Mindful Marketing
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Mindful Meter & Matrix
    • Leadership
  • Mindful Matters Blog
  • Engage Your Mind
    • Mindful Ads? Vote Your Mind!
  • Expand Your Mind
  • Contact

It's About a <<Fiji Water>> Girl

1/12/2019

18 Comments

 
Picture

by David Hagenbuch, founder of Mindful Marketing & author of Honorable Influence

Have you ever been photobombed?  Friends and family often have fun slyly inserting themselves into each other’s pictures.  Sometimes it’s a complete stranger who appears in the background of a vacation photo, smiling for the camera.  People are used to those kinds of photobombs, but do A-list celebrities expect such interlopers on the red carpet of a major awards show?
 
Fiji Water Girl, perhaps the most famous photobomber ever, rose to global prominence in Beverly Hills, just this past weekend.  Like other award programs, the Golden Globes features a preshow red carpet event during which the many talented people of television and film stroll in front of the media while slowing making their way into the Beverly Hilton Hotel.
 
The promenade of stars in elegant evening gowns and stylish tuxedos provides countless photo opportunities that the celebrities graciously accommodate.  This time, however, as many of them posed for the paparazzi, the same, solitary figure appeared behind them: Fiji Water Girl.  Her intriguing presence in the background of so many popular celebrities’ pictures ignited a social media firestorm—Who is that girl and how did she get in the images of all those icons?
 
For each Golden Globe awards, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (HFPA) selects a small number of companies to be
“awards sponsors,” which means they help underwrite the cost of the program, and in return, they are permitted a demure presence at the event that includes sharing their prestige products with the program’s distinguished guests.  This year’s awards sponsors were Moët & Chandon Champagne, Lavazza Coffee, Lindt Chocolates, and, of course, Fiji Water.

Fiji outfitted several young, attractive women in matching royal blue gowns, and positioned them on the red carpet, holding clear trays of the firm’s trademark bottles.  Ostensibly, the idea was that thirsty guests would avail themselves of the product samples, appreciate the refreshment, and gain a positive impression of the brand.  However, one particular model,
Kelleth Cuthbert, used some strategic photobombing to parlay her gig into so much more.
 
As mentioned above, Cuthbert somehow managed to place herself in the background of photos of a variety of top celebrities including Jim Carrey, Idris Elba, Judy Greer, Eric Lange, and Tony Shalhoub, often making “direct – and sultry – eye contact with the camera.”  Social media shares of the pics quickly made Fiji Water Girl one of the web’s hottest trending topics and, according to Apex Marketing, earned Fiji about $12 million in free media exposure.
 
So, the $12 million question is:  Was Cuthbert’s photobombing serendipitous, or was it planned?
 
Fiji seemed surprised by all the attention, suggesting that although it appreciated the extra exposure, it hadn’t tried to orchestrate it.  The company tweeted: "We're so glad everyone is talking about our water!  *senses ominous presence*  She's right behind us, isn't she? #FIJIwatergirl.”
 
It’s also worth noting that of the several Fiji Water girls stationed on the red carpet at the Globes, Cuthbert was the only one whose presence went viral.  If Fiji truly had been trying to gain mass media attention, wouldn’t more of its models have been found photobombing celebs?
 
All the above makes it seem like Cuthbert may have ‘gone rogue’ and taken up the photobombing herself.  Since her meteoric  rise to stardom, the model has had several opportunities to address such claims.  She’s often suggested that her presence in so many celebrities’ pics was unplanned, for instance:
 
“There’s tons of photographers everywhere. It doesn’t matter where you stand, you’re in the crossfire of every shot.”
 
“No matter where you move, you’re in somebody’s shot. I don’t know, you just have to look at what you’re doing and be aware of where everyone is. But know that you can’t avoid it.”
 
“I don’t even think there was a point where I made any conscious decision [to lean into the photography]. I think from so many years of modeling, when I hear a shutter, I just kind of give a face.”
 
