannot be checked. Of course, I know that popular artists are also afraid to enter advertisements for two reasons.
The first is the reaction to this question: ((Why are you advertising as a good actor?)) The lack of a sufficient vision of the advertising industry leads to this emotional impression. Second: ((Why should you take this money and not me?)) which is again an emotional statement. Unfortunately, during this time, I have not heard or read any expert and scientific analysis about this story from the supporters and opponents.
• Do you have statistics on which of the famous sports figures and cinematographers in the world were most active in the advertising industry?
The history of the first celebrity branding (marketing) dates back to the 1760s. When the company (Josiah Wedwood and Sons), a manufacturer of pottery and household goods, used the image and prestige of the royal family to increase the value of its products. From 1875 to the early 1900s, manufacturers used business cards featuring a famous person along with a product image. These cards, which generally included actors and sports figures, were given to the consumer or in the product packaging. In the 1930s, it was athletes who featured on the cards, but after World War II, they gave way to movie stars. It was in 1965 that color television was introduced to the public, a leap for consumer-producer communication. created In the 1980s, the function of celebrity branding changed. “Nike” company took the first step in this field. This company made the most of a genius basketball player named Michael Jordan . Nike’s initiative was to make a shoe model with Jordan’s name and brand and send him as its ambassador to different parts of the world. It was with the expansion of this approach that actors and sportsmen became the advertising symbols of different companies and day by day their expectations for increasing the number of contracts increased. Because the companies were making good profits with this program, they competed with each other to attract celebrities and allocated more budgets. It was in the 1990s that this approach changed again, this time the images on the card gave way to held news conferences where a celebrity, as a spokesperson for the company, introduced the product in question. Statistics showed that this method is very effective. One of these statistics, which was published in the first decade of 2000, indicated that the Nike company, from its 1996 contract with Tiger Wood, the golf superstar, until 2002, was able to pocket fifty million dollars in profits. But here I have to give a technical explanation: we are facing two types of celebrity branding: ((explicit)) and ((implicit)). Explicit branding, a clear example of which is Beyoncé’s sponsorship contract with Pepsi. In 2012, Beyoncé and the Pepsi Company signed a deal worth fifty million dollars, according to which (2012) Sisario was to take part in the advertising presence of the celebrity in publications, media programs and the Pepsi Creative Foundation. . But the clever thing was that Pepsi announced that Mrs. Beyoncé is somehow one of the colleagues of this company, not its advertising face. This intelligence made a psychological impact on the audience. In this way, consumers came to believe that Beyoncé believes in Pepsi products and that Pepsi stands firmly behind her. They came to believe that it is no longer a question that a celebrity has received money and is now willingly or unwillingly advertising for the company in question. Pepsi wanted the consumer to have a feeling of closeness and trust towards its advertisements, not the feeling of being exploited, and it was very successful in this move. Implicit branding, an example of which was the promotion and sale of headphones and portable speakers produced by Beats Electronics, owned by Dr. Dre, one of the founders of rap music, whose brand was called Beats By Dre. It was here that some rap singers, hip-hop singers and some pop singers such as Lady Gaga, Miley Cyrus, Nicki Minaj, Britney Spears promoted “Dr. Der” headphones and portable speakers in their music videos (Ortiz 2014). ).
But the more professional point was that these celebrities went further and used this product in their personal and natural environment. This idea caused the consumer to not see it through the eyes of advertisements and realize that it is a really good product that people with this class use even in their private lives. This implicitness sometimes has a far more effective effect.
• It seems that some of the opponents have been harsh in their comments. To say that we will remember a certain actor from now on with a certain product rather than his films is, perhaps not to say, narrow-minded and unprofessional.
Exactly, you know the best tennis player in the world by the product he promoted; Or do you remember Ronaldo from his commercials? or actors who have participated in advertisements in Iranian and world cinema in the past. See, this is a superficial treatment of a very important and big issue. Unfortunately, in recent years, this type of view is dictated to us a lot, that the motivation of popular faces is mostly to earn money and some kind of (selling popularity), while there is no correct and logical analysis behind these creations.
. In the words of Georg Wilhelm Gadamer ((My understanding is not the last word)). Therefore, we should know that the period of superficial dealing with deep issues is over.
How true are the advertising works that have happened now with the presence of figures? Which one do you remember as a good example? Or which one do you think is more interesting?
