Once upon a time, supermodels reigned supreme. They stared vacuously at us from print ads and magazine covers, and some even became such big household names that they publicly declared they wouldn’t get out of bed for less than $10,000 a day (Linda Evangelista famously said that).
How times have changed.
Now you can hardly flip through a fashion magazine without seeing a movie star, a hot new pop act or a young tennis sensation pushing everything from lipstick to lingerie. Even Vogue, the bible for every self-respecting fashionista, has a celebrity on its cover more often that not these days.
Since when was the last time you came across a luxury watch ad with an unknown face? Celebrity endorsements are nothing new but it seems that even designer labels, which have traditionally embraced pouty-lipped waifs, have shown an increasing preference to use celebrities in their advertising campaigns. Uma Thurman and Nicole Kidman smoulder in the ads for Louis Vuitton and Chanel, respectively. Undoubtedly under contracts lucrative enough to enable them to buy a small island somewhere off the coast of Tahiti and modestly refer to it as their holiday home.
A designer was once quoted as saying that he preferred to work with models as they were like blank canvases on which an artist could splash his colours. At least their personalities will never overshadow the brand and they will never carry with them the tacky taint of tabloid gossip. Well, with the exception of Naomi “Damn, missed another anger management class” Campbell.
When Carolyn Murphy was signed on to replace Elizabeth Hurley as the new face of Estee Lauder Cosmetics, some said that it was because at age 36, Liz was considered too old. But mostly, the rumour being circulated was that it was all due to Liz’s chaotic love life being constant tabloid fodder that the cosmetics company was keen to dissociate itself from.
Fresher in recent memory, Kate Moss was dropped as the face of several fashion houses after a drugs scandal that was well-publicised in the media. Of course, she’s bounced back with a vengeance since then, appearing in new ad campaigns for some of the very brands that initially tried to distance themselves from her by denouncing her use of drugs. Clearly, they have a short-term memory. 
What helps Kate though is the fact that she is one of the rare models who have successfully propelled themselves into the celebrity stratosphere, becoming a household name and an instantly recognizable face. And Calvin Klein could hardly care less what Kate snorts and who she snogs in her free time, as long as she helps move jeans off the shelves.
That just pretty much sums up the attitude of companies these days.
Back then, one had to have a squeaky clean image in order to endorse a brand. But as counterculture becomes more acceptable in modern society, so does its icons.
But the question is, as an advertising or PR practitioner, why sign on celebrities to endorse your brand, especially with so much money involved and so much at stake? When Britney Spears was signed by Pepsi, she negligently bit the hand that fed by being seen in public on numerous occasions with a can of Coke in her hand.
Well, it’s undeniable that a celebrity makes an immediate impact. In a world where we’re constantly deluged by a glut of ads in every medium, having a celebrity helps an ad stand out from all the clutter.
And then there’s the power of association – a brand can leverage on the celebrity’s image in the hopes that whatever positive qualities he/she possesses may be transferred to the brand. But of course that doesn’t mean signing up someone just because he/she is famous.
Credibility is an important criteria and the endorser should ideally represent the brand values. Amber Chia endorsing laptops? She may have been Malaysia’s It girl at one point but the fact is, I don’t can’t see her using a laptop. I really can’t see her sitting at some Starbucks with her laptop, working on an Excel sheet. It’s not believable. Why not Hannah Tan, who is some sort of financial consultant when she’s not preening for the cameras? Or even Arianna Teoh, a mother and businesswoman who’s always on the go? Makes sense for them to have a laptop, no?
Of course, you might think, ‘I don’t give a rat’s ass who’s in the ad because I can’t be influenced to buy a product that easily. I decide for myself what to buy.’ Think again.
For instance, take Kate Moss, who is frequently heralded as a style icon. She has an intrinsic coolness that translates to her dressing and this is why fashion brands are so eager to sign her on. She makes high fashion seem accessible to the regular working woman. I credit Kate Moss for reviving Burberry at a time when it was ailing and considered passe. She was photographed on the street wearing a Burberry trenchcoat and all of a sudden, it was cool to wear checkered patterns again.
But seriously, come on, Burberry checks look better as tablecloths or cushion covers, or on little old ladies. And this whole trend of wearing leggings under skirts? It should be burned at the stake. Sure, Sienna Miller looks cute and chic wearing it but she’s got the kind of looks that can make a brown paper bag look cute and chic. For a moment in time, we have deluded ourselves into thinking that we can emulate the quirky style of Sienna and Kate et al. by rushing to the nearest shop to buy ourselves something that doesn’t even look flattering on us. We celebrate their “individualistic style” and then try to copy it. And whose fault is that? Media. Advertisements.
You’ve been beaten before you even ran the race.
That’s why branding is such big business. And in an increasingly celebrity-obsessed world, paying $10 million for some famous person to endorse your product can bring in profitable returns on your investment more quickly that some fresh-faced model. We don’t just admire celebrities – we want to look, dress and smell like them as well.
This is why fragrance companies are tying up with celebrities to develop their “own” scents. Every star worth her wattage has her own perfume, from J.Lo to Sarah Jessica Parker, and you can bet only more will follow suit.
Then there’s Reebok who is collaborating with Scarlett Johansson to co-create a new women’s range. 
Admittedly, Scarlett doesn’t fit in with Reebok’s image - she’s more old Hollywood glamour than sporty, modern chic. But it’s an exciting tie-up because Reebok is making a loud entry into a new market segment, backed by a young actress whose star is only just on the rise. When they talk about Scarlett’s co-designer duties, do you think she’ll be there on the floor, sewing and cutting fabrics? How much creative input do you think she’ll really have in the process? My guess is the only work she has cut out for her is staring seductively at the camera for the print ad shoots.
But would there be the same impact if Reebok were launching this new line of apparel with some dewy-faced model? No.
So note to Miss Evangelista: you can stay in bed because your throne has just been usurped.
