Groupon Superbowl Advertising Analysis Paper

George B. Harris III Analysis PaperSID: 830353266

Analysis Paper:

An Examination of the Groupon Super Bowl

Advertising

George B. Harris III

SID: 830-35-3266

COMM 4200

Professor Omar Swartz


Analysis Paper:

An Examination of the Groupon Super Bowl

Advertising

During the 2011 Super Bowl game the company

known as Groupon launched an ad campaign. This

ad campaign was hailed as Groupon’s “coming

out”. The concept of the ad campaign was to

have celebrities like Timothy Hutton, Elizabeth

Hurley and Cuba Gooding Jr star in thirty-second

television ads in which they appear to be

talking about current global issues. These

include the extinction of the killer whale, the

deforestation in Brazil and the plight in Tibet.

As the ads progress, the focus of the spot

changes from these critical issues to discounts

people can receive by using the services

provided by Groupon. This campaign was


determined one of the worst and most socially

irresponsible ads presented thus far. This

series of ads will be the focus of this paper.

My intention is to look at two theories;

psychological reactance theory and the stimulus-

organism-response theory. After providing a

detailed overview of both, I will be applying

these theories to these ads. By this, I intend

to show how the misuse or misunderstanding of

these theories caused the failure of this ad

campaign.

Part One: Introduction of the Theories

Psychological Reactance Theory

“Psychological reactance theory was first

discussed by psychologist Jack W. Brehm, who

predicted that reactions of arousal, resentment,

and anger occur when a person or agency

threatens to restrict a fee behavior in which we


want to engage” (Swartz, 2009). In a nutshell,

this theory discusses the fact that we as

individuals find it critical to feel as if we

are free to think, feel and engage in the things

that we choose to. When we feel as if these

rights are being threatened or taken away, we

get pretty upset. This is the reactance piece

of the theory.

An easier way to look at this theory is to

observe the actions of your average teenager.

Right around the age of thirteen years old, I

remember discovering all the things in the world

that seemed like they would be fun to try out,

but obviously my mother would be opposed to.

These are things like drinking alcoholic

beverages, engaging in sexual activities at such

a young age, and of course the big one -

smoking. It just so happened that my mother was


a smoker at the time. Seeing her smoke, yet

hearing the message that I was not allowed to

smoke, somehow rubbed me the wrong way. So, in

the 11th grade, I began stealing cigarettes from

my mother and/or smoking with friends during and

after school. In my opinion, the taking of my

mother’s cigarettes was my way of robbing her of

the same freedom I felt she was taking from me.

This example is also echoed in The Power of

Persuasion; “Telling the child something’s

prohibited and he becomes obsessed with nothing

else” (Levine, 2003).

This can, if used correctly, be a very

powerful persuasive tool in advertising. If the

person crafting the message can give the

impression that a freedom is being taken away,

but in the same breath give it back to you; AND

tie that restoration of freedom to the product


or service they are providing, you would assume

that the receiver of the message would have an

affinity of sorts for that company or brand.

Granted giving a cigarette to a child isn’t a

good way to get them to NOT smoke, I was able to

find an example that shows my point. In their

book Theories of Persuasion, Dillard and Pfau

also discuss the notion of restoring the freedom

that we have perceived being taken away from us.

The example they use; a police officer giving

the freedom to have a wallet, after having it

taken at gunpoint. In a case like this, the

person who had their wallet stolen would

obviously feel a sense of gratitude to the

officer who saved their freedom. Here’s an

interesting question for you; if you were put in

this situation, and this kind young officer not

only saves your wallet and possessions, but


potentially save your life, would you lend him a

dollar if he asked for it? After thinking about

it, I believe that I would actually feel

obligated to do so. In the application portion

of this paper I will be showing how misuse of

this can backfire on you.

Stimulus-Organism-Response Theory

For the purposes of this paper, I believe

that this theory may be the most critical

component. It focuses on how the message

connects to the audience in such a way that it

will make them react. The reaction you’re

obviously hoping for is one that will benefit

your product or service. Each of the sources

used for this paper discuss the need to make a

connection between the message and the receiver.

This is a basic staple of effective


communication. According to Dr. Swartz, this

theory ties in with Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

Let me try and put this theory into more

common terms. One of the most basic needs, as

described by Maslow is that of procreation.

Without procreation, the human species would

cease to exist. Some might argue that “need” is

the very driving force to everything we do as

human beings. There is currently a product

called AX that is primarily marketed to teenage

males. As we all know, between the ages of 13

years old to 25 years old, sexual interaction is

at the forefront of this segment of the

populations mind. In their ad campaigns, AX

uses the notion that using their product will

increase your chances of getting a mate. Not

only increase, but also insure that you will

“get lucky”. Although there is scientific


evidence that pheromones do have a tendency to

increase sexual attraction within a species, it

is safe to bet that this company does not employ

this science in their product, which for all

intents and purposes makes it useless.

