This issue of the Journal of Marketing Communications presents a diverse selection of papers from various parts of the world including South Korea, The Netherlands, USA, Australia, United Kingdom and Bangladesh. To my knowledge, the latter paper is one of very few in the marketing communication domain to be accepted. This diversity and breadth of scope of the journal is one of its hallmarks and we continue to welcome submissions from all areas of the world.
As may be anticipated, integration continues to be a significant theme for the journal, and the paper by Valos et al. challenges the notion that B2B marketers can follow or apply generic marketing communication frameworks. The authors note that B2B applications may lag B2C in terms of online communities and develop a conceptual model for future development and/or empirical investigations. In the broader domain of marketing, the target audience or audiences, as researched from the context of environmental circumstances are always a major driving force for marketing communications applications and B2B or B2C are no exception.
The paper by Chowdhury considers media preferences among young consumers in Bangladesh, a subject that has been well rehearsed and understood in more advanced markets. The media preferences in Bangladesh are diverse and respondents may react in different ways to commercial messages. However, the developed model goes well beyond media preference to preferred media alternatives relating to buyer propensities and – as such – could be utilised for comparative purposes.
Kim and Kim consider the effects or ironic advertising on consumer attention, involvement and attitude and consider its usefulness in engaging consumers who may be disillusioned with the ever-increasing tsunami of advertising banality via a multiplicity of medias. The hypotheses tend to show that such advertising impacts upon ad attention and ad message involvement but show little propensity relative to attitudinal change. Based on hierarchy of effects models, advertising of any type must at least capture some attention. Yet, it may be said, what type and to whom? However, we live in an age where advertisements follow consumers especially online via cookies. Often, however, these are unwanted and unneeded by consumers.
Having just co-authored a paper on corporate communications, I was pleased to see the paper by Bolhuis et al. relative to corporate rebranding and visual identity changes. The paper considers these subjects in four different organisations. Often rebranding new CVI involves considerable investment and there are risk factors involved. What is noted here is the effects of the rebranding may differ between internal (employees) and external audiences (consumers).
Park’s paper uncovers (as may be anticipated to a degree) the motivations for self-gifting. Such gifting associated with activating the self are known to be effective in retail sales and most readers will be familiar with communications about the subject. However, the underlying dimensions of the subject are explored here with reference to achievement, self-sacrifice, self-reward, pride or respect are considered here. I look forward to further research on the topic.
The final paper by Pich and Armansdottir addresses the perennial topic of political brand image in order to develop a brand image framework relative to Party and Leader considerations from the context of the 2010 general election in the UK, with a conservative party ‘win’ (to some degree) and the success of their then leader – David Cameron. No comment is necessary as to his subsequent ‘fall from grace’ i.e., in winning the next election and then falling on the referendum Brexit sword where he completely failed to understand the mood of the British electorate. Be that as it may, it is useful to offer such a framework, albeit recent events in world and national politics tend to run counter to what may be anticipated or expected. Examples could be added but doubtless readers could add their own.
Finally as an editorial aside, I continue to be surprised by how many papers continue to operate within the status quo of established models, theories, tests, processes and procedures. It would be good to see the occasional paper that adopts a different tack … For examples, questions such as:
| • | Is social media anti-social? | ||||
| • | Is ‘political marketing’ a contradiction in terms? | ||||
| • | To what extent is advertising a reflection of moral values in society? Or, | ||||
| • | Should certain topics be banned from advertising – for example, gambling? | ||||
are all deserving of address, and I would encourage submission of papers on these subjects.
Editor
[email protected]