Celebrity Endorsements


This past weekend I destroyed my running shoes doing some home renovations (not that I’m too upset, they already needed to be replaced). On Sunday I went out to look for a new pair of runners. I really want to buy a pair of the K Swiss runners endorsed by Jillian Michaels, normally I wouldn’t be swayed to buy something just because they have a celebrity attached to them but this time I just can’t resist.

Are you ever swayed by celebrity endorsements?

Mar 07, 2011 @ 12:22 pm

11 Replies



It's really bad, but for me, if a celeb I like endorses a beauty brand/perfume, I always want it! I realize how silly it is, and I laugh at myself because I know I do it, but oh well!
Mar 07, 2011 @ 02:05 pm


I just want the shoes because I feel like I need an extra kick in the butt everytime I put them on. It`s totally all in my head!
Mar 07, 2011 @ 02:19 pm


If I see a celebrity endorsing a product for an ad, then no, because I know they are just being paid to endorse it. But if I see in a magazine that a celebrity is actually using a certain product or a line of clothing, then I will assume that it must be good because they can afford to buy and use the best.
Mar 07, 2011 @ 04:02 pm


I agree, most of the time I think they are just doing it to get paid. However, celebrities are offered a lot of endorsement deals so I would think they would pick the brands they believe in or want to be associated with.

For instance, (because I love her so much!) Jillian Michaels won`t endorse Subway in commercials because of the high fructose corn syrup in their bread, even though they are a huge sponser of the Biggest Loser.
Mar 07, 2011 @ 04:24 pm

Lauren and Jill

@Lauren, you crack me up. I love that you're such a big fan of Jillian Michaels! Also, I agree with what you said-- celebs get offered a lot of endorsement deals, so I would like to think they choose ones they feel strongly about...unless their careers are going to shambles and they need some extra cash.
Mar 07, 2011 @ 04:40 pm

speaking of subway....

msn.com has just posted a new article on Subway's triumph over McDonald's, in becoming the world's largest restaurant chain. This means McDonald's loses its title that it has kept since the 70s. I guess those 5$ footlongs are just too good of a deal :P
Mar 07, 2011 @ 04:44 pm


I think that's good for 2 reasons:
1 - obviously more nutritious options at Subway (at least without having to search too hard or carry the nutrition guide with you)
2 - You get more bang for your buck - McDonalds is getting more expensive and you can get lots of food (2 meals for $5 if you save that foot long for supper).
Mar 07, 2011 @ 04:52 pm

true, true

Yes, Lauren, you're right, and I hadn't thought of that. I guess I get skeptical when I see a celebrity of the calibre of Reese Witherspoon all through the pages of the Avon catalogue. Personally, I use lots of Avon products, but I doubt Reese Witherspoon does, with all of the designer and upscale cosmetics she has access to.
Mar 07, 2011 @ 05:00 pm


...that one doesn't really match.
Mar 08, 2011 @ 09:06 am

Jillian Michaels

@Lauren - that's interesting you mention that. I'm finding the product placement on BL to be so bad lately (like "Truman Show" bad) that it utterly turns me off. In the beginning they were much more casual about it. It's very cool to know that Jillian Michaels has that filter (or at least, so this would seem) where she only endorses stuff she really stands behind. I'm hoping this is true of Bob - my favourite! I saw him talking up Quaker Oats (which I totally love too) but the instant pouches which I was surprised about. I know they are more healthy than many cold cereals but they have more sugar than plain oats. Having said that, I don't know many people who eat regular oatmeal with honey and fruit like I do. I guess more people go for the Maple & Brown Sugar packets, which is why Quaker would spend more on advertising.

Mmm, I want some oatmeal now...
Mar 08, 2011 @ 09:32 am

Leave A Reply