But where does the attraction come in? If

you apply AX body spray campaign logic to the

Stimulus-Organism-Response equation, it would

look something like this:

Stimulus(AX) + Organism(Target)=

Response(Sex)

Because of the basic need to procreate, the

target market associates the use of this product

with their likelihood to be successful in their

endeavors. This connection with the organism on

a basic human level makes this product extremely

successful.


At the risk of making this theory sounds like

a cheap parlor trick, this is a theory that I

find employed very frequently; often as the

straw that will break the camels back. Another

good example of this theory in practice is

political conventions, speeches and addresses.

The candidate or politician will often appeal to

things like country and God to try and make

their message and, for that matter, their brand

relevant and important to the voter. In order

to help maintain support for our current war on

terror, you see a resurgence of 9/11 imagery

and/or references. This serves to “remind” the

country why we are doing what we are doing and

to bring them back to center on the issue.


Part Two: Theory Application

Psychological Reactance Theory

As stated before, the Groupon Super Bowl ad

campaign used a twist strategy. That is, they

took you in one direction to begin with and then

suddenly shift gears to take you in a new

direction; that of their product. For these

ads, they chose to use relevant global social

issues to grab the views attention. Coupled

with the use of famous faces, you are

immediately drawn in to something that should be

important to anyone who considers themselves a

socially conscious human being. Once the

position of global awareness has been

established, you are diverted to services that

loosely tie these issues to Groupon’s product

and in some cases, make fun of the issues at

hand.


In my opinion, this shows a poor

understanding of the psychological reactance

theory. By this I mean, the advertisers who

created this campaign may have seen this as a

witty use of world issues to market a product

but in fact, caused a negative psychological

reaction from virtually everyone who viewed the

ad. While this does not directly apply to a

freedom, it does speak to the choice that the

viewer made to view the ad because of what they

may have perceived to be an important message.

As a consumer, when I viewed the ad, I found

myself shocked by the use of these issues to

market their product. I also felt a sense of

betrayal for Groupon’s misuse of my choice to

care about something that was important to more

than just my segment of the world.


I believe a more appropriate use of this

theory for this campaign would have been to

simply reverse the order in which they

commercial played. If Groupon had presented

samples of their discounts and at the end

announced they were going to donate a certain

percentage of their profit to help with relief

for these loosely related topics, it would have

had a different ending for the campaign. In

this situation, the freedom or choice that is

taken away is the right to have a balanced

world. Many people feel that world issues are

too big for them; what can they do? Groupon

could have used this feeling of helplessness to

provide a means for people to contribute to the

world scene while also creating a demand for use

of their services.

Stimulus-Organism-Response Theory


As we discussed earlier, this theory is

comprised of three key pieces; the stimulus, the

organism and the response. When used in

advertising, the desired response is always the

known variable. You want the consumer to choose

your product over your competitors. In the case

of this Groupon campaign, they did just the

opposite; they made the consumer stray away from

their product. The current financial status of

the United States makes services like Groupon

very appealing for the average person. You

receive notification of daily deals in your

local area. Local businesses also benefit

because they have the ability to attract

clientele that they may not normally reach.

With this ad campaign, Groupon had the right

idea of what this theory could do for them, but

they didn’t factor in the response they would


get from the consumer once the true nature of

the ad was revealed. I believe the general

consensus regarding this “switch-a-roo” was more

of a “HOW DARE THEY!” Once the comic nature of

the ad was known, several key components of the

message were lost; credibility of the

spokesperson and credibility and ethics of the

company. Again, this campaign would have been

better served by focusing on our social

consciousness. Get people to use your service

because they see a tie between your product and

alleviating a global problem.

Conclusion

In this analysis paper, I have discussed the

Psychological Response Theory and the Stimulus-

Organism-Response Theory. I have demonstrated

an understanding of these theories and their


function in the field of persuasion and

communication. Further, I have used the 2011

Super Bowl advertisement presented by Groupon to

show what can happen if an organization fails to

correctly calculate how the elements of their

campaigns play out when these two key persuasion

theories are applied to them.

If Groupon had done a better analysis of

their market and the importance of these global

social issues, their ad campaigns would probably

look dramatically different. Also the response

to this campaign would have been very different.

Their failure to take the appropriate measures

during the planning process, caused them bad

press and millions of dollars in advertising.


References

DeFleur, M.L., & Ball-Rokeach, S.(1982). Theories of mass communication, 4th edition. New York, NY: Longman Inc.

Swartz, O. (2009). Persuasion as a critical activity. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.

Andersen, K.E. (1971). Persuasion: theory and practice. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon

Gordon, G. N. (1971). Persuasion: the theory and practice of manipulative communication. Don Mills, Canada: Saunders of Toronto, Ltd.

Roloff, M. E., & Miller, G.R. (1980). Persuasion: new directions in theory and research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Levine , R. (2003). The power of persuasion: how we're bought and sold. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley


and Sons.

Dillard, J.P., & Pfau, M. (2002). The persuasion handbook: developments in theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Documents

Groupon Superbowl Advertising Analysis Paper