On the other hand, Cuthbert told a Los Angeles times reporter that “It’s all strategic” and “You’ve got to angle.”  She also hasn’t shied away from the cameras since the Golden Globes, appearing on Inside Edition to describe her photobombing experience, taping her own mock award acceptance speech for YouTube, and making a cameo on the Late Show with James Corden.
 
Not having been there or spoken with Cuthbert, it’s hard to evaluate her somewhat conflicting statements and other disparate evidence.  One person who was at the last Golden Globes and has many years of experience with paparazzi is accomplished film actress  Jamie Lee Curtis .  She expressed clear and strong sentiments about what happened to her on the red carpet:
 
“I specifically moved away from the blatant promotions by Fiji and Moet where young women with their trays filled with their wares stood near a designated camera. I knew why there was a photographer poised there and I moved away as I said out loud that I didn’t want to be doing advertising for either. Clearly this angle shows that I moved from her being behind me and yet from the side it still happens. The sponsors of events need to get permission from people when they get them to take their picture next to products.”
 
Some may suggest that Curtis overreacted to what occurred or was too cynical to think sponsors try to stage such photo ops.  However, Business Insider has corroborated her claims, reporting that a specific Fiji-commissioned photographer was the initiator of the photobombing strategy.
 
Stefanie Keenan, the photographer contracted through Getty Images, was at the Golden Globes for the purpose of taking photos that would “elevate” Fiji, which mainly meant getting pictures of celebrities drinking the water.  Cooler temperatures, however, led few stars to take the samples, so, according to Getty’s vice president of global entertainment Kirstin Benson, Keenan “came up with the idea to have a Fiji brand ambassador creep in to some shots.”
 
This revelation certainly supports Curtis’s experience, while contradicting many of the things that Cuthbert said.  It seems, then, that the photobombing was the collaborative effort of Keenan and Cuthbert.  Fiji corporate also bears responsibility in as much as it contracted with the companies that provided the photographer and the model.
 
But even if the photobombing was intentional, is there anything wrong with it?  As mentioned at the outset of this article, it’s often funny when people photobomb others.  That photobombing takes on a different meaning, though, when the pictures are used for commercial purposes. 
 
As Curtis suggested, people, whether celebrities or ordinary citizens, have the right to choose the companies they support.  You probably wouldn’t want your likeness associated with an organization whose mission you don’t endorse.  You also wouldn’t want a company to profit from the use of your image without your consent.
 
However, that’s how Fiji unfairly benefited from the photobombing.  Although the company undoubtedly paid for the privilege of being one of the few Golden Globe awards sponsors, it didn’t secure permission from or provide payment to Jamie Lee Curtis, Jim Carey, or other celebrities whose personal brands it co-opted without their consent.
 
Some may say that no one would assume Curtis endorses Fiji Water just because a model bearing the firm’s bottles appears behind her in a picture.  A lack of an express endorsement is certainly significant; however, simply showing Curtis and Fiji together starts to establish a connection in people’s minds, especially when the picture keeps reappearing.  Branding often leverages such repeat associations, as when a brand uses the same colors and fonts.
 
Cuthbert’s ‘performance’ on the red carpet at the Golden Globes made her and Fiji Water viral stars.  They owe that celebrity status, however, to the real stars whose painstakingly-developed personal brands Fiji and company commandeered.  Hopefully photobombing people with commercial content won’t catch on, as it’s clearly a picture of “Single-Minded Marketing.”


Picture
Picture
Subscribe to Mindful Matters blog.
Learn more about the Mindful Matrix and Mindful Meter.
Check out Mindful Marketing Ads
 and Vote your Mind!
18 Comments
Andrew Chez
1/13/2019 01:33:44 pm

In my opinion I do not think Kelleth Cuthbert just happened to get in all of the celebrities pictures. While it is quite possible that Fiji did not directly tell her to photobomb the pictures I find it strange that she managed to get in so many pictures as well as made the whole night about her and Fiji Water. I personally would be very upset if I was a celebrity and was being nominated to have her in just about every picture of mine. While she by no means did anything illegal, I do think her actions were unethical and I believe this is an excellent example of a "Single-Minded" marketing strategy because it created value to the company, and to Kelleth by making them the most talked about topics of the night, but it took way from the whole purpose of the Golden Globes and to me that is unethical, especially when the Golden Globes was expecting Fiji Waters presence to be hidden from the public eye.

