Yesterday (October 28, 2014), when I mentioned the GAP ad in one of my other classes, I was stunned to find that not a single person in class was aware of this event that took place last year! Did this ad come to my notice only because the person being victimized in the ad was an Indian? Or was it because I view and read articles about ads more frequently? Does it really matter how and why just ME? Was I being targeted?
I am not really sure about that. But, a few weeks back when I was going through an online journal article on "Racialized Campaign Ads", I came across a striking revelation, which read, 'Campaign managers craft campaign ads with the intention of evoking certain emotional responses. And, racialized ads (either implicit or explicit) are created to heighten negative emotional response'.
Was the GAP ad created with the same intention of generating a buzz so as to gain more attention from non-whites like me? Maybe or may be not. The company however went ahead and had the ad put up in every GAP store. The company also had its Twitter page's banner logo changed to the original ad. But, I am not sure if it was still just the marketing gimmick to grab maximum eye-balls.
Here's another ad, this time from Intel, who knew that their ad was racist, and still chose to publish it—
This ad showsBlack men bowing down to a White man, who supposedly is their boss because the copy reads, 'Multiply computing performance and maximize the power of your employees'. Now, they could have had a Black person as the boss and all white people bowing down to him just to break the stereotype. But, instead of going against the norms, they chose to stick to the 'standards of normalcy' in terms of 'Race Representation' set by ads. And, these standards of normalcy in ads require male and female models to be White, at least for all life-style ads. The other races are either under-represented or represented in negative light. And, since the minority population (African-Americans, Latinos & Asians) has increased to 30% of the total American population today, more people are likely to come across such ads and react to them. And, who does it help the most? Of course, the advertisers! After all that is their main purpose—to be viewed, shared and discussed more and more via new media sites and tools. As they say any publicity is good publicity. No matter how bad it is!
I will share more details on Race Representation in coming weeks. Till then, happy reading!
I am not really sure about that. But, a few weeks back when I was going through an online journal article on "Racialized Campaign Ads", I came across a striking revelation, which read, 'Campaign managers craft campaign ads with the intention of evoking certain emotional responses. And, racialized ads (either implicit or explicit) are created to heighten negative emotional response'.
Was the GAP ad created with the same intention of generating a buzz so as to gain more attention from non-whites like me? Maybe or may be not. The company however went ahead and had the ad put up in every GAP store. The company also had its Twitter page's banner logo changed to the original ad. But, I am not sure if it was still just the marketing gimmick to grab maximum eye-balls.
Here's another ad, this time from Intel, who knew that their ad was racist, and still chose to publish it—
 |
| Intel 'Racist' Ad |
I will share more details on Race Representation in coming weeks. Till then, happy reading!
No comments:
Post a Comment