In my opinion, the most professional use of celebrity to promote Bahram Radan. Due to his innate talent and the possibility of getting good consultants during this time, he has been able to display one of the most professional ways of being a brand ambassador And on the opposite point, the presence of the former head coach of the Iranian national team in the campaign of one of the prominent banks of the country, due to the non-professional contract with him, at one point by conducting a controversial interview about the legend of the national football team, Ali Karimi, led to the reaction of the fans. It was football. Undoubtedly, this experience and tarnishing the name of our head coach, also damaged the advertisements of that bank . The next case was the collaboration of a food industry company with Sirvan Khosravi, which was also unsuccessful due to the non-standard conflicts of this young star with his artistic predecessors.
• Recently, Navid Mohammadzadeh has been criticized for her advertising presence.
The SenH brand’s emotional use of a deconstructive celebrity like Navid Mohammadzadeh, whose entire artistic career shows emotion, was a very inappropriate choice. Basically, this product is more reminiscent of relaxing moments, while the combination of this feeling with the face of a popular character who is restless in terms of his roles like Navid Mohammadzadeh was not suitable. The professional of this product is against this opinion There is an explanation about the generated personality of a brand and its difference with a logo: for every logo there is an identity that ((mental image)) the creator draws for the brand. For example, today we want to launch a food product that consumers will feel close to and trust after seeing it . This abstract image includes ((the appearance of the product)) and ((the audience’s need for the product)). For example, in the case of food, this abstract image is the face of a mother or older sister or grandmother and the father of the family, of course, all these characters are symbols of the family. Therefore, in the book of brand and brand image, it is written at the beginning of the movement that the character of the brand is supposed to be which one of these people? In the long run, this orientation makes you see behind the brand and in its abstraction the personality that the brand wanted, which, of course, is the result of many years of efforts of consultants and advertising experts. This definition is also true for an actor, because he created a character that has become a brand due to his work background. When a face like Navid Mohammadzadeh creates a clear and complete brand image of himself, we know the characteristics of this brand and its attributes. If we go to those angles and attributes that we know about Navid Mohammadzadeh to choose a brand ambassador and this choice is against professional principles, this project will not get a suitable answer. It may be analyzed that what happens to metatextual attraction like ((contrast))? Contrast is always attractive, but size is very important. Whenever you exaggerate the opposite of a message to make it more interesting, or use an opposite of a larger nature at all, Or use an opposite of a larger nature at all, you’ve lost your subject. It may be analyzed that the technique of negative advertising is used, which again uses contrast in the content and gives the above answer. Most of this is a brand like Sun H which is advertising for a brand like Navid Mohammadzadeh. Don’t take this as a joke, I have to say that the Sen-H brand should receive an amount from one of our young actors for this advertising campaign to make his brand stronger!
The image we have of Navid Mohammadzadeh’s brand is associated with excitement, speed and protest, which is closer to home appliances, technology and men’s sports detergent. All over the world, the dos and don’ts of a celebrity for a brand are much less than the dos and don’ts of a brand for a celebrity. Usually, they sign a very harsh legal contract with the artist or celebrity, which is all implemented. In Iran, this contract model is not concluded, nor is it possible to implement it through relationships.
• And of course Navid Mohammadzadeh unveiled a perfume with her name at the same time.
Yes, another mistake happened about Navid brand and that was the production of perfume with a soft and gentle beat. Maybe Ishan Oper produced a sports spray or a perfume with an aggressive advertisement, their brand image would have been more successful. Another example of the non-technical presence of celebrities in advertisements is the experience of Bijan company with Amin Hayai Amin Hayai’s brand image is formed from his comedy personality in the pictures and from the comedy forms in his body or facial expressions. Now you put this brand image next to an ironed and very formal image with basic manners like Bijan. Did Bijan’s brand image really need Amin Hayai’s brand image? Or is this false need produced by an unprofessional intermediary? This is because sometimes the psychological aspect and effectiveness of this advertising work is forgotten, because it is necessary to see if the brand needs to use the fame of a celebrity for advertising or not? The obvious mistake in this process is that instead of paying attention to the economic needs of the brand, we seek the excitement of responding and being a competitor to the brand; Like the response of two food industry brands to each other. After the presence of Navid Mohammadzadeh in the advertising campaign, Sunstar’s performance actually made Sun H to compensate for some of its potential loss; The same emotional response as advertising. This problem is evident in all the fields of advertising in the country, and the winners are the media owners who fill their billboards and TV boxes by heating this fire, and the main losers are the brand owners or maybe celebrities who do not study or follow the professional principles of advertising. They enter such campaigns. This is not advertising but a hype, you only see the dust but not the rider! ! It is natural that choosing the right celebrity for the image of the brand or product will contribute a lot to the success of this move. It should be noted that there are many examples to point out the inappropriate choices of some celebrities, which I am not allowed to mention due to legal reasons and legal considerations. One of the problems that is currently being investigated is the production of messages with low value content. At this point, I have criticism according to Mr. Frosti. Regarding the presence of Navid Mohammadzadeh, they have objected to the content of the message in this advertisement and compared it with the infrastructure of a dramatic work, which is the wrong way. The components of a good teaser are far from the components of a good short film and a dramatic effect, and they require their own experts.
