an anti-capitalist analysis of the ad
please watch the entire thing before commenting
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Gillette's Toxic Masculinity Ad, Applause, + Outrage | Adversaries 78
- Thread starter lashman
- Start date
an anti-capitalist analysis of the ad
please watch the entire thing before commenting
I'm trying to watch the whole thing before commenting, but failing, obviously. 10 minutes in and these people are insufferable. Their take so far is 'fuck the message because it's an ad'.
Edit: ok, finished watching it... They remain insufferable throughout. As Helios mentions below me, they do agree with the message, they just don't agree with the message being put forth by a company as a form of advertising. Which is horrible to me. It basically says f*** Gillette for even trying to say something, because Gillette might benefit from it. Of course Gillette knows they're going to benefit from this, it's an ad, that's what ads to do. But their criticism of it essentially suggests that these sorts of messages, no matter how obvious, should be disregarded if they come from large corporations. That, and their use of buzzwords like woke and milquetoast over and over and over again just annoy me.
Edit: ok, finished watching it... They remain insufferable throughout. As Helios mentions below me, they do agree with the message, they just don't agree with the message being put forth by a company as a form of advertising. Which is horrible to me. It basically says f*** Gillette for even trying to say something, because Gillette might benefit from it. Of course Gillette knows they're going to benefit from this, it's an ad, that's what ads to do. But their criticism of it essentially suggests that these sorts of messages, no matter how obvious, should be disregarded if they come from large corporations. That, and their use of buzzwords like woke and milquetoast over and over and over again just annoy me.
Last edited:
Agreed. They're stating the obvious. Of course Gillete stands to gain from the discussion about the ad, youd be hard pressed to find anyone who doesnt understand that basic fact. I'll let you try to see the irony in their critique of "wokeness" here.
My question to them is how exactly do they expect these sorts of topics to be disseminated to the general public if not for stuff like this? How do they think addressing toxic masculinity should be carried out? They dont seem to provide many answers for the problems they outline in the video.
Also, yes extremely annoying with the voice shit. I get they need to have some sort of humor in their video but that was unnecessary. Almost stopped watching a few times because of it. Get your point across without sounding like a complete doofus.
This! I mean the glaring flaw in their argument is that the ad places the onus of improvement on the individual while ignoring the influence of society(hint hint societies consist of many individuals) and yet they're a couple of individuals using their small sphere of influence to try and alert people to the realities of advertising...So should men hold one another accountable and educate each other on what toxic masculinity is or shouldn't they?
The fact of the matter is that ads are never going anywhere and they will always try to play on the current hot topic and the onus of improvement will always fall to the individual from where they can begin to change their societal stressors. The gillete ad just states the truth. Who gives a damn if its ultimately there to make money. I mean duh.
The fact that they said we can have conversations about toxic masculinity but to leave gillete out of it speaks to how stupid they think their viewers/people are. Even a mention of the ad could spur on someone to purchase a product from this money grubbing corporation! Listen to us, were woke! Bah.
Sorry I'm done rambling lol
Pretty much. I don't really give a shit if they are profiting from this because the message is sound.
Eh, this critique is a little...bizarre to me. Sure, Gillette is doing this ad to promote their brand and make money. That is the sole purpose of advertising. The fact that they've chosen to do this by promoting a positive message is better than them choosing to promote their brand and make money by enforcing negative messages instead...which a lot of advertising chooses to do instead. Additionally, they are donating 1 million dollars a year for 3 years. Are they donating that money for tax breaks and good PR? Sure, that's the incentive that exists to encourage companies to behave in this manner...seems like those incentives are working as intended. I don't think this ad is going to meaningfully change the systemic causes of toxic masculinity, but it is starting a conversation about that issue and is not actively contributing to that issue...which is good.
I really don't see the downside of this Gillette ad outside of it being, like, a 'symptom of capitalism'...which no shit, we live in a Capitalist society.
I really don't see the downside of this Gillette ad outside of it being, like, a 'symptom of capitalism'...which no shit, we live in a Capitalist society.
It's getting people talking about the subject and raising awareness, I can't find fault in that even if the company behind it overall probably doesn't care at the highest levels or that their message about targeting the individual won't magically solve things because the problem is institutionalized.
As long as this is the network that we disseminate these messages through youre always at risk of the message changing to chase the money
If it made Gillette more cash to say that beating your wife is a good way to keep her in line and a harmonious household theyd do it in an instant. Remember, advertising is completely amoral and will do whatever it needs to do to get its message to the biggest audience.
e: Oh my God is that Peter Coffin? I dont remember what was funny about him but something was.
