Branded face masks is a strategy our industry and government should be exploring
With mask-wearing compulsory in some parts of Victoria, Roger Hogan suggests that marketers, and governments, should create branded face masks. It would help brands, but it might also just encourage the public to widely wear them.
On the weekend, the Victorian government made face masks compulsory in Melbourne and the Mitchell Shire. As the pandemic develops, the same could happen in other states, perhaps across the whole country. But before other governments rush to follow Victoria’s example, it should consider an alternative, or at least complementary, strategy: branded face masks.
If the goal is to protect our health with as little cost as possible to our civil liberties, harnessing the power of marketing, business competition, and consumer choice is likely to be a better option than compulsion.
Even if we take civil liberties out of the equation, there are still reasons to think that a private-sector solution – branded face masks sold by retailers and given away as promotional items – would be more effective and efficient in the medium and long terms. It would certainly be more colourful.
Imagine a street full (to the extent permissible under lockdowns and other restrictions) of faces half-obscured by anonymous strips of fabric. The word ‘dystopia’ comes to mind.
Now picture that same street, where those strips of fabric advertise footy teams, rock bands, celebrities, super heroes… whatever expresses the passions, interests and humanity of the people behind the masks.
I know which one I’d rather walk down, and I suspect most people would feel the same. But creating a private-sector solution for a national public health emergency would require high-level collaboration between Australia’s governments and the marketing industry.
Compulsion has a short shelf life
Clearly, compulsion is necessary right now in Melbourne and Mitchell, and the Andrews government has understandably extended the state of emergency to 16 August. It’s likely, however, that the requirement to wear masks will last well beyond that date.
That’s relevant, because there are reasons to think that a compulsory mask-wearing regime will become less effective and efficient the longer it stays in place.
The most obvious measure of effectiveness would be the compliance rate—and this is where, in my view, the compulsion model becomes risky for governments. Public trust in governments and other institutions had sunk to an all-time low before the COVID-19 outbreak, and the public’s patience has been stretched further by virus-related lockdowns and other restrictions.
It would take only a few incidents of mule-headed refusal to wear a mask and one or two arrests to darken the public mood further, with potentially adverse consequences at the ballot box.
And how efficient is it, from a taxpayer’s point of view, to spend money on enforced mask-wearing when so much is being spent, and so much debt incurred, on measures already in place?
While compulsion might be necessary, and even desirable, in the short term, a private-sector solution could prove effective and efficient over longer periods.
A branded solution
It’s true that most Australians have not become regular mask-wearers since the pandemic began.
As ABC Melbourne Radio noted recently, this is partly for cultural reasons and partly because of mixed messages in the pandemic’s early stages about whether or not masks were proof against COVID-19.
Messaging should no longer be an issue, as informed consensus now favours wearing masks.
Better still, from a marketer’s point of view, designer masks have begun to pique consumer interest, suggesting there is scope to leverage that interest into sales of masks that carry popular brands. On that basis alone, branded face masks – compared to the compulsion model – would be pushing at an open door. There might (might) be a longer-term pay-off if branded face masks prove so popular that people wear them during normal flu season, once the pandemic has run its course. That would be a major behavioural, even cultural, change for Australians.
There would also be a much lower, perhaps very low, cost to government (i.e. the taxpayer) if the private sector, driven by the prospect of profit, finances the initiative.
Harnessing the profit motive to a national public health outcome would require top-level collaboration between governments and the industry. Perhaps a Zoom call between the federal government and, say, the Australian Marketing Institute would be a start.
Scott Morrison, you’re a marketing man—how about it? And all you marketers out there: You and your brand-owning clients could make some money. You’d certainly be doing a lot of public good.
Roger Hogan is the principal of Australian Media Services
sigh
User ID not verified.
Seriously…?
User ID not verified.
This is mighty sensitive territory.. And what brand would want to appear to profiteer from a pandemic?
There are so many better ways to be visible and provide true value that supports people in a time of need. Not sure this is it.
Agreed – it’s sensitive territory. But profiteering happens when manufacturers take advantage of high demand and low supply to jack up their prices. We’re already seeing people rush to buy masks ahead of the enforcement deadline – an opportunity for profiteering, if ever there was one. What happens to those who are unable to buy masks but are still legally obliged to wear them? Introducing a profit (not profiteering) element might encourage more investment in mask manufacturing and hence more supply, and so actually reduce the opportunity for profiteering. Consumer choice and supplier competition would (ideally) help keep prices down and ensure adequate mask quality. As for the sensitivities involved, they can be managed through appropriate messaging (aka marketing).