Mr. Amin Hayai signs a contract with the employer without studying and receiving specialized branding advice, which is completely unprofessional, and then the teaser maker must dissolve these two insoluble forms in the teaser container with Lataif Al Hail!
Therefore, the objection on his part in this field is an unprofessional opinion. Although I have enjoyed his analysis about the form in cinema, but his position for me is different from his expert opinion in the field of advertising. But the important thing is that sometimes the teaser maker is faced with a strange situation where the result of his hard work is nothing better than this.
For a better understanding of the matter, I will return to the example of the Bijan brand image and Mr. Hayai’s brand image. In this process, Mr. Hayai signs a contract with the employer without studying and receiving specialized branding advice, which is completely unprofessional, and then the teaser maker must dissolve these two insoluble forms in the teaser container with Lataif Al Hail!
It is natural that the result of the work is to separate the two materials from each other and create a false sense. In fact, the wrong content has completely overshadowed the production of the message, and the consequences of brand image conflict cannot be underestimated in any way. A clear example of a lose-lose interaction is wrong content, no matter how clever it is, it conveys its forms to the audience.
• It seems that the dimensions of this issue are much more complicated than it appears and it needs more discussions.
Yes, I just raised the issue in this conversation. In the meantime, I want to explain about art brokers. Dealers are very helpful in the field of economy and their expertise is actually simplifying the language of production for the buyer . This means that the presence of brokers is mandatory in any field, including art. Only then does the loss begin when they themselves become line givers and try to dominate the audience’s immature desire for production. This process can be seen in all industries and there is no room for detailed discussion about it here. Another important issue that I need to mention is consulting and training celebrities to develop their own brand infrastructure. It is necessary for the faces to be careful and careful in choosing the screenplay, which increases their popularity among the audience, in the category of advertising, and to benefit from specialized branding advice when signing a contract….
Where both the celebrity and the client lose the game
Long live Jamshid Meshaikhi, one of the first popular actors of Iranian cinema, whose face on advertising billboards announced the first appearance of cinematographers in the field of advertising after the revolution.
With this move, he somehow broke the taboo of winning advertisements by superstars and popular figures as a brand and exposed himself to the positive and negative reflections of this move among people and mass media. From that time until now, this movement has continued from time to time by other prominent figures and celebrities, and perhaps the last one was Navid Mohammadzadeh’s entry into this arena in recent months. This movement and appearance of the actor has always been hijacked by different opinions
. Some consider it as a help to the field of domestic production, and apart from the commercial aspect, they praise this partnership, and some criticize the way it is implemented, and there are some who always disagree and have a problem with it. We decided to have a conversation with one of the experts in the field of advertising, who has many programs and studies on the presence of celebrities in the world of advertising, to see from an expert perspective, the features and disadvantages of this advertising method for both brands, celebrities and products. What has been
Let’s get to the point right at the beginning, we would like to know if you have any plans with cinematographers and celebrities to appear in advertisements during your work or not?
For several reasons, this story has not happened yet. First of all, I believe that it is very harmful and dangerous for cinematographers to enter this field in a sensory and emotional way, and more than that, it is problematic for the advertising industry. In addition, I have been studying and observing for several years and I have been and still am very strict in accepting this. For about two years, together with a team of experts, we have started designing under the title ((Celebrity Branding)) and we plan to plan and implement services in this field. I want to ask a question to get more specialized into the discussion, what do you think is the difference between a logo and a brand?
I imagine that a logo is a logo of a company or an institution, while a brand is related to the whole of that activity.
This question opens a good perspective for a better understanding of advertising. Regardless of the academic definitions, in the popular definition, a logo is a sign ((without sense)) and a brand is a sign ((owner of sense)), that is, the difference between the two is having and not having ((sense)). The important thing is that there are many in our country who academically translate and teach branding and advertising from foreign sources, but with great respect for these friends, I consider it necessary to emphasize the special importance of ((culture)) and ((geography)) and ( (race, society and psyche)) in advertisements.
