Can competitive advertising work in Uganda?

Tony Glencross

What you need to know:

  • In South Africa, where I originate from and draw a large part of my experience, competitive advertising is not illegal, but is tightly managed by the Advertising Standards Authority.
  • Let’s go back to the two ads that appeared on Ugandan social media last week.

In the last week, after the announcement of the resignation of Arsene Wenger from Arsenal, there were some advertisements, linking an advertising company to the event, but having a vague taunt or comparison to a competitor company. The two ads, that I saw (there may have been more) were from NBS TV and MTN. NBS TV made a veiled reference to NTV with a reference to turning on your world, while MTN poked at Airtel by saying that the red of Arsenal was the only red they respected.

Let’s take a step back and look at competitive advertising. The business dictionary defines it this way: - “Competitive advertising is an effort by at least one company to create a contrast between its product and the same or similar product offerings by competitors. By establishing a contrast for the consumer and trying to influence the consumer's buying choice, this company hopes to obtain a larger market share.”
When searching online there are also references to comparative advertising, which in broad terms is similar.
Competitive advertising is legal in many countries, but is also illegal in others. In the USA, open brand comparison is acceptable and many ads will feature direct comparisons to other brands and even have the brand in question within their own ads, such as an ad that was done on chicken noodles and another on 3G coverage. Both examples openly display the logos and brands of their own and their competitors such as.

In South Africa, where I originate from and draw a large part of my experience, competitive advertising is not illegal, but is tightly managed by the Advertising Standards Authority. However, for all intents and purposes, it is not allowed and is frowned upon. The offending advertiser will be reprimanded if the tribunal finds that rules have been transgressed. An example occurred in the country during the 90s. Mercedes Benz made a new TV ad that showed a Mercedes being driven around Chapmans Peak and for whatever reason crashed and went through the safety barrier and plunged down the side of the cliff into the rocks below. The driver, wearing a seatbelt, coupled with the safety features of the car, survived and was protected. BMW within a short period of time, created a TV ad that featured the same stretch of road on Chapmans peak, but with the driver navigating the bends of the road and driving through unharmed. The caption and tagline of the ad was “BMW - Beating the bends”. Mercedes complained and the tribunal ruled that the ad was competitive and ordered it withdrawn from circulation. BMW complied, but the damage had been done and the point made.

However, as a further reprimand, the tribunal also ruled that for the next few years, BMW had to submit all advertising for pre-approval by the committee before flighting. This severely complicated the ability of BMW to be first to market with new concepts and in the end, they may have said – it was not worth it.
I do not believe competitive advertising works. How can you better sell your own strengths by highlighting the weakness of competitors? When running ads of this nature, the advertisers risk completely alienating the consumers that are loyal to the product being compared. In sales, it is taught that you never knock your competitors down when selling, as you invite unnecessary comparisons; instead always focus on your own strengths and benefits.

Jeri Smith, president and CEO of Communicus, an advertising research firm, said in an article on the American Marketing Association website, that research shows consumers warm up to and respond better to brand advertising when the main feature of the ad is brand building and highlighting features of the mobile phone in question (Smith was writing on competitive ads in the mobile phone industry in the US).
**
Let’s go back to the two ads that appeared on Ugandan social media last week. MTN is the market leader in Uganda and by all accounts doesn’t need to make any comparisons to Airtel. We are also not 100 per cent sure that the ad was an official and approved MTN ad, since it was only shared on their social media platforms. If however, it was an ad created and approved by the company, it is not clear why they would choose to make a snide remark about their competitors. It speaks volumes also, that they only released the ad on social media and didn’t take it to mainstream media which in Uganda is still mainstay of all advertising. So perhaps MTN knew the possible implications of the ad.

Now to NBS. Was the ad effective? We would have to look in detail at what responses they received and what the comments were, if this were possible. But going from the responses shared that we saw, perhaps it was not. Again, the ad was only released on social media, so it may be something similar to the case above.

Should a brand respond to competitive advertising jibes? These are best ignored, as one jibe retaliated to, will lead to another and eventually both brands will be focusing on each other and not really taking their consumers into account. The competitor to fear is the one who focuses on his own business, his own brand and his own consumers. A wise African man once told me, “When a madman steals your clothes while you are bathing at the river, if you chase after him, you will be seen as the madman.”
Finally, these issues, amongst many others in the advertising industry should be regulated by the industry itself. The Advertising Association should stand up and be counted and set the ground rules for how and where we advertise, what content is acceptable and what is not. If the industry doesn’t regulate itself, the authorities (government) will end up stepping in and regulating and then nobody will be happy.