This art piece represent how commercials target children with strong gender targeting. While I understand knowing your market’s demographics and psychographics is important in deciding how to advertise your product or service, but in many cases for kids products, most main stream media advertisements are extremely gendered based. Another problem I noticed with it too is what activities are advertised to children. Young girls are often shown playing inside with their toys well young boys are shown doing a variety of activities outside.The way I represented this was through basic male and female silhouettes that are mostly black to represent the neutral part of children that haven’t developed the idea that only boys do certain activities well girls do other activities, they are slowly absorbing what they see in commercials though as what they are and aren’t aloud to do. This is causing them not to play with what they want to play but what they are told to play with.
It appears that some Super Bowl ads have ended up playing before the wrong videos on YouTube; videos that support terrorism and violence. One ad was Hyundai’s ad supporting U.S troops who are active and over seas. The video was supporting a political group by the name of Hezbollah that is listed as a terrorist group by the USA. What made it very concerning for Hyundai’s ad about American Troops is that the video for the group is best known for an attack on American troops in 1983 that killed 241 U.S marines but have been involved in attacks from 1982 to 2015. Definitely not a group you want your brand to be identified with.
Google worked quickly to fix the problem and a spokesperson from Google commented to Ad Age that they have strict advertising guidelines, and work hard to prevent ads appearing against any video once it is determined that the content of the video is not appropriate for any of their advertising partners. Google works hard to remove any videos that are against it’s community guidelines but while ads do not appear on the video that started the problem the video itself has yet to be taken down.
I find it odd that a Google spokesperson states “We have clear policies prohibiting terrorist recruitment and content intending to incite violence” to a magazine like Ad Age but doesn’t take down a video supporting a terrorist group that sparked problems with some of their advertising partners. While I believe Google acted quickly to remove ads from the video, the fact that they haven’t removed the video now that they are fully aware of it and has caught the attention of large news outlets like Fox is alarming . The video was still up while I was writing this blog post even though it was first reported by Fox February 9th, 2017 as well as Ad Age on February 12th, 2017.
As part of my blog’s set up I will be posting bi-weekly one panel cartoons highlighting an aspect of advertising as well as a artist statement.
I drew this as a bit of a comparison to what happen to JCPennys back in 2012 with how the group One Million Mom’s reacted to seeing a happy same sex couple as bad for their children. What groups like One Million Moms don’t realise is that there are many other advertisements out there that kids pay far more attention to and have a dangerous effect. My goal with this imagine was to show how silly it is to be targeting the imagine of happy couples rather than imagines of unrealistic body standards.
My original plan for this weeks post was to talk about 84 Lumber’s ad that targeted Trump’s plan to build a wall on the border of Mexico and the US, but with that being the number one topic for every one else I decided to compare it with It’s A 10’s commercial. As much as 84 Lumber’s ad has a lot to talk about it was very blunt with it’s message which left it cut short on air and caused their site to crash. It’s A 10’s ad wasn’t as blunt and played it on the lighter side of political issues, including poking fun at Trump’s hair.
It’s A 10 did a superior job with their ad by talking about diversity and taking a hit at Trump without being obviously blunt, which I believe to be far more effective if you want an ad to make a political statement well still advertising your brand. Advertising is an investment just like any other, a good investment can make you money while a bad investment can cost money. Well I can’t fully say if 84 Lumber’s investment was good or bad right now, I am confident when I say that It’s A 10’s investment was a great investment.
84 Lumber’s ad story line made it look as if it was for illegal immigration and left the real message behind in the dust. Another problem with the ad was it was reworked and cut short due to it being to controversial. The final problem was that if you wanted to view the rest of the ad you had to go to 84 Lumber, which due to the massive volume of people that hit the site cause the site to crash. Well these are negative hits against the ad and to the company itself, you could argue that the controversy of the ad made it a success just by getting everyone talking about the company. Unfortunately people talking about it may not get it the return on investment the company was looking for.
It’s A 10 on the other hand based their ad off diversity by including a wide range of ethnicities, both people and hair. Their commercial got their message and brand across clearly in a effective manner. The black and white filter was a nice touch to create a monotone helping with the message about diversity by bringing everyone together as one and not as us and them.
While both companies messages were with good intentions, It’s A 10 was more effective with their commercial and a greater investment then 84 Lumber’s. I hope the outcome for 84 Lumber is a good one but only time will tell if theirs was a success or a flop.
JCPennys 2012 advertising campaigns for Mothers and Father’s Day got them caught under fire by a group, One Million Moms by including same sex couples in their mail out flyers. One Million Moms wanted JCPennys to take a neutral stand and felt that the business was picking sides. Despite the group only having 40,000 members at the time, JCPennys saw a 25% drop in sales that resulted in CEO, Ron Johnson being replaced by former CEO, Myron Ullman.
What JCPennys did was progressive and it is unfortunate that the public wasn’t ready to be inclusive with the LGBTQ community. It is impressive to see how much has changed though between 2012 to 2017 with more companies including members of the LGBTQ community and breaking gender barriers. Examples include American Eagle with Troye Sivan in their #WeAllCan campaign and CoverGirl introducing their first male spokesperson James Charles. I feel as though JCPennys opened the door to including the LGBTQ communities in advertising, but only failed due to their target market and that they did it too soon. I hope that JCPennys won’t be scared to try being inclusive to again in the future and that next time around that it will be successful.
Just a brief introduction to who I am and what this blog is about as well as the set up. I am a second year marketing student that wants to pursue a career in the advertising industry. I’ve started this blog to follow and comment on corporate social responsibility events in the advertising industry. The set up will be weekly opinion pieces with articles relating to the topic included within the post as well as bi-weekly political comics that involve the advertising industry. My end goals for this blog are as follows:
- To have a better understanding of the advertising industry as a whole.
- Improve my skills with blogging and social media as I believe it’s a key assets in today’s business world.
- Help with developing my art and creative thinking.
I hope you enjoy my posts as well as learn something new each week and please feel free to add your own opinion and provide feedback. Thank you for your time!