Reza Mikaelzadeh has been working in the advertising industry since 1377 and has worked as a researcher and consultant in various fields of advertising, and apart from advertising issues in the field of performing arts and its integration with the advertising industry, he also has opinions and experience.
Let’s get to the point right at the beginning, we would like to know if you have any plans with cinematographers and celebrities to appear in advertisements during your work or not?
For several reasons, this story has not happened yet. First of all, I believe that it is very harmful and dangerous for cinematographers to enter this field in a sensory and emotional way, and more than that, it is problematic for the advertising industry. In addition, I have been studying and observing for several years and I have been and still am very strict in accepting this. For about two years, together with a team of experts, we have started designing under the title ((Celebrity Branding)) and we plan to plan and implement services in this field. I want to ask a question to get more specialized into the discussion, what do you think is the difference between a logo and a brand?
I imagine that a logo is a logo of a company or an institution, while a brand is related to the whole of that activity.
This question opens a good perspective for a better understanding of advertising. Regardless of the academic definitions, in the popular definition, a logo is a sign ((without sense)) and a brand is a sign ((owner of sense)), that is, the difference between the two is having and not having ((sense)). The important thing is that there are many in our country who academically translate and teach branding and advertising from foreign sources, but with great respect for these friends, I consider it necessary to emphasize the special importance of ((culture)) and ((geography)) and ( (race, society and psyche)) in advertisements.
• You certainly know that different and sometimes critical opinions have been expressed about the presence of cinematographers in the field of advertising, especially since it seems that there is a lot of repulsion in our country.
Our society is in transition, we have heard this description a lot and we even use it, one of the aspects of this story is passing the tradition and getting approval from circles towards technical analysis and review. Therefore, the advertising presence of many figures faces resistance or support due to emotional analysis, if this issue is not an emotional approach at all.
The economy of this program is very important, where and how it is done, because with a purely emotional lack of planning, both sides lose this game and do not get a positive result. Our celebrities need professional and specialized advertising consultants. Many times, wrong guidance has caused harmful results that cannot be checked. Of course, I know that popular artists are also afraid to enter advertisements for two reasons.
The first is the reaction to this question: ((Why are you advertising as a good actor?)) The lack of a sufficient vision of the advertising industry leads to this emotional impression. Second: ((Why should you take this money and not me?)) which is again an emotional statement. Unfortunately, during this time, I have not heard or read any expert and scientific analysis about this story from the supporters and opponents.
• Do you have statistics on which of the famous sports figures and cinematographers in the world were most active in the advertising industry?
The history of the first celebrity branding (marketing) dates back to the 1760s. When the company (Josiah Wedwood and Sons), a manufacturer of pottery and household goods, used the image and prestige of the royal family to increase the value of its products. From 1875 to the early 1900s, manufacturers used business cards featuring a famous person along with a product image. These cards, which generally included actors and sports figures, were given to the consumer or in the product packaging. In the 1930s, it was athletes who featured on the cards, but after World War II, they gave way to movie stars. It was in 1965 that color television was introduced to the public, a leap for consumer-producer communication. created In the 1980s, the function of celebrity branding changed. “Nike” company took the first step in this field. This company made the most of a genius basketball player named Michael Jordan . Nike’s initiative was to make a shoe model with Jordan’s name and brand and send him as its ambassador to different parts of the world. It was with the expansion of this approach that actors and sportsmen became the advertising symbols of different companies and day by day their expectations for increasing the number of contracts increased. Because the companies were making good profits with this program, they competed with each other to attract celebrities and allocated more budgets. It was in the 1990s that this approach changed again, this time the images on the card gave way to held news conferences where a celebrity, as a spokesperson for the company, introduced the product in question. Statistics showed that this method is very effective. One of these statistics, which was published in the first decade of 2000, indicated that the Nike company, from its 1996 contract with Tiger Wood, the golf superstar, until 2002, was able to pocket fifty million dollars in profits. But here I have to give a technical explanation: we are facing two types of celebrity branding: ((explicit)) and ((implicit)). Explicit branding, a clear example of which is Beyoncé’s sponsorship contract with Pepsi. In 2012, Beyoncé and the Pepsi Company signed a deal worth fifty million dollars, according to which (2012) Sisario was to take part in the advertising presence of the celebrity in publications, media programs and the Pepsi Creative Foundation. . But the clever thing was that Pepsi announced that Mrs. Beyoncé is somehow one of the colleagues of this company, not its advertising face. This intelligence made a psychological impact on the audience. In this way, consumers came to believe that Beyoncé believes in Pepsi products and that Pepsi stands firmly behind her. They came to believe that it is no longer a question that a celebrity has received money and is now willingly or unwillingly advertising for the company in question. Pepsi wanted the consumer to have a feeling of closeness and trust towards its advertisements, not the feeling of being exploited, and it was very successful in this move. Implicit branding, an example of which was the promotion and sale of headphones and portable speakers produced by Beats Electronics, owned by Dr. Dre, one of the founders of rap music, whose brand was called Beats By Dre. It was here that some rap singers, hip-hop singers and some pop singers such as Lady Gaga, Miley Cyrus, Nicki Minaj, Britney Spears promoted “Dr. Der” headphones and portable speakers in their music videos (Ortiz 2014). ).
