There are many factors to consider when applying the theory of source credibility to the advertising industry. First, the credibility of an advertising message is affected profoundly by the public’s perceptions regarding that brand or product. Established brands that have enjoyed long-term success in American are more apt to be perceived as credible than unknown brands that are just beginning to communicate with the public. Additionally, the private actions of a company or a corporation can have both a positive and negative effect with regards to credibility. Public relations scandals such as Nike’s difficulties with child labor in Southeast Asia can seriously impact how the public perceives the brand.

Therefore, agencies often rely on the credibility of others to bolster their messages when they cannot rely on the inherent credibility of the brand. This happens in two different ways: first through the use of independent research or analysis, and secondly, through the use of celebrity spokespersons. The use of independent research or analysis refers to advertising messages that boast of awards or findings discovered by independent sources like Consumer Reports or J.D. Power and Associates. These well-known institutions are well regarded for their non-biased analysis of consumer products. Brands who are fortunate enough to be recognized by these entities rarely hesitate to advertise that fact in their persuasive messages.

Another interesting phenomenon within the advertising industry is the use of celebrity spokespersons. Agencies often rely upon the credibility of others to imbue their messages with the trustworthiness that they cannot muster on their own. This practice, however, can be fraught with disaster. Advertising legend David Ogilvy contends that this practice is not particularly successful in changing the public’s brand preference. In Ogilvy on Advertising, he relates the story of how he paid former first lady Eleanor Roosevelt $35,000 to appear in a margarine commercial. Mrs. Roosevelt later reported that half her mail was sad that she had damaged her reputation and the other half was happy she had damaged her reputation. (Ogilvy, p. 109.) Not many, it seems, decided to buy the margarine upon the basis of Mrs. Roosevelt’s recommendation.

Despite this fiasco, the advertising industry continues to use celebrity spokespersons. Oftentimes, agencies hire spokespersons that have little or no authority to speak for or against the product they are promoting. We will look at two current examples of the use of spokespersons: Michael Jordan for Rayovac Batteries and David Brinkley for Archers Daniel Midland.

Michael Jordan for Rayovac

As a sports star, Michael Jordan is unparalleled. In addition to leading the Chicago Bulls to six world championships, Jordan is famous for helping Nike rise to the top of the sports footwear and apparel market. Arguably, Michael Jordan knows what he’s talking about when it comes to sports gear. But does he have any expertise when it comes to alkaline batteries? In 1995, Rayovac signed a contract with Michael Jordan that made the sports superstar the company’s official spokesperson. In an interview published on the company’s website, Jordan proclaimed, "I’m confident that together we can take Rayovac and Rechargeable Alkaline to new heights."

Companies often use celebrities for their advertising under the assumption that their star power will somehow imbue their product with the same credibility and dynamism. In the case of Rayovac, the strategy seemed to work. Earnings reports published on the company’s website on July 21, 1999 showed that sales had improved 8% in one fiscal quarter alone. A.C. Neilsen studies show that Rayovac is the nation;s fastest growing battery brand. Whether or not Jordan’s commercials have any direct impact on sales is unknown. However, it is simple to see how some celebrities are so likable and well known that their very image in the presence of a particular product can help bolster that product’s image.

David Brinkley and Archers Daniels Midland

Sometimes, the relationship between spokesperson and company can have disastrous results. In 1998, Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), an agribusiness giant, was reeling from an international scandal involving price fixing. Top ADM executives were sentenced to prison for their role in the scandal. (Jones, p. F1.) The situation was bad enough to cause presidential hopeful Pat Buchanan to describe the company as having "a shady reputation." (Camp, p. D3)

The company needed an image overhaul quickly to repair the damage caused by the international scandal. Enter retired ABC news anchor David Brinkley. ADM had long been a sponsor of the respected television show, Sunday Morning with David Brinkley. After Brinkley retired from the airwaves in 1997, ADM hired him to appear in informative commercials for the company. As Brinkley stated in the first commercial, "I will still speak straight and true. I’ll never change that. But now I will bring you information about food, the environment, agriculture--- issues of importance to the American people and the world." (Carter, p. D5.) Brinkley had long been respected as one of the nation’s most credible and trustworthy news anchors. ADM could only benefit from having the man appear in their commercials.

This was not ultimately the case. A range of media personalities were astonished that Brinkley would appear in commercials for ADM. 60 Minutes commentator Andy Rooney likened the situation to "the death of a friend." Walter Cronkite, Daniel Schorr and Don Hewitt were among the many news personalities who publicly spoke out against the Brinkley-ADM relationship. All agreed that Brinkley’s reputation would be tarnished. For a time, ABC even refused to air the commercials fearing that viewers would confuse them with actual programming. (Goodman, E2.)

The uproar over the relationship was short-lived and Brinkley continues to appear in commercials for ADM. However, there is a number of troubling issues raised by this incident. The lines between television news and commerce have been steadily blurring for many years, and this example is only the latest. It is interesting to see how readily David Brinkley was willing to risk his own credibility as an anchor for the sake of appearing in the commercials. Second, the uproar also established how ADM’s attempts to bolster their credibility by attaching themselves to Brinkley failed to have any lasting impact. It will take more than a television news anchor to erase the damage done by the price-fixing scandal.