The Celebrity Death Effect: How Tragedy Impacts Brand Perception

Lena Kashyap in Culture & Society June 2025 • 5 min read.

"Exploring consumer behavior following a celebrity endorser's death: Does it boost brand image or tarnish it forever?"

In the high-stakes world of brand endorsements, companies invest heavily in aligning themselves with popular and attractive celebrities, hoping to bask in their reflected glory. The goal is simple: leverage the celebrity's appeal to boost brand recognition, foster positive associations, and ultimately drive sales. However, this strategy carries inherent risks. A celebrity's actions, both on and off-screen, are under constant public scrutiny, and any misstep can have significant repercussions for the brands they represent.

From drug use and DUIs to scandals involving infidelity or even criminal accusations, celebrity misbehavior has become a recurring nightmare for marketing teams. Research consistently shows that negative information about a celebrity can damage consumer attitudes and purchase intent towards associated brands. But what happens when a celebrity endorser dies, especially as a result of their own misbehavior? Does the tragedy amplify the negative impact, or does it trigger a shift in consumer perception?

A new study delves into this complex and often-unforeseen dimension of celebrity endorsements. The research explores how a celebrity's death impacts blame attribution and consumer attitudes, examining whether the circumstances of their death – particularly if linked to misbehavior – can alter the brand's fate.

Death, Blame, and Brand Loyalty: Unpacking the Paradox

The study challenges the assumption that any negative publicity surrounding a celebrity endorser automatically spells disaster for the associated brand. It proposes that when a celebrity dies, particularly due to circumstances related to misbehavior, a unique psychological dynamic comes into play. Death, in some ways, elevates the celebrity in the public consciousness, potentially imbuing them with a sense of sacredness or triggering feelings of sympathy. This makes it more difficult for consumers to assign blame solely to the individual.

Drawing from attribution theory and the concept of cognitive dissonance, the researchers suggest that consumers grapple with conflicting thoughts: the celebrity was a wrongdoer, but they are also now somehow 'sacred' due to their death. To resolve this internal conflict, consumers may unconsciously shift some of the blame away from the celebrity and onto the brand, especially if the misbehavior is directly linked to the product or service being endorsed.

Blame Shifting: Death can lead consumers to attribute less blame to the celebrity and more to the brand, especially if the misbehavior is related to the endorsed product.
Sacredness Factor: The perceived sacredness of a celebrity post-death can positively influence brand attitude, potentially offsetting negative impacts.
Product Harm: If a product is inherently harmful, consumers are more likely to associate the celebrity's misbehavior (and subsequent death) with the brand.
Endorsement Matters: The presence of a strong endorsement deal exacerbates the impact of both product harm and misbehavior on blame attribution.

The study, through a series of experiments, reveals several key findings. First, when a celebrity's misbehavior is directly related to the endorsed brand, their death leads to a partial transfer of blame. Consumers attribute less blame to the celebrity and more to the brand. However, this effect is only observed when the misbehavior implies a product related to the brand. Second, the research uncovers a positive effect of death through celebrity sacredness on brand attitude. In other words, the sense of reverence or sympathy consumers feel towards the deceased celebrity can positively influence their perception of the brand.

Implications and Future Research

This research provides valuable insights for brands navigating the complex landscape of celebrity endorsements. It highlights the importance of considering the potential impact of a celebrity's death, particularly if linked to scandalous behavior. While the findings suggest that death can, in some cases, soften the negative impact of misbehavior through increased sacredness, brands should not assume automatic absolution. Careful monitoring of consumer sentiment, strategic communication, and a willingness to distance the brand from the misbehavior may still be necessary. Future research could explore the role of celebrity-brand congruence, the type of misbehavior, and the consumers' pre-existing attitudes towards the brand and celebrity in shaping these effects. It would also be interesting to see if these results translate to social media influencers.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.1002/mar.21032, Alternate LINK

Title: The Impact Of Death On Consumer Responses To Celebrity Endorser Misbehavior

Subject: Marketing

Journal: Psychology & Marketing

Publisher: Wiley

Authors: Benjamin Boeuf

Published: 2017-09-12

Everything You Need To Know

What is the 'Celebrity Death Effect', and how does it challenge traditional assumptions about celebrity endorsements?

The 'Celebrity Death Effect' describes how the death of a celebrity endorser influences consumer attitudes towards the brands they represent, potentially leading to shifts in blame attribution, perceptions of 'sacredness,' and overall brand perception. It challenges the assumption that negative publicity automatically harms the brand, suggesting that death can introduce a unique psychological dynamic.

How does the study explain why consumers might shift blame from a deceased celebrity endorser to the brand they represented?

The study suggests that when a celebrity dies, particularly due to misbehavior, consumers may experience cognitive dissonance, struggling to reconcile the celebrity's wrongdoing with the perceived 'sacredness' that death can confer. To resolve this internal conflict, they might unconsciously shift some blame away from the celebrity and onto the brand, especially if the misbehavior is related to the endorsed product. This is based on attribution theory, which explores how people explain the causes of events and behaviors.

What key factors influence how a celebrity's death impacts consumer attitudes towards a brand, according to this research?

Several factors play a crucial role. 'Product Harm' refers to situations where the endorsed product itself is inherently harmful. In such cases, consumers are more likely to link the celebrity's misbehavior and death to the brand. Additionally, a strong 'Endorsement Deal' can exacerbate the impact of both 'Product Harm' and misbehavior on how blame is attributed. 'Blame Shifting' is also a key concept, referring to the phenomenon where consumers attribute less blame to the celebrity and more to the brand after the celebrity's death.

Can the death of a celebrity endorser ever have a positive impact on the brand they represented? If so, how?

The research highlights that a sense of reverence or sympathy felt towards the deceased celebrity, termed 'Sacredness Factor', can positively influence consumer perception of the brand. This 'Sacredness Factor' may offset some of the negative impacts typically associated with celebrity misbehavior. This suggests that brands might experience a boost in consumer attitude due to the heightened public sympathy and perceived elevation of the celebrity's image after death.

What are the implications of this research for brands, and what future research directions are suggested?

Brands should closely monitor consumer sentiment, be prepared to strategically communicate, and potentially distance themselves from the celebrity's misbehavior. Further research could investigate how celebrity-brand congruence, the specific type of misbehavior, and consumers' pre-existing attitudes towards the brand and celebrity affect these dynamics. It would also be insightful to explore whether these findings extend to social media influencers, who have become increasingly prominent in brand endorsements.