Reply
Matt F
1/13/2019 03:31:02 pm

While this was a very clever strategy by Fiji, if they did orchestrate it, it makes more sense to me that Kelleth was acting either of her own accord than to presume that Fiji specifically told her to photobomb pictures. We can only imagine how difficult the modeling market is and this could have been her big shot at stardom, and it is no surprise she took it. There are plenty of people that jump behind reporters in news stories just to make the news, and she is certainly enjoying the media attention.

Because of how unlikely it is that Fiji specifically told her to jump into pictures without asking celebrities, I can't say that Fiji did anything other than mindful marketing. They were there legitimately simply handing out samples of their product with a pretty face to make it more appealing. There is no ethical or moral dilemma in that, and having celebrities endorse their product is a good way to produce stockholder value.

Reply
Jarod Bingaman
1/13/2019 06:14:28 pm

Fiji water girl did nothing wrong in "photobombing" all the celebrities at the Golden Globe Awards. Fiji had paid to be there at the awards ceremony and Cuthbert was hired to be on the red carpet. The whole point of the job was to advertise Fiji water.

I understand that many of the celebrities and the general public were upset about this, but it was part of the job. Cuthbert's company had paid the rights to be on the carpet, therefore, in the pictures.

Reply
Logan Andrews
1/13/2019 10:01:24 pm

I would even make an argument that the Fiji water girl is making mindful marketing. Assuming Fiji paid for their exposure on the red carpet, it should have been assumed that one or more of their girls would have been caught in the back of some of the celeb shots. The main factor in whether this is single-minded or mindful, is if she intended to photobomb these celebrities, or if it truly was an accident.
If she purposely tried to get in the background of these celebrities' pictures, then yes, I would say she is taking advantage of her spot on the red carpet.
However, if it indeed was an accident, then it is not her fault that the internet noticed her and made her into a "meme" so to speak, thus making this mindful.

Reply
Maci
1/13/2019 11:18:51 pm

I agree that the Fiji water girl photo-bombing falls under single-minded marketing the most. I can understand why many people may believe it to be mindful, due to the fact the Fiji paid to advertise their products at the Golden Globes. However, I believe the photo-bombing to be unethical, whether Fiji told Cuthbert to do so or if it was by her own accord. Award shows and other events always allow companies to advertise their products in exchange for their services, but an issue such as this has never occurred. That is why I am not easily convinced by Cuthbert's defense of being in the "cross-fire of every shot." Fiji certainly achieved the attention they desired, but unintentional or not, the company took away from celebrities' recognition. The attention to this issue was more than that of the celebrities' accomplishments.

Reply
Bryan Slusser
1/14/2019 09:39:23 am

I believe that while the idea of photobombing the photos was single-minded marketing for sure. I believe that while Fiji paying to have the girls at the event might be a closer representation to mindful marketing, the fact that the one girl took the job a step further on her own and got in as many photos as possible (I'm guessing without being specifically told to do so by Fiji) keeps this as single minded. It may not be the most ethical strategy considering not all celebrities are cool with being associated to the Fiji brand. However, in the big picture it's just a photobombing and I think this whole thing is being blown out of proportions by some of these celebrities. The girl getting in the background of these pictures really doesn't take away from the awards given out at the event. Also, Fiji paid to have the girls there, so I believe whatever advertising they got out of the night was deserved. The added perk for the company, is that this incident achieved "meme" status. Becoming a meme, like Tide Pods, can be greatly beneficial to sales. Overall, while this incident was probably not planned and not entirely ethical, I think it is being blown out of proportion.

