Pepsi-Cola Public Relations Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Pepsi-Cola Public Relations - Case Study Example PR for these largely undifferentiated brands accounts for their market share dominance. PR often has an important role in sustaining brand equity. Long-lived campaigns that presented PepsiCo as the soft drink for the young and those who aspired to be young have helped sustain these brands' position and market share. Moreover, consistently advertising a brand's position serves as a barrier to competitive entry. Relates to what consumers believe about a brand and the category in which it holds membership (Chitty et al 2005). The other type of insight pertains to how consumers use advertising information to make brand decisions. This insight is the basis for planning the advertising function: identifying a target and developing a brand position. In turn, targeting and positioning guide the design of creative and media strategies (Brassington and Pettitt 2003). Three different publics involved in the case are the government, the consumers and competitors. FDA examined all reported cases but "could see any rational reason for the allergen incidents being reported" (There is a Syringer in my Pepsi Can p. 326). The most problem was general public and potential consumers. Negative publicity influenced its brand image and sales volumes. PR may be able to change these beliefs, but it is generally a slow process. PR An of brand linkage is even more likely when a brand does not have a strong point of differentiation from its competition. In this situation, the point of difference becomes an understanding of target consumers and their goals rather than some brand benefit. When several competitors use this same approach the linkage between brand and message is weakened. One motivation factor is the discrepancy between the position advocated in a message and people's current beliefs. Precision is needed in using this motivational device (Chitty et al 2005).If a communication argues for a position that people currently hold, persuasion will be minimal. At most, this approach will reinforce individuals' current beliefs. If a communication is highly discrepant, it is likely to evoke counterarguments and thus have limited influence. The implication is that messages of moderate discrepancy are maximally persuasive. From everyday experience, it might be expected that threat would be an effective means of motivating message elaboration (Brassington and Pettitt 2003). One of the tools used by PepsiCo is "All of evidence" campaign. Thus, it "was lost on the news media" (There is a Syringer in my Pepsi Can p. 326). The main problem is that consumers make purchase decisions based on what they know about a brand, rather than on what they remember from an ad. Whereas explicit ad recall reflects what people can remember about information stated in an ad, advertisers are interested in what people know about their brand. Implicit measures of memory are useful in this regard. Implicit measures solicit what people know without making reference to the origins of their knowledge. For example, brand recall is an implicit measure because people are asked to tell what they know about a brand. The impact of exposure on brand recall is a more appropriate measure of the learning prompted by PR than is ad recall because brand recall is a reflection of what people know rather than what they can remember (Chitty et al 20