BBC ranks lower than Tampax for respect in its most humiliating year in its history
BBC is less respected than Maltesers, Oxo and Tampax after ‘most humiliating year in its history’
Taxpayer-funded broadcaster rocked by Jimmy Savile sex abuse scandal
Also faced fury over ‘inane’ coverage of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee
And there has been anger over bumper pay for presenters and managers
By ROB DAVIES
PUBLISHED: 18:47, 26 June 2013 | UPDATED: 20:01, 26 June 2013
The BBC commands less public affection than Maltesers, Tampax and the Oxo Cube after arguably the most humiliating year in its history, according to a survey of Britain’s top brands.
The taxpayer-funded broadcaster has been almost permanently engulfed in controversy in the past year, including allegations of a cover-up over the Jimmy Savile sex abuse scandal.
It also faced fury over its ‘inane’ coverage of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee and bumper pay deals for top presenters and managers.
And the reputational body blows have taken their toll, according to a survey due to be released tomorrow by brand consultancy Clear, part of advertising firm M&C Saatchi.
Just 37 per cent of respondents said the BBC was a ‘desirable’ brand, putting it behind Tampax, Maltesers and the Oxo Cube.
And only 30 per cent said they would describe the BBC – funded by a £145.50 licence fee from every household with a TV – as reliable.
The miserable rating means that the Britons feel they can depend just as much on fast-food chain Kentucky Fried Chicken as they can on the public service broadcaster.
James Osmond, chief executive of Clear, said that people was prepared to forgive one mistake, but had grown tired of the BBC after an unrelenting series of failures.
‘The challenge the Beeb has had is that it’s had more than one or two crises and scandals,’ he said.
‘That really begins to damage a brand over time.’
The survey took in responses from 20,000 consumers and analysed 678 brands in 25 categories.
Britain’s least desirable brand was newsagent chain WH Smith, which was rooted to the bottom, below even pile cream Anusol.
With concerns over the use of personal data reaching fever pitch, Facebook slipped down the ranks of the most reliable brand, with just 6 per cent of those surveyed saying they could depend on it.
That placed the social network below state-owned bank Royal Bank of Scotland and even one rung beneath no-frills airline Ryanair.
But the Irish airline came bottom of the pile when respondents were asked to name a ‘brand I respect’.
Alongside Camel cigarettes, Ryanair scraped a measly 5 per cent.
New parents may not see the glamour in changing nappies, but the survey revealed that Pampers was equally as ‘desired’ as French fashion house Chanel.
Technology giant Apple dominated the list of the UK’s most desirable brands, occupying four of the top 20 spots, although it lost ground to fast-growing rival Samsung.
Apple itself topped the table, with its iPhone in second, the iTunes music service in sixth place and the iPad tablet computer further back in eighth.
And there were some surprises as Marmite defied its own marketing premise that you either love it or loathe it.
The supposedly divisive toast spread was in fifth place, just behind upmarket jeweller Tiffany and well ahead of Disney in 18th.
Anger against Google over its minute tax contribution in the UK saw it lose 38 points on the brand desirability scale.
But Starbucks, which was also embroiled in the tax controversy, managed to climb 3 points after responding to fears of a public boycott by offering to pay more corporation tax.
Despite Amazon being named among the companies siphoning profit out of the UK to avoid tax, it came in at seventh place.
Mr Osmond said the tax controversy hit Google particularly hard because it coincided with fears about the amount of personal data that the web giant collects and anger over search results that allowed access to child pornography.
‘There’s less goodwill to fall back on,’ he said.
The Olympics produced as many surprises for its top sponsors as it did on the athletics track.
The constant sight of billboards for brands such as McDonalds and Coca-Cola, hardly known for their health credentials, seemed to turn Olympics fans off.
McDonalds fell 1 per cent in terms of its impact on consumers, wihle Coca-Cola was the biggest loser, faling 21 per cent.
‘There are an awful lot of brands that had very little association with the values and personalities of the Olympics,’ said Mr Osmond.
‘It can buy you some short-term association, but if there’s no logic it doesn’t help the brand.’
Surprisngly, oil giant BP proved the summer sports event’s big winner, up 70 per cent.
The rise saw BP rebound sharply from the biggest crisis in its history, when the devastating Gulf of Mexico oil spill of 2010 blackened both its reputation and the waters of the Gulf.