But the more professional point was that these celebrities went further and used this product in their personal and natural environment. This idea caused the consumer to not see it through the eyes of advertisements and realize that it is a really good product that people with this class use even in their private lives. This implicitness sometimes has a far more effective effect.
• It seems that some of the opponents have been harsh in their comments. To say that we will remember a certain actor from now on with a certain product rather than his films is, perhaps not to say, narrow-minded and unprofessional.
Exactly, you know the best tennis player in the world by the product he promoted; Or do you remember Ronaldo from his commercials? or actors who have participated in advertisements in Iranian and world cinema in the past. See, this is a superficial treatment of a very important and big issue. Unfortunately, in recent years, this type of view is dictated to us a lot, that the motivation of popular faces is mostly to earn money and some kind of (selling popularity), while there is no correct and logical analysis behind these creations.
. In the words of Georg Wilhelm Gadamer ((My understanding is not the last word)). Therefore, we should know that the period of superficial dealing with deep issues is over.
How true are the advertising works that have happened now with the presence of figures? Which one do you remember as a good example? Or which one do you think is more interesting?
In my opinion, the most professional use of celebrity to promote Bahram Radan. Due to his innate talent and the possibility of getting good consultants during this time, he has been able to display one of the most professional ways of being a brand ambassador And on the opposite point, the presence of the former head coach of the Iranian national team in the campaign of one of the prominent banks of the country, due to the non-professional contract with him, at one point by conducting a controversial interview about the legend of the national football team, Ali Karimi, led to the reaction of the fans. It was football. Undoubtedly, this experience and tarnishing the name of our head coach, also damaged the advertisements of that bank . The next case was the collaboration of a food industry company with Sirvan Khosravi, which was also unsuccessful due to the non-standard conflicts of this young star with his artistic predecessors.
• Recently, Navid Mohammadzadeh has been criticized for her advertising presence.
The SenH brand’s emotional use of a deconstructive celebrity like Navid Mohammadzadeh, whose entire artistic career shows emotion, was a very inappropriate choice. Basically, this product is more reminiscent of relaxing moments, while the combination of this feeling with the face of a popular character who is restless in terms of his roles like Navid Mohammadzadeh was not suitable. The professional of this product is against this opinion There is an explanation about the generated personality of a brand and its difference with a logo: for every logo there is an identity that ((mental image)) the creator draws for the brand. For example, today we want to launch a food product that consumers will feel close to and trust after seeing it . This abstract image includes ((the appearance of the product)) and ((the audience’s need for the product)). For example, in the case of food, this abstract image is the face of a mother or older sister or grandmother and the father of the family, of course, all these characters are symbols of the family. Therefore, in the book of brand and brand image, it is written at the beginning of the movement that the character of the brand is supposed to be which one of these people? In the long run, this orientation makes you see behind the brand and in its abstraction the personality that the brand wanted, which, of course, is the result of many years of efforts of consultants and advertising experts. This definition is also true for an actor, because he created a character that has become a brand due to his work background. When a face like Navid Mohammadzadeh creates a clear and complete brand image of himself, we know the characteristics of this brand and its attributes. If we go to those angles and attributes that we know about Navid Mohammadzadeh to choose a brand ambassador and this choice is against professional principles, this project will not get a suitable answer. It may be analyzed that what happens to metatextual attraction like ((contrast))? Contrast is always attractive, but size is very important. Whenever you exaggerate the opposite of a message to make it more interesting, or use an opposite of a larger nature at all, Or use an opposite of a larger nature at all, you’ve lost your subject. It may be analyzed that the technique of negative advertising is used, which again uses contrast in the content and gives the above answer. Most of this is a brand like Sun H which is advertising for a brand like Navid Mohammadzadeh. Don’t take this as a joke, I have to say that the Sen-H brand should receive an amount from one of our young actors for this advertising campaign to make his brand stronger!
