Pro
Related Posts
Anyone else following Rocket Lab’s debut today?
Pro
Any facial recommendations in the city?
Additional Posts in Advertising
I need infographic tips please!
Any thoughts on Analog Folk?
Any great resume-writer recos? I need help!
Rising Star
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Rising Star
No. They’re saying she has great “genes” because she’s hot, not cause she’s white.
They probably could’ve done something a lot better, but influencer/celebrity as an idea is the only thing that wins now.
Nope and she looks great!
Yes, next question.
That’s scary that you can’t tell.
It must be exhausting getting outraged at anything and everything on the daily
People love to get offended
Rising Star
No. It’s the equivalent of people freaking out over the green M&M being too woke.
It’s neither racist nor any good. Let’s move on
feels like bad 90s advertising.
No and you’ve lost the plot if you think so
I think it sounds a bit like a racist dog whistle, especially the video where she talks about genes being passed down. But I think it was intended to be nothing deeper than “we sell jeans and Sydney Sweeney is hot”.
But sure, let’s keep getting mad about this instead of literally everything else going on.
There are literal genocides happening today, slavery, children starving, wars, etc.
People here don’t seem to realize they have it so good that their only complaint is a tv commercial about jeans.
And let’s be realistic for a moment….put a black woman in place of Sydney and this campaign would be lauded.
Not every commercial has to feature a black person or lgbtq member.
Pro
Your opinion is subjectively more valued if you have an MBA
You are consistent! As a commenter, you are proof that lot of things are possible if you go “all in” on a POV! 😄😄
Yes but racism aside, it’s still boring and she’s cringey
These comments demonstrate how bad ideas get through the door with no one saying, “Hey this might come off as a little racist to some of our brand’s audience, how can we push the idea and make it better?”
AE’s stock value went up in anticipation of sales that aren’t following, and they have alienated a portion of their customer base that were hard won over the last decade. They created a campaign that seems mostly to appeal to a demographic that does not buy their clothing. Whether or not it’s intentionally racist, it’s incredibly dumb to burn brand equity like that.
No. We endured a slew of obese women in ads telling us they're pretty and healthy for half a decade. One hot blonde woman with a giant cans has made everyone's heads explode. It's a fact she has good genes. She's hot. They could keep the campaign going and say other hot ppl have good genes, if they even needed to. The ad was clearly successful. Look at their stock prices. We aren't here to socially engineer 2 million years of biological facts. We're here to sell items to consumers.
ACD1 - Correct. It's like that children's tale "the emperor's new clothes". It's a lie that everyone bought in on for fear of speaking out. It's subversion and social engineering It's nor factual. It's forced.
Marketing designer 1 - I am not a stock owner in this brand or group, no. But if I were the client or the agency that had this client relationship, those numbers would be great. Strong stocks are often a sign of a strong company. The board would love those numbers, and love who helped provide them. Giving this agency more money and notoriety and (hopefully) the ppl at that agency more money. Cuz that's why we all do it. Money.
Yes - we don’t live in a vacuum - given the political and cultural climate, context is key. Also it’s cringey.
Yes, and I am protesting by never wearing jeans again. Ever. Sorry, Not Sorry.
Nope! It was a witty play on words that I would be willing to bet nobody at the agency even considered that this might offend anyone.
Chief
It’s heartening to see that we’re still getting all worked up over the same stuff we got all worked up about in 1980. There isn’t an original idea here.
https://youtu.be/AXzR5b6HoIA?si=NZhPFahMSdcbizQ9
It was a risk and in bad taste, unless they are planning more campaigns with more beautiful people of different races and ethnicities. The whole point is it IS playing on genes/jeans, and so hopefully they considered the importance of expanding on the definition of "good genes."
Pro
Yeah I think this would be a pretty good solve, although it still feels like a "these jeans are not for uggos" thing
Yes and to think otherwise is not just dumb, but dangerous too.
Eugenics -> superior race -> genocide
Strategist 3 - the irony is, I do understand how narratives in mass media can be used to further dangerous rhetoric and ideologies. You seem to adhere to just one of those ideologies made popular in the last 10 years. Highlighting the beauty of one group does not detract beauty from others. In fact, what you're saying is there's only one group who isn't allowed to be beautiful or talk about having great genes. Because recognizing what's right in front of you is some dog whistle? No, that's lazy. And it's a learned, honestly trained, reflex from one of those dangerous rhetorics or ideologies you spoke of.
It's not.