Reply
Owen Snyder
1/14/2019 10:43:19 am

This form of marketing done by Fiji water has definitely proven to work. However this style of marketing is definitely single-minded, and while yes it creates stakeholder value, it lacks upholding societal values. I think that we could all agree that if one day we were asked to walk on the red carpet at an awards show, then we wouldn't want some random guy or girl standing in the background of all our pictures just holding water....It seems very rude yet entertaining. I mean this style of marketing definitely wasn't free because, I believe that Fiji had to pay some good coin just to be on the red carpet. That being said, I don't think that they paid for what they got to do. I definitely don't see this happening in the future now that these award shows know what to expect from advertisers like Fiji trying to squeeze in the background of celebrity's pictures. People don't want others photobombing their pictures usually and that's just a societal value. When you're out in public you don't go looking for people who are taking a picture just so you can go hop in the background and make a funny face or something. So the fact that Fiji had her stand in the background of the pictures kind of tells me that Fiji just wants some exposure without paying the money for it.

Reply
Sarah link
1/14/2019 11:36:14 pm

Due to the other "Fiji water girls" not showing up in the same number of pictures as Kelleth Cuthbert, it does seem like she intentionally photobombed celebrities. In addition, it looks as though she made direct eye contact with the camera whenever possible. This adds to the evidence that her actions were intentional. While the photobombs may not have been planned by the Fiji company, there may have been some pressure on Stefanie Keenan to get the proper shots. This could have contributed to Keenan coming up with the plan to get Cuthbert in the back of as many celebrities' photos as possible. Since Keenan was hired to take good pictures for Fiji, it makes since that they might go to extremes to get those shots. There also may have been some extra stress in getting good shots because it was a cooler day and less celebrities were sampling the water. In the end, the decision made by both Cuthbert and Keenan to photobomb celebrities was not ethical. They took the decision to be associated with Fiji water out of the celebrities' hands. This was not fair to the celebrities, especially ones like Jamie Lee Curtis who had made a specific effort to not be next to the Fiji water girls. I agree that this does not uphold societal values and that this was single-minded advertisement as a result.

Reply
Zach Sheaffer
1/29/2019 05:33:53 pm

I agree that this falls under the category of Single-minded marketing. Yes, the whole idea behind it is genius, they gained so much exposure in one night, especially because it was televised, but Fiji took advantage of the system. They paid to endorse their product at the Golden Globes, but did not pay to be in celebrity photos. If they did receive consent from the various celebrities, they this would most definitely be mindful marketing, but this is not the case. The fiji water girl had no right to be in these photographs.

Reply
Kate
2/23/2019 05:59:12 pm

The girl did nothing wrong but was simply doing her job ON THE RED CARPET and happened to be in the background. However, with the amount of photos she was in, I do think that it was a bit intentional. I really do not think she should get so much attention for a few photobombs as with the magic of photoshop, she can cropped out and there would be no more issues. Who doesn't want to have fun on the red carpet? I say this was in the end effective marketing despite how it came about.

Reply
Julia
2/24/2019 06:42:24 pm

Hi, I agree that this marketing stunt was single-minded! I think that Fiji Water's intentions were pure at first, but when they got to the red carpet and had the opportunity to photo-bomb the pictures they went with it and tried to benefit from it. I've seen now that even the girl who was involved with this wasn't compensated properly when they used her image even more in stores. Thanks for your research!

Reply
Britt LeMay
3/17/2019 07:15:54 pm

Although I agree that Fiji's marketing tactic was single-minded, I do not really think that the brand did anything to be criticized for. The brand was helping put on the event and so they promoted their product by having it out and exposed for the photos during the event. I think the single girl who was photo-bombing a lot of celebrity photos probably had her own agenda so it might have been just out of Fiji's control. In regards to celebrity association, they were attending an event in which different brands were helping put on through sponsoring, so I don't necessarily think that the celebrities could be upset by having the brand names in their pictures.

