An Old Navy commercial as well as a hacker sparked outrage and annoyance from one Kim Kardashian and her public relations people. Yesterday, the star’s Twitter account was hacked. For a celebrity this can cause a lot of backlash from the public should something out of character be tweeted. Kardashian, like several of her celebrity counterparts, tweets constantly about wherever she is, who she is with, and she is doing. Tweeting is a type of micro-blogging according to a Yahoo! TV blog. The twitter issue has been resolved; that is sure to be a relief for Kardashian.
This blog labels Old Navy’s ad as “obnoxious” and goes on to say that the ad will give a review “nightmares.” The singer/actress in the ad is Canadian Melissa Molinaro. Molinaro’s popularity on the Web has increased (by 16,000%!) because of this television ad. Critics speculate that Old Navy chose Molinaro rather than Kim Kardashian because Molinaro is a cheaper endorsement. Kardashian can supposedly receive up tp $25,000 to simply tweet about a product. Oh, if life could only be so easy!
For a celebrity to be legible for actual payment from merely tweeting or posting a status about a product blew my mind. But the more I thought about it, the more I was intrigued. I suppose the same concept applies to celebrities appearing in commercials. It’s actually probably cheaper for companies to pay celebrities to tweet about their product rather than create a commercial. Tweets take mere seconds to produce. Commercials require a script, plot of some kind, choreography, a shooting crew, actors, a myriad of other things to consider such as time and finances.
Here is the advertisement under scrutiny. Check it; is it “obnoxious” and “nightmare-“invoking? Personally, the harshest words I would use to describe the ad are “indulgent” and “annoying.” And yet, I can’t help but humming along.