January 8, 20108
A Leader in Style

Posted by Jim Lichtman | What do you think?

“This is President Barack Obama. Whether I’m facing the bitter cold of China’s foreign policy or the bitter winds on Capitol Hill, I can do it in comfort and style in my Weatherproof™ jacket. It’s rugged and waterproof, yet soft and comfortable.  

“So whether I want to get in touch with my inner Thoreau, or just discuss finance policy on the Capitol steps with my good friend John McCain, my Weatherproof™ coat is the perfect choice for my active lifestyle.

“I’m Barack Obama, and I did not approve this message.”

According to the Associated Press, “Outerwear company Weatherproof™ used a recent news photo of the president in front of the Great Wall in Badaling, China, for the advertisement, with the tagline A Leader In Style.”

Apparently, when Weatherproof ™ President Freddie Stollmack recognized that the coat Obama was wearing in the photo was, in fact, made by his company, he had a brainstorm:  buy the photo rights, then create and buy ad space for "America’s Next Top Model."

There’s just one problem: While Stollmack made sure to secure the rights for the photo taken by AP photographer Charles Dharapak, he neglected to ask permission from Obama or the White House to use the image of the president for clearly commercial purposes.

“He didn't come to us. It's just a great looking jacket on a great looking president,” Stollmack said.

The White House didn’t buy Stollmack’s pitch and has asked the company to remove the billboard because the ad misleads the public into believing that Mr. Obama approved the use of his image in the ad campaign.  White House policy disapproves of any use of the President’s name or likeness used for commercial purposes.

“We did this in good faith,” Stollmack said. “This is an image that we thought would enhance the president of the United States.”

“Enhance the president of the United States”? Give it up, Stolly!  You’re looking for an inexpensive and controversial way to sell coats and it worked!

It’s interesting to note that while the billboard owners accepted the ad, The New York Times, New York Post, and Women’s Wear Daily all rejected the ad.

In the end, Stollmack will accede to the White House’s request, but not after Weatherproof™ has achieved its sales quota.

“Meanwhile,” the AP said, “the animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals recently debuted a new ad campaign featuring Michelle Obama – and also did not ask for the first lady’s consent.”

What do you think?

UPDATE: According to a report in the New York Times (Jan. 12), “The Weatherproof Garment Company... has agreed to take down the billboard after talking with the White House.”

“This ad is clearly misleading,” a White House statement said, “because the company suggests the approval or endorsement of the president or the White House that it does not have.”

 

 

  Reader Comments

Comments by Heather, New Hampshire, January 8, 2010

Stollmack's business decision to use Obama's picture for advertisement purposes for his company was maybe lacking in ethics, but other businesses have set precedence.

I can see how Stollmack may have thought it wouldn't be an issue due to the global marketization of Obama collectibles & memorabilia. Obama has been one big "photo op" since he began his campaign trail. His entire presidency is one large Advertisement Campaign. What is he advertising? Why himself, look how great I am! 

Vendors have and still do sell Obama's Hope and Change T-shirts depicting Obama s face in bright colors. Obama's face is on tennis shoes, basketballs, Danbury mint coins, Bradford exchange collector's plates, children s savings banks and bumper stickers. Other companies are apparently making money off of Obama's Hollywood-style days in office. So I'm not sure what the difference is in this situation.

Is Mr. Stollmack a Republican, conservative, or has he just recently voiced disdain towards the president and his current administrations handling of our nations complex affairs? Or maybe the real root of the problem is that Stollmack is a successful entrepreneur of which the current administration has not only voiced their unapproval of but its ultimate mission is to make successful independent entrepreneurs a thing of the past.

Comments by Mike, Texas, January 8, 2010

The New York Times may not have accepted the ad, but the folks who sell billboard space in Times Square didn't have a problem with it. Is it ethical? Of course not, but since when was advertising ever completely ethical?
 
If you want the comforts of a Snuggie or the technology of an iPhone, then you better recalibrate your moral - and ethical - compass.

 

 
 
  HOME | about-jim | archives | articles | be-honest | books | excerpt | fame-shame | hero | quotes | suggested-links | Site Map | FAQ  
  copyright © 2010 Jim Lichtman