+14 Since advertisers are already spending huge amounts of money to advertise their products, it would be nice to see them all start spreading the wealth around a little by selecting unknown and non famous people to do their spots. This would relate well to all other unknowns (most of us), and give a few more people the chance of earning a nice paycheck. The highly visible celebrities surely would not mind a few more unknowns making a dollar too. Amirite?

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Unfortunately, profit is the most important thing to advertisers, so it probably will never happen for a long period of time. If unknown people generated more of a profit than Rihanna, I'm sure it would be more common. Also, I'm not sure if you mean unknown people who //are// in the industry (like a model or voice actor that isn't famous) or someone who isn't involved in the industry at all, like a teacher. If you mean the former, I completely agree. However, for the latter, at least for voice actors, it is probably makes more sense to work with people who are experienced. I won't pretend that I exactly how this profession works, but a voice actor that is experienced, can do a variety of different voices, and is extremely used to conveying emotions with just their voice is probably worth more to casting agents than someone with a great voice who would need to be taught how to handle every type of situation that a movie will ask for.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Yes, I meant people like off the streets. They could have try-outs just like they do for talent shows, and give people an honest shot at it. Advertisers have advertising BUDGETS, and are going to spend that money no matter what. The people who are already rich and famous don't NEED more and more millions to already pad their mega millions. They are set for life whether they ever do another thing. Supposedly Obama and most Democrats are for sharing the wealth and redistribution, but it NEVER ever touches the rich, and always falls on the backs of responsible hard working, already over burdened taxpayers. I was just trying to think of a creative way that something like that could occur without just taking the money from them OR having them just give it away for free.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

If you want to see this happen, start your own advertising agency and do it.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

That would require the one thing I DON'T have - MONEY!

by Anonymous 10 years ago

Poor excuse. Present your idea to venture capitalists, angel investors, a bank, etc. If you've done your research and put together a good presentation, you should have no trouble convincing an investor to help fund your venture. Otherwise, perhaps it's not such a feasible idea to begin with.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

everybody needs to make a living somehow

by Anonymous 10 years ago

It's not that I disagree with your idea per se. However, I do not think it will ever happen on a large scale for multiple reasons. Simply put, celebrities can and do accomplish more than an off-the-street average person. Often times, a contract with a celebrity extends beyond just for example, running print in a magazine. If a celebrity promotes a brand, they often talk about it in interviews, promote it in music videos, etc. As a result, even if people don't read the magazines the ads are printed in, millions will still likely hear about this product. Also, celebrities can exert a stronger influence because people want to emulate them. They often are able to pull in new consumers for the company simply because their fans will do anything their idols tell them. It's a sad fact that we are so influenced by celebrities, most of which are not even great role models. (Rihanna, as an example, in my humble opinion.) Nonetheless, it remains a fact, and for as long as it does, we will continue to see celebrity endorsements.

by Anonymous 10 years ago

I was simply trying to be creative AND think outside of the box. It is the box thinking that has us where we are today. People are going to have to come up with ideas and challenge the status quo. If Geico can create a totally fictitious Gecko, or Budweiser can market Clydesdale Horses or a Frog, then surely they could easily market unknowns if they cared to. Advertising and marketing are all about creating image. Unknowns could be made to look and be the "cool" or "in" image versus people who are already extremely and overly successful and rich. If people truly believe in sharing the wealth, helping the less fortunate, and paying it forward, then this would be an actual way to do something without just giving it away freely like our government does. New people would find good work and pay, and products would still be sold and marketed. And do we really go out and buy something/anything because Brad Pitt or Madonna said to in an ad? I never have. Usually, the bigger the star, the less inclined I am to pay attention or want what they have. I can't relate to their wealth and excess. I have no idea what it would be like to pay $1,000 for a bottle of wine or blow $1 million on a single piece of jewelry. I can't relate to Taylor Swift paying over $20 million CASH for a house she will rarely stay in. All I am saying is the more successful and rich they are, the wider the gap between them and me. And when I see THEM only doing all they can to make more and more and more, I ask why? How many millions can 1 person actually spend in a lifetime? That is all I am saying. If they can get it, I guess that is fine and great for them, but it sure leaves out a whole lot of people who would like to taste just a small sliver of the pie too.

by Anonymous 10 years ago