If consumers are demanding more authenticity and transparency from marketers, is it still OK for brands to be anything but authentic? Before you respond with a resounding, "of course not," let's consider the possibility that not all of us are equally serious about being authentic in all we say and do.
Over the weekend, my wife purchased a small container of trail mix -- specifically a blend called Psychedelic Sunday Mix from a company called Elizabeth's Natural.
Despite the use of the word "natural" on the product label and in the company's name itself, one peek into the container is enough to disprove the claim. Among other things, the mix contains M&M's which, in turn, contain a number of artificial ingredients including artificial coloring.
I'm not singling out Elizabeth's per se. This is just one example of the kind of brand inauthenticity that is still all too common among companies small and large.
Does your fast food burger look as good on the table as it does in your ads? Does your body spray really make your customers irresistable to members of the opposite sex? Will your new automobile perform as well for the average suburban carpooler as it seems to for the "professional driver on a closed course?"
Odds are the answer will be, "no," so what do we really have to gain from advertising our products in this way? Consumers have never been less willing to buy into the charade. Why continue to play the game? Is it because we've always done it this way? Or because, as often as not, we realize that presenting things as they are might actually hurt our bottom lines?
I'd argue that creating total alignment between what we say we are and what we actually are would force a commitment to making our brands, products, customer relationships and our companies themselves better than they are today.
But maybe I'm nuts. What do you think?