Reply
Tiffany Logan
3/18/2019 02:56:39 am

This is something that I had not heard about until now! That is actually very funny to me, and I do not think she did anything wrong by photobombing celebrities photos. I think this is actually very smart and it was a way to get Fiji Water more publicity at no extra expense. People would think this is funny and would make memes out of it and would make it go viral, and it did just that. I am impressed with her thinking and I am sure that it was her idea even though some are taking her ideas and saying it was theirs. I hope that this continues to happen.

Reply
Joon Kim
3/18/2019 03:54:21 am

This is a smart move made by Fiji-water. I am sure they were surprised by how viral Cuthbert became and for them it was like winning the lottery. However, the question on is this right or wrong? It all depends on the individual and how they think about it. This does not necessarily harm anyone while doing this, however, it is a very sly move. In the end, marketing today is all about money and if there was a revenue out of it they succeeded and they'll do anything for more money.

Reply
Gabriella
3/18/2019 03:09:53 pm

When I first watched the video, I saw some flaws in the Gillette commercial, but I agreed with some of their message about how a man should treat others. They only focused on the unfortunate situations that men are a part of and I do not think it was the best approach. They were shamming all men because some choose to live that way. In the video responding to it, it focused on everything that men do for us and how they give to our world. It is important to see the good in the bad before declaring all men as “sexual harassers” and “unnecessarily violent”. Men are not bad and as the blog says, we know and love many men.

Reply
Alex Wright
3/18/2019 03:45:48 pm

This was a very interesting read. I had not heard of figi water girl before reading this article. I really wonder if this was on purpose. It seems like too much of a coincidence for it to be accidental. Therefore, I am led to believe that Cuthbert planned this on her own. If she did, it was quite genius because it gave figi free advertising and helped boost both her modeling career and figi's brand. While it may not have been ethical altogether, figi did not force her to do it so it doesn't fall on the company and they shouldn't be blamed for it.

Reply
Michelle Kim
3/18/2019 11:06:15 pm

This blog was very informational and insightful. The "Fiji water girl" had become the center of the Golden Globes red carpet event, and had shed light upon the Fiji water brand. Due to this, Fiji was given $12 million in free media exposure- that's crazy! I thought that it was interesting how people could turn every situation into scheming or unfair. The talk about Cuthbert's photobombing being intentional or planned does not matter or should not be looked down upon. Photobombs are known for being somewhat intentional; therefore, I do not see much harm in Cuthbert's actions. The purpose of red carpets are for celebrities to flaunt their looks and status, and so I am not surprised that someone in the background had gotten into a shot. Those models are there to do their job and are not restricted from posing or being photos if that is where they are being placed while on the job.

Reply
Aubrey
3/18/2019 11:50:20 pm

Wow, what a marketing move! I had not heard of this until now--I agree with you that this is single-minded. Honestly, I think it was a bold and smart move for Fiji water because the Golden Globes gets a lot of attention. However, it does take away from the moment and what the night is truly about. However, I don't think it was so distracting that it ruined the entire night. At the end of the day, it's just a water bottle, and I think the Golden Globes were probably still enjoyable for the public to watch.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Subscribe to receive this blog by email

    Editor

    David Hagenbuch,
    founder of
    Mindful Marketing    & author of Honorable Influence

    Archives

    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014

    Categories

    All
    + Decency
    + Fairness
    Honesty7883a9b09e
    * Mindful
    Mindless33703c5669
    > Place
    Price5d70aa2269
    > Product
    Promotion37eb4ea826
    Respect170bbeec51
    Simple Minded
    Single Minded2c3169a786
    + Stewardship

    RSS Feed

    Share this blog:

    Subscribe to
    Mindful Matters
    blog by email


    Illuminating
    ​Marketing Ethics ​

    Encouraging
    ​Ethical Marketing  ​


    Copyright 2020
    David Hagenbuch

Proudly powered by Weebly