This is my take. Yes capitalism sucks, yes they're doing this for profit. But I'd rather their audience be hit with a message that actually means something and needs to be said than usual shallow bullshit.
Isn't there still an argument to be made that these corporations only can gain from sowing discord among us? It's basically a way to co-opt social progress while distracting everyone from the many problems of these giant corporations? Coke and Nestle are basically doing the same lately.
Maybe, but i'd rather they were co-opting the progressive, morally correct viewpoints than the alternative ones.
And there's always going to be discord among us at this point, the liberal/conservative, left/right split will last for generations.
So I know this is a battle that I'll never win, but as an uncle with no kids of my own, I really hate how "your uncle" is shorthand for "a shitty person" whether it be racism, child molestation, etc. >:(
Also great video: "Gillette just wants to make money! Please like, subscribe, and support our patreon!"
Look, if Gillette came out with an ad that supported Unite the Right or some shit, I know I'd be attacking it, so I'll congratulate them for putting out a good message even if an ad isn't where I'd prefer the loudest social messages to be.
Also great video: "Gillette just wants to make money! Please like, subscribe, and support our patreon!"
Look, if Gillette came out with an ad that supported Unite the Right or some shit, I know I'd be attacking it, so I'll congratulate them for putting out a good message even if an ad isn't where I'd prefer the loudest social messages to be.
Profiting from this should only be considered a side benefit. The first intent of the ad was to send a message. They never talked about their product in the ad, and not once did Gillette show their product. They really weren't trying hard to sell anything, they were trying to send a message.
Yes it's an ad, but they didn't do anything illegal. They bought the air time, sent their message, and got some brand recognition in the process. They used their opportunity to buy ad air time to provide more than just an ad.
It probably got more publicity than they thought it would and they do benefit from the brand awareness, but I don't think that was their only intent. Their purpose was not to have a capitalistic clever ad campaign, not entirely anyway. Anybody who wants to dismiss the message because they skeptically think this was just an advertising "trick" is completely missing the point of the ad. Or they're just trying to downplay the message.
Yes it's an ad, but they didn't do anything illegal. They bought the air time, sent their message, and got some brand recognition in the process. They used their opportunity to buy ad air time to provide more than just an ad.
It probably got more publicity than they thought it would and they do benefit from the brand awareness, but I don't think that was their only intent. Their purpose was not to have a capitalistic clever ad campaign, not entirely anyway. Anybody who wants to dismiss the message because they skeptically think this was just an advertising "trick" is completely missing the point of the ad. Or they're just trying to downplay the message.
The wife kissing her perfectly shaved husband on the cheek is not acceptable anymore? Interesting.
My take: Ads already influence culture. I welcome companies trying to change the bad parts of culture while advertising.
The idea that companies can't or shouldn't influence social or political messages is the kind of fucking stupid idea I would expect people who have never worked for a large company to peddle. Many CPG companies have been around for 100 years or more and stretch across multiple continents. Large companies have a RESPONSIBILITY to use their global influences to make PROGRESS in humanity toward ethical and moral ideals. They have power and they should use it for good. Energy companies SHOULD use their extensive R&D budgets and supply chains to push energy policy and materials that reduce climate change. Food and drug companies SHOULD use their global R&D centers and synergy with the FDA, CDC, and NIH to develop new healthier products and treatments for the public in a responsible way. Beauty companies, with their global reach in marketing and influence, SHOULD be pushing positive messages on body image and consumerism that promotes positive mental health.
To say companies should stay quiet is to say they aren't present significantly in our society, which is just ignorant and wrong. They influence everything so they SHOULD use their influence responsibly.
Many often don't, but some do, sometimes. We should celebrate when they do and regulate when they don't.
A video that chastises Gillette for positively influencing men when they have more power to do so than most other sources of attention is just brainless and comes off as the ideology of someone who has never worked for a large corporation.
Yeah this is where I'm at. The byproduct is that millions of people are seeing the message and thousands of people are talking about it. Sure, shitty capitalism, but if being a good person becomes profitable, I'd say that's the best we can hope for in the meantime. I consider this a positive and not a negative, even if it's not a message delivered in good faith.
Because the alternative, as others have said, is ads about shallow stuff that actually harms public opinion/perception.