Why ads for blacks backfire?

Here’s an interesting (and thought-provoking) article published on Theroot.com on advertising to black consumers.

Source: The Root

I couldn’t say it any better, so I’m re-posting it.

“A roll of the eyes. A shake of the head. A sigh of disgust: Whatever your reaction may have been to Summer’s Eve’s latest viral advertisements, you certainly had one.

As part of the personal-hygiene brand’s Hail to the V campaign, it released a series of three ads last month featuring talking hands meant to represent vaginas. Using a hand to symbolize a vagina is problematic enough, but it gets worse: The three hands represented a black woman, a Latina and a white woman, with personalities that could have come straight out of a handbook of racial and ethnic stereotypes”.

Continue reading here

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Why ads for blacks backfire?

  1. Hey, Tiffany I read every post on your blog. Yeah that commercial was SOMETHING else. I saw it just before they pulled it off of YouTube. Hand vaginas? Really? Its bad enough that in the past I have been grossed out by tampon commercials of women wearing 80% of white clothing all through the commercial. But back to this commercial. We all now that stereotypes are standardized assumptions, which are bad and may hold some truth to them. Well in this commercial, the assumption is that ALL women of certain ethnicity act and talk this way in real life. I can see what they were trying to do; I guess the ad was to come off humorous. Instead it came off racist, tacky and plain unnecessary. I can understand they are trying to sell a product and
    that our “POCKET BOOK” may need more TLC then regular old Ivory soap can give it., but the “Hey Girl” and ” AY-YI-YI” is not going to make me going running to Wal-Mart to pick up any of their products. When you really think about it, you can tell most of the time, but not all the time the ethnicity of the person without the extras. This commercial is no better then those relaxer commercials I see on BET. Just my 2 cents.

    Also here is a link to a show that shows the clips of the commercial and they weren’t too fond about it either.

    But on a lighter note, I was running through one of my shows on the DVR, and I came across two commercials. One from Fruit of the Loom, which has two naturals . The second one is a Safelite Commercial.

  2. I tend to agree. I think they were trying to make the product relatable to most women (because black, white, and Latina just doesn’t cover it all). But I think they failed in their delivery and their method.

    To be honest, I’m not sure that everyone knows or will acknowledge that stereotypes hold some truth to them. I agree with you completely. I would say this to Summer Eve’s: Basing an advertisement on stereotypes is not the way to go.

    If they tested these ads on consumers first, I would have loved to be a fly on the wall for that conversation.

    Thank you so much! I’m posting these new ads.

  3. Pingback: Summer’s Eve Second Campaign Advertisement « Natural Hair in the Media

  4. I’m a guy, so of course I don’t have any use for the product in question, but I think in advertiser’s zeal to capture minorty/diverse markets – it’s often a case of “trying too hard” coupled with ad departments/agencies who lack minorites with the kind of cultural outlook to ensure that campaign is executed correctly. The McDonald’s R&B “McNugget Lovin” commercials immediately come to mind. For someone who is pretty much making an estimation of how a certain group thinks and acts with no cultural context, save for someone else’s estimation in the same media, these kind of “one size fits all” generalizations are to be expected. It’s cyclical.

    As a point of reference to the lack of diverse persons in advertising, in 2006, the New York City Commission on Human Rights (NYCCHR), acting on a complaint from Sanford Moore, an African American who had worked at agencies including BBDO, launched an investigation of 16 prominent New York firms, including BBDO, DDB, Ogilvy & Mather, Saatchi & Saatchi and Young & Rubicam. The agencies settled with the commission, committing to increase diversity over three years. Sorry, but I don’t have the time to explore what kind of advertising diversity headway has been made in the wake of this ruling, but at least in talking to friends who are involved in advertising, I’d wager it slim to none.

    • Hi Macaroni! Thanks for stopping by. I love hearing from men on my blog. And your comment raises some interesting points. I’d like to believe that progress has been made in the realm of multicultural marketing, but “one size fits all” campaigns suggest otherwise. And thank you for pointing out the 2006 investigation. I wasn’t aware of it, and will definitely research it. I wonder what type of progress has been made?

  5. ” In 2006, the New York City Commission on Human Rights (NYCCHR), acting on a complaint from Sanford Moore, an African American who had worked at agencies including BBDO, launched an investigation of 16 prominent New York firms, including BBDO, DDB, Ogilvy & Mather, Saatchi & Saatchi and Young & Rubicam. The agencies settled with the commission, committing to increase diversity over three years.”

    I think this tells you all you need to know on how these things happen…

  6. Pingback: Always Infinity – Commercial « Natural Hair in the Media

What's on your mind?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s