The Dominion FRIDAY, DECEMBER 26, 1926. ADVERTISING OURSELVES

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 53, 26 November 1926, Page 10

The Dominion FRIDAY, DECEMBER 26, 1926. ADVERTISING OURSELVES

From two quarters come demands for more money for New Zealand publicity. In London the High Commissioner, after a conference with representatives of the control boards, has been asked to make representations to the Government for more energetic publicity for New Zealand products. In Wellington, the conference of the Associated Chambers of Commerce has passed a resolution urging that the needs of the Dominion demand still greater efforts in advertising this country abroad.

In view of the fact that other countries arc devoting large sums to the business of advertising their products and attractions, it is necessary that this country should be kept well in the limelight. Sir Janies Parr savs that Australia has set an example by endowing its Publicity Department with £50,000. Before enlarging the Dominion’s expenditure on publicity, however, it might be as well to have a stock-taking. It is one thing to vote a large sum for advertising purposes, but an entirely different and much more difficult thing to devise a scheme for spending the money effectively. - It would be interesting to know, for example, what means we have for checking the results of our national advertising. In private enterprise the successful advertiser is able to trace his results to their source, and shapes his policy accordingly. It is possible to make large profits from advertising, but it is also possible to incur heavy losses. No business or nation which has something to sell can afford not to advertise. By the same token neither can afford to engage in costly advertising campaigns which fail to produce commensurate results. ... . . ■ . Modern advertising is a scientific business. It is essentially competitive in its operation, for its aim is to attract business to a particular centre. The principle remains the same whether the object is the marketing of a new device for peeling potatoes or placing the tourist attractions and products of a country before oyerseas populations. That being the case, it would seem that in any investigation of the methods and results of our policy in national advertising the scrutiny of trained experts would be desirable. If it is mcessary to increase our expenditure in advertising, let us be sure first of'all. that we are on right lines. In the matter of advertising New Zealand products, the Government’s responsibility ought to be carefully studied. New Zealand meat, butter, and wool are not sold by the Government, but by private producers. If a private enterprise went into the business of marketing overseas a New Zealand brand of potato peeler the Government would hardly be expected to pay for the advertising. There is room here for some clear thinking. The advertising of our tourist resorts is the legitimate function of the Government. Is it suggested that it should also undertake the advertising of our products ? That the community in general derives substantial benefit from the successful exploitation of our primary products in the overseas markets is well understood. On the surface, the instructions given to Sir James Parr suggest that the Government should push the sale of our products with more adrertising. It is somebody s job, of course, but is it the Government’s, or wholly the Government's? The officers of the Publicity Department in recent times have done some admirable work-, but we seem to have got into a happy-go-lucky way of dealing with the business of national advertising, and it is time we had a clear-cut policy. There appears to be a fairly general impression that wc are not spending enough, and there can be no doubt at all that this view is correct. It is surprising that the Government have been so long in realising this.