Dunkin’ Donuts criticized for ‘bizarre and racist’ ad campaign in Thailand

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kinitari said:
I'm sure that they have a broader scope than that, and I am sure that the advertisers in charge of this particular ad aren't so... I don't know, clueless? I think it's borderline insulting to assume that they did this in ignorance.
Click to expand...

So is she appropriating black culture too? It's the same hairstyle after all.

Kite said:
xGNj83a.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Zoe said:
So is she appropriating black culture too? It's the same hairstyle after all.
Click to expand...
It's not as simple as all that. If we take the hair in the ad by itself, I wouldn't think anything of it.

Now if you combine the hair, with the blackness, with the lips and the fact that this was a transformation after eating this chocolate donut, it's harder to see it as unintentional. Each of these things in a vacuum can absolutely seem meaningless - but together?

If I was eating rice in a commercial would it mean I was aping Asians? Of course not.

But if I sat down to eat some new "yellow" rice, and suddenly my top hat transformed into a straw hat and my eyes squinted because I was overwhelmed with the taste - would you think that was by accident?
 
Kinitari said:
If I was eating rice in a commercial would it mean I was aping Asians? Of course not.

But if I sat down to eat some new "yellow" rice, and suddenly my top hat transformed into a straw hat and my eyes squinted because I was overwhelmed with the taste - would you think that was by accident?
Click to expand...
Kite said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrXo1pO65qw

fiwwP9t.png

KS5sCLf.png

v0q8IfW.png

DPQGJBf.png
Click to expand...
Watch the video ad, her lips were already big and red with lipstick before her skin turned black (not unusual among asian women), the only thing left to really complain about is the braids=black thing which is reeeally reaching to try and find something to be offended about. Especially when braids go back to at least the Qing dynasty in China -__-
 
I don't see how culture and context should be the definitive explanation for whether the image is racist or at the very least harmful to the image of black communities. If you rely on the crutch of being mindful of culture and context you remove the ability to discuss whether any action performed by an individual or society is in the best interest of a human's well-being. If there were some culture out there that celebrated sex with minors as a coming-of-age ritual then I think we can all agree that practice crosses a red line, not everything relating to culture and context should be upheld as infallible. Mind you I'm not trying to relate the act of pedophilia to the advertisement image, I'm just illustrating an extreme to show that a red line exists. The discussion should revolve around whether or not the advertisement crosses this line and why.

Having said all of this, I don't appreciate the dismissive comments of people being offended by this image or that it is only white people that are getting up-in arms. We know the woman is suppose to be covered in charcoal and the color of her lipstick is suppose to represent the Dunkin' Donuts logo, but it isn't far fetched that the marketers were also trying to make a connection to blackface when all the elements of the advertisement put together give something strikingly similar. It's not like the image of blackface exists in a vacuum in the Unites States either. The blackface caricature spread internationally and can easily be found used as logos or advertisement in areas where the black population is non-existent. Don't be surprised when people are disturbed to see an image born out of racism spreading out and changing into something used to sell doughnuts.
 
Knee jerk reaction to a charcoal covered woman advertising charcoal donuts. Yep, seems about right in today's world. Ignore actual racist issues and focus on the little things.
 
Giygas AF said:
Knee jerk reaction to a charcoal covered woman advertising charcoal donuts. Yep, seems about right in today's world. Ignore actual racist issues and focus on the little things.
Click to expand...
Yep because vocalizing a problem you have with something is the one true evil in this world we live in
 
I honestly don't think it was intentional or even implying that she is a black person. The lips are red/pink but they are not exaggerated in a cartoonish way as opposed to blackface imagery. You could say, "why isn't she all black?" but from a design perspective you could say they wanted some dichotomy in the image to catch your attention and it also has a layer of sex appeal. I'm more baffled at why they thought they could sell something called a "charcoal donut".
 
Forkball said:
I honestly don't think it was intentional or even implying that she is a black person. The lips are red/pink but they are not exaggerated in a cartoonish