User ID not verified.
Riley, hard to believe that non-maskers will be persuaded to wear one based on ‘branded’ awareness, I’m certain a $200 fine for not wearing a mask makes more sense for something that last 4 hours (disposable mask).
Understandable if you are an essential service and clearly need to distinguish yourself for employment reasons i.e. Disability employment service worker or an aid.
Once this pandemic is over, people won’t remember that great brand they once saw on a mask, Face masks aren’t intended to be used as if we are walking billboards for companies to profiteer off. Common sense people and wear the friggin mask
User ID not verified.
Why not just put Coke stickers on some ICU machines and be done with it.
User ID not verified.
https://adidas-cdn.revton.com/media/catalog/product/cache/0/image/500x/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/H/0/H08837-1.jpg
User ID not verified.
I am (for once) lost for words. This is gutter level marketing at its worst.
User ID not verified.
Not sure what you mean by “non-maskers”. If you’re referring to people who are culturally or ideologically opposed to wearing masks, I agree – they won’t buy branded products and probably won’t submit to compulsion, either. If you mean people who won’t wear masks because they resent being compelled, they might feel differently about a branded option—not because a branded mask is “better” than a non-branded mask, but because the psychological appeal of a particular favoured brand might help to motivate them to buy a mask and wear it. That’s obviously a marginal purchasing decision for each individual; multiply it across the community, however, and it might result in more people wearing masks, which seems to be a desirable outcome.
As for people not remembering a brand once the pandemic is over, my understanding of a brand is that it constitutes part of the relationship between a consumer and a product—a relationship which extends beyond each individual purchasing decision and may apply to a range of products, not just one. If Nike, for example, were to offer branded face masks, that would be a natural extension of the health and fitness aspects of its brand. Sure, I might forget one day that I bought a Nike face mask, but my awareness of the brand and ability to recall it would hardly have been diminished by the experience and would probably have been enhanced by it.
Two more points: there’s no end in sight, yet, to this pandemic and there are likely to be others; compulsion makes absolute sense in the short term, but the challenge is to come up with a longer-term solution. Re profiteering, I addressed this earlier in the thread but, if brand owners are wary of being seen to be making money out of a crisis, they can donate part of the profits from branded masks to medical research. Win-win?
User ID not verified.
As Oscar Wilde said, “We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.”
User ID not verified.
Roger Good Story, just imagine a room full of marketing execs meeting a year ago trying to storm up a way to keep their brand on everyone’s lips while on their public transport commute. Keep cups have gone and now reusable fabric masks are hot property in the Brand space.
Everything in Marketing is cashing in on something.
User ID not verified.
Sure, but will the public see it that way?
If you then have to spend a heap on marketing to change the perception, seems like you’re making a rod for your own back then destroying the profits in the process.
Can’t wait to wear my Maccas mask.
How about instead, Australians receive a small Medicare subsidy to buy a mask from a a provider of their choice. I’ll be choosing a social enterprise who use decent materials to make masks in a variety of attractive fabrics.
Hordes in branded masks sounds like some sort of dystopia.
User ID not verified.
Instead of selling them, give them away like Jimmy Brings is doing and reap the brand benefits that way:
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jamiegag_from-midnight-melburnians-will-be-fined-activity-6691586857899311104-hQ1A
I’m not sure what’s worse:
A space that advertisers don’t want to cover?
A commentator thinking this is a good idea?
P.S You don’t need to brand something life saving to make it effective. I’m yet to see a condom with a Nike swoosh, or Coca Cola logo yet or any logo for that matter.
User ID not verified.
Although I’m not 100% convinced this is a good idea it’s definitely worth a conversation and is no doubt something that’s being / has been considered by marketers, particularly those managing retail fashion brands. I applaud Roger for coming back to the individual comments (those of merit anyway) in a such a measured and logical way. Also huge props for the Oscar Wilde quote. What a comeback.
User ID not verified.
Branded reusable face masks are already in massive demand https://www.smartcompany.com.au/partner-content/articles/branded-face-masks-popularity-surge/
User ID not verified.