Marketing communication Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3750 words

Marketing communication - Essay Example Recent studies show that the public over-attributes poverty to characteristics such as character flaws of the poor and under-attribute situations beyond the poor’s control. (Bolitho et al. p. 14). The studies also show that the wealthier the individual and the more opportunity the individual is afforded, the more likely that individual is to blame the poor for their own plight. (Bolitho et al. p. 14). This study is important, as it illustrates a challenge that organizations that help the poor must face – if people are predisposed to blame the poor for their own plight, they are less likely to give. (Bolitho et al. p. 14). Another trend that is related to the above phenomenon is known as the â€Å"stereotype rebound effect.† Kennedy and Hill (2008) argue that typical advertising campaigns, in which the poor are depicted as â€Å"helpless, passive and destitute†¦desperately awaiting handouts from aid agencies† contribute to this phenomenon, in which ind ividuals, upon seeing these helpless poor, attempt to suppress the stereotypes that they are feeling about these people, and this suppression leads to a â€Å"stereotype rebound effect† that leads to fewer donations. (Kennedy and Hill, 2008, p. 112). Profile of the campaign audience The individuals who will be targeted will be those that display the characteristics of conspicuous compassion, donors who are peer driven, donors who are community driven, self-driven donors and corporations. The profiles of these donors are explained in the next section below. As explained below, each of these donors would be the most likely to give to this campaign, because of the psychographic profiles of each of these groups. Audience Perception This section discusses the key attitudes and perceptions of the different psychographic profiles that will be targeted in this campaign. The first psychological trend is what is known as â€Å"conspicuous compassion† (Grace and Griffin, 2006, p. 147). This refers to a particular behavior in which an individual participates in charitable work, or displays charitable symbols, such as ribbons, for ostentatious reasons as opposed to altruistic ones. â€Å"Conspicuous compassion† is related to the term â€Å"conspicuous consumption†, in which an individual purchases an expensive car or house, because to not do so would imply failure. As with â€Å"conspicuous consumption†, the individual is interested in his or her image, and how this image is supposedly enhanced through public emoting. This person does not care about the charity, he or she just cares about how being associated with the charity enhances his or her image. (Grace and Griffin, 2006, pp. 147-148). â€Å"Conspicuous compassion† is a logical extension to other studies that show that donors are often motivated by intrinsic benefits, such as â€Å"increased self-esteem, public gratification, satisfaction and fulfillment through meeting oneà ¢â‚¬â„¢s obligation.† (Grace and Griffin, 2006, p. 148). If a donor’s motivation is â€Å"conspicuous compassion†, then that donor is looking to the charity to enhance his or her social standing. Grace and Griffin (2006) argue that conspicuous compassion is the reason why people wear empathy ribbons, and, presumably, empathy bracelets, such as the yellow bracelets offered by The Livestrong Foundation. Further, the individuals who are