Mr Murthy of Voltas

The Friday issue of BusinessLine had a puff piece on the TATA/Voltas television commercial featuring “Mr. Murthy” and his pidgin-Hindi speaking relatives.

Written by one Lavanya Narayan whose credulity-level is too high for journalism, it credits the witless ads with “humor” that represents the “ideals of the brand.”

She claims it is “proving to be popular with the masses.” (The masses!!!)

“Murthy represents their real consumer,” she writes earnestly, citing TATA/Voltas’ Head of Marketing Deba Ghoshal.

He is attributed the following Dumb & Dumber quote: “The whole chemistry of Murthy and his boss, Mr and Mrs Murthy, and now Murthy and his father in law, is very consumer centric, and the target audience can easily relate to this. We have always believed that consumers are our biggest ambassadors, and with Murthy our customer is right up there, right in the middle of action and gratification. The character of Murthy cuts across multiple segments, entry, mid and high-end, and appeals to a broad spectrum of customers.”

She adds that “industry experts appear positive about Murthy as well,” citing “Ramanujam Sridhar, Founder and CEO of Brand-Comm, a communications consultancy.”

“I like what Voltas is doing with the character of Murthy,” he says; “it continues to develop him year after year, bringing in new elements and characters to support his appearance.”

And finally, the article claims that “According to Ghoshal, since the summer of 2012, Voltas has had the highest market share in the AC category.”

All this is very enlightening but does not address the key issue: why did Voltas choose to make Murthy “comic” in just the way the British used to ridicule Indians?

If you did have to use an accent and speech pattern, wouldn’t it have been much funnier to go with a feringhi Mike Tully affect, something along the lines of his deathless “One thing is Cliah, Benaziah is hyah!”

Those are not rhetorical questions.

Seventy years after independence, TATA continues to hunt with the hounds while pretending to run with the hares, a game it perfected under colonial rule.

Its corporate biggies play a sneaky game we pidgin spouting Murthys are not supposed to notice: using/being used by foreign agencies to subversive ends while pretending to engage in “humor” and entertainment.

It’s not just Voltas.

Last year I pointed out how Aquaguard was almost the only major advertiser on the new television channel EPIC as it conducted a full scale assault on India. (Mercifully, it has since withered on the vine.)

The latest sneak attack is a commercial from Tanishq that dumps quite gratuitously on Punjabis. (It  might be intended as a comforting pat on the back for Southies to make up for Voltas, but that does not alter its political point.)

Is there a larger meaning to all this?

I think there is, and you can see it in what has happened to the annual Goafest gathering of the Indian advertising industry: over the last two years, foreign agencies have abandoned it and now have a rival conference.

If we are to look for a difference between the two, it is that Goafest is at heart Indian; its natural focus is the national market. The foreigners want to bring provincial identities to the fore.

Why do that?

Especially when the Internet, Worldwide Web and social media allow finely targeted and economical approaches to smaller audiences?

The only reasons are political. The national market offers huge efficiencies and, as demonstrated by the runaway success of the IPL, gives the country massive clout with global brands.

That is something foreign interests would like to weaken.

Nitwit Commercials

Do corporate bigwigs in India pay any attention at all to what their ad men are putting out?

On the basis of the idiocy of commercials selling major brands, I would say they're quite oblivious.

Consider the assortment of animals (goldfish, dog, parakeet, monkey and tiger) starring in the commercial for a new Hyundai model.

Did anyone at the car company ask about the commercial's intended target audience? Are there enough five-year-old car buyers to warrant the pitch? 

If Tata had asked such questions before the launch of the NANO perhaps they could have avoided the major marketing disaster that followed commercials presenting the car as a step-up from the scooter for the lower middle class. 

Think how different the NANO image would be if the launch campaign had shown it as fun wheels for 20-something foursomes.

Or consider the mindless Nerolac commercial now playing that shows Keralites unfurling giant umbrellas over their houses while a mocking Shah Rukh Khan offers them a paint-job instead.

Did anyone at the company question the wisdom of reprising the South Indian bashing theme of SRK's recent films?

With the Indian Formula 1 struggling to establish an audience, has anyone done a postmortem of the advertising so far?

The people who planned and executed that campaign were evidently trying to sell the idea that the sport is sexy: their commercials showed Indian girls ecstatic over some weedy white men in driver suits.

Perhaps someone should have sat them down and explained the reason why the sport is sexy.

It's the fast powerful cars.

Boys like them. Girls like boys.

If you cut out the cars, the whole thing loses energy.

Also, showing teenage Indian girls starry-eyed over some White guys who appear to be decidedly over the hill might go over big in Europe; here, it's pathetic.

What Are They Advertising?

What exactly is Z Cafe advertising in a commercial that explicitly promotes drug use?

What does Tata Dokomo think it is selling when it shows a car rocking rhymically in the dark?

There's an element in Indian advertising that is not selling anything but subversion of our social values.

Take that company selling sunglasses and wallets with the pitch line "Why the world moved to ... ". It seems to be selling the idea that women are sluts.

The basic concept of advertising is that products are associated with images/values appealing to the target audience. What kind of market research are these ads based on?

Did the agency that produced the Tata Aria ad showing a middle-aged Englishman declaring to his wife that he is a Secret Agent, really expect that it would have any impact with an Indian audience?

Indian commercials are unlike those in any other major country in their use of models who are nothing like the target audience. One recent commercial showed a band of White skinned surfers running to the sea. Another showed a chocolate man vowing White girls by using Axe perfume.

Is this because agencies are using European commercials to save money, or do they think Indians will look up to White skinned role models? Or, in the case of skin-lightening creams (all marketed by foreign corporations), that Indians want to become White?

Perhaps it's just dim-witted admen. What else can explain the Axe slug line "Who's the man?" in commercials showing a guy lavishing perfume on himself.