The image we have of Navid Mohammadzadeh’s brand is associated with excitement, speed and protest, which is closer to home appliances, technology and men’s sports detergent. All over the world, the dos and don’ts of a celebrity for a brand are much less than the dos and don’ts of a brand for a celebrity. Usually, they sign a very harsh legal contract with the artist or celebrity, which is all implemented. In Iran, this contract model is not concluded, nor is it possible to implement it through relationships.
• And of course Navid Mohammadzadeh unveiled a perfume with her name at the same time.
Yes, another mistake happened about Navid brand and that was the production of perfume with a soft and gentle beat. Maybe Ishan Oper produced a sports spray or a perfume with an aggressive advertisement, their brand image would have been more successful. Another example of the non-technical presence of celebrities in advertisements is the experience of Bijan company with Amin Hayai Amin Hayai’s brand image is formed from his comedy personality in the pictures and from the comedy forms in his body or facial expressions. Now you put this brand image next to an ironed and very formal image with basic manners like Bijan. Did Bijan’s brand image really need Amin Hayai’s brand image? Or is this false need produced by an unprofessional intermediary? This is because sometimes the psychological aspect and effectiveness of this advertising work is forgotten, because it is necessary to see if the brand needs to use the fame of a celebrity for advertising or not? The obvious mistake in this process is that instead of paying attention to the economic needs of the brand, we seek the excitement of responding and being a competitor to the brand; Like the response of two food industry brands to each other. After the presence of Navid Mohammadzadeh in the advertising campaign, Sunstar’s performance actually made Sun H to compensate for some of its potential loss; The same emotional response as advertising. This problem is evident in all the fields of advertising in the country, and the winners are the media owners who fill their billboards and TV boxes by heating this fire, and the main losers are the brand owners or maybe celebrities who do not study or follow the professional principles of advertising. They enter such campaigns. This is not advertising but a hype, you only see the dust but not the rider! ! It is natural that choosing the right celebrity for the image of the brand or product will contribute a lot to the success of this move. It should be noted that there are many examples to point out the inappropriate choices of some celebrities, which I am not allowed to mention due to legal reasons and legal considerations. One of the problems that is currently being investigated is the production of messages with low value content. At this point, I have criticism according to Mr. Frosti. Regarding the presence of Navid Mohammadzadeh, they have objected to the content of the message in this advertisement and compared it with the infrastructure of a dramatic work, which is the wrong way. The components of a good teaser are far from the components of a good short film and a dramatic effect, and they require their own experts.
Mr. Amin Hayai signs a contract with the employer without studying and receiving specialized branding advice, which is completely unprofessional, and then the teaser maker must dissolve these two insoluble forms in the teaser container with Lataif Al Hail!
Therefore, the objection on his part in this field is an unprofessional opinion. Although I have enjoyed his analysis about the form in cinema, but his position for me is different from his expert opinion in the field of advertising. But the important thing is that sometimes the teaser maker is faced with a strange situation where the result of his hard work is nothing better than this.
For a better understanding of the matter, I will return to the example of the Bijan brand image and Mr. Hayai’s brand image. In this process, Mr. Hayai signs a contract with the employer without studying and receiving specialized branding advice, which is completely unprofessional, and then the teaser maker must dissolve these two insoluble forms in the teaser container with Lataif Al Hail!
It is natural that the result of the work is to separate the two materials from each other and create a false sense. In fact, the wrong content has completely overshadowed the production of the message, and the consequences of brand image conflict cannot be underestimated in any way. A clear example of a lose-lose interaction is wrong content, no matter how clever it is, it conveys its forms to the audience.
• It seems that the dimensions of this issue are much more complicated than it appears and it needs more discussions.
Yes, I just raised the issue in this conversation. In the meantime, I want to explain about art brokers. Dealers are very helpful in the field of economy and their expertise is actually simplifying the language of production for the buyer . This means that the presence of brokers is mandatory in any field, including art. Only then does the loss begin when they themselves become line givers and try to dominate the audience’s immature desire for production. This process can be seen in all industries and there is no room for detailed discussion about it here. Another important issue that I need to mention is consulting and training celebrities to develop their own brand infrastructure. It is necessary for the faces to be careful and careful in choosing the screenplay, which increases their popularity among the audience, in the category of advertising, and to benefit from specialized branding advice when signing a contract….