Zeynep BAYAZIT, Uğur Cevdet PANAYIRCI

8186

MODA MARKALARININ PAZARLAMA İLETİŞİMİNDE ŞİDDET: SHOCKVERTISING

Toplumsal ve teknolojik değişimler tüketicilerin sosyal ve demografik yapılarında dolayısıyla da tüketim alışkanlıklarında değişime neden olmuştur. Tüketiciler geçmişe göre artık ulaşılması ve ikna etmesi daha zor bireyler olmuşlardır. Bu değişim özellikle moda sektörü gibi rekabetin yoğun olduğu sektörleri etkilemektedir. Moda markaları çoğunlukla ilgi çekmek amaçlı şok yaratıcı temaları kullanmayı ve tüketicileri duygusal anlamda sarsmayı ve sorgulatmayı amaç edinmişlerdir. Bu çalışmanın amacı shockvertising yaklaşımını benimseyen markaların reklam çalışmalarını eleştirel bir bakış açısıyla irdelemektir.
Anahtar Kelimeler:

Pazarlama İletişimi, Reklamcılık, Moda İletişimi, Şiddet, Shockvertising

VIOLENCE IN MARKETING COMMUNICATION EFFORTS OF FASHION BRANDS: SHOCKVERTISING

Contemporary social and technological changes inevitably affect consumer behaviour. Today’s customer is savvy, have no time and hard to persuade. This new relationship between customers and brands has a deeper impact on competitive industries such as fashion. Fashion brands are eager to adopt shocking themes for their marketing communication efforts in order to emotionally affect and challenge consumers. Aim of this study is to study with a critical perspective the advertisement efforts of fashion companies that adopted shockvertising concept.
Keywords:

Marketing Communication, Advertising, Fashion Communication, Violence, Shockvertising,

___

  • Adaval, R. ve Wyer, R.S. (1998). “The role of narratives in consumer information processing”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 3, ss. 207-45.
  • Anderson, C.A, C.N. De Wall, Brad J. Bushman.(2011). “The General Aggresion Model: Theoretical Extension to Violence” Psychology of Violence, Vol.1, No.3, ss245-258.
  • Andersson, S., A. Hedelin, A. Nilsson, C. Welander.(2004) “Violent Advertising in Fashion Marketing” Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol.8. No.1. ss.96-112.
  • Avolio, L., Martens, C. (2009). “You like that, huh?”http://observers.france24.com/en/20090203-you-like-that-huh-relish-advertising-campaign-milan-sexual-abuse
  • Aziz, Aysel (1994), ‘Toplumda Kadın: Kadın Şiddet ve İletişim’ içinde Dünya’da ve Türkiye ‘de Güncel Sosyolojik Gelişmeler, Sosyoloji Derneği Yayınları. Ankara. ss.501-516
  • Banyte, J., K. Paskeviciute, A. Rutelione.(2014) ”Features of shocking advertizing impact on consumers in commercial and social context” Innovative Marketing, Vol.10 No.2. ss.35-46.
  • Barnard Malcolm. Fashion as Communication. 2nd Edition. USA ve Kanada: Routledge, 2007.
  • Burke, M.C. and Edell, J.A. (1989), “The impact of feelings on ad-based affect and cognition”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26 No. 1, ss. 69-83.
  • Cochrane, K. (2014) "How female corpses became a fashion trend”http: //www.theguardian.com lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2014/jan/09/female-corpses-fashiontrend-marc-jacobs-miley-cyrus
  • Dahl D.W., Frankenberger K.D., Manchanda R.V. (2003). “Does It Pay to Shock? Reactions to Shocking and Nonshocking Advertizing Content among University Students”, Journal of Advertising Research, 9, ss. 268-280.
  • Denys, P. (2011). “Animals and Women as Meat”. The Brock Review, 12(1), 1–7.
  • Eagle, L., Bruin A. , Blumer, S. (2002). “Violence, Values and the electronic media environment” Corporate Communications: An International Journal. Vol.7 No.1 ss 25-33
  • Evans, Martin. (1989) “Consumer Behaviour Toward Fashion”. European Journal of Marketing. Vol.23, No.7. ss.7-16.
  • Gartner, William (1986), “Temporal Influences on ImageChange” Annals of Tourism Research,vol: 13, no: 4, ss. 635-644
  • Kunkel, D., B.Wilson, E.,Donnerstein, D. Linz, S. Smith, T. Gray, E. Blumenthal, and W.J.3 Potter. (1995) “Measuring television violence: the importance of context”, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, Vol. 39, , ss. 284-291.
  • Lorenz, Konrad. (1996) “Saldırganlığın Spontanlığı“, Cogito. sayı 6-7. Kış-Bahar. ss.165-168.
  • Mandel, N., Petrova, Petia K., Cialdini, Robert V. (2006). Images of Success and the preference of luxury Brands Journal of Consumer Psychology. Vol. 16, No.1, ss.57-69
  • Moore D.J., Harris W. (1996). “Affect Intensity and the Consumer’s Attitude toward High Impact Emotional Advertising Appeals“, Journal of Advertising, 25 (2), ss. 37-50.
  • Nam, K., I. N., Frith, K. T.(2015) “Consumers’ Responses Towards Provocative Advertising for Social Cause“, The Journal of Advertising and Promotion Research, Vol.4 No.1 ss.109-141
  • Petrova, Petia K. ve Robert V. Cialdini. (December 2005) “Fluency of Consumption Imagery and The Backfire Effects of Imagery Appeals”. Journal of Consumer Research. Vol.32.ss.442-452.
  • Pickton, D. & Broderick, A., (2005). Integrated Marketing Communications (2nd ed). Pearson Education Limited, Edinburgh, UK.
  • Prendergast, G., Ho, B. and Phau, I. (2002), “A Hong Kong view of offensive advertising”, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 8 No. 3, ss. 165-177.
  • Sabri, Ouidade. (2012) “Preliminary investigation of the communication effects of “taboo” themes in advertising ”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 No. 1/2 ss.215-236.
  • Söderlund M. ve M. Dahlen.( 2010 ) “ The Killer ad: an assessment of advertising violence” European Journal of Marketing, Vol.44. No.11/12, ss. 1811-1838.
  • Stevens, L. ve MacLaran P. (2005) “ Exploring the shopping imaginery: The dreamworld of women’s magazines ” Journal of Consumer Behaviour. Vol.4 No.4 ss.282-292
  • Urwin, Brandon ve Marike Venter. (2014) “ Shock Advertising: Not So Shocking Anymore. An Investigation among Generation Y’ Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, vol.5 no.21, ss.203-214.
  • U.S. Census Bureau, National Crime victimization Study. Washington D.C. 2000. http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbo
  • Vezina, R. ve Paul, O. (1997). “ Provocation in advertising: A conceptualization and an empirical assessment”. International Journal of Research in Marketing. Vol. 14. Issue 2. Ss.177-192.
  • World Health Organization. Prevention of violence: a public health priority”. Forty- ninth Assembly May 20-25, 1996, Geneva, Switzerland. World Health Association
  • Yalçın, Ö., A. Erdoğan.(2013) “Şiddet ve Agresyonun Nörobiyolojik, Psikososyal ve Çevresel Nedenleri ” Psikyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, Vol.5. No.4 ss.388-419.
İstanbul Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi-Cover
  • ISSN: 2147-3390
  • Başlangıç: 2012
  • Yayıncı: Fatma Asuman YALÇIN
Arşiv
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

DUYGUSAL TATMİN ARACI OLARAK SOSYAL MEDYA KULLANIMI ÜZERİNE BİR ALAN ARAŞTIRMASI

Nazan ALİOĞLU

MODA MARKALARININ PAZARLAMA İLETİŞİMİNDE ŞİDDET: SHOCKVERTISING

Zeynep BAYAZIT, Uğur Cevdet PANAYIRCI

Belkıs SARAÇ USLUSOY