Celebrity endorsements or gambles?

I was reading an article on Adage about brands that are starting to use timeless celebrities in their ads such as Elvis or Einstein because they won't have to worry about those people getting caught in legal turmoil. Of course this is in reference to the recent scandals with Michael Phelps' marijuana use and Chris Brown's boxing training. I mean domestic violence (sorry Rhianna). The truth is that why would an agency use so much money on a celebrity endorser? Look at the videos below with Phelps and Brown.





I mean seriously. Michael Phelps didn't make me want to learn a new language and Chris Brown didn't make me want to chew gum. He actually just made me want to dance. This following ad for Stride gum is much more effective at making me consider trying this gum brand.



As an advertising creative, I have to wonder how a writer or art director goes into an internal meeting and presents an idea with a celebrity. I have to wonder how someone would think that Chris Brown dancing with gum would be more effective than a good creative idea. As a matter of fact, it kind of defeats the purpose of our job. We are supposed to come up with creative ideas. Picking a celebrity to do your dirty work is such a cop out. I understand that celebrities are opinion leaders and they influence people but please pick your battles. The following is a commercial for State Farm starring Lebron James.



Someone tell me how the hell Lebron James is going to sell me car insurance. He can try and sell me Vitamin Water. I probably still won't be convinced, but car insurance? Throwing a celebrity into the mix doesn't guarantee you a homerun. Plus, it's way more out of the client's budget.

My point is let's be creative again. We wouldn't have to worry about our celebrity endorsers screwing up if we didn't use them at all because we actually had good ideas. Let's stop using actors and athletes as a crutch for our unoriginality. And will someone slap the shit out of Chris Brown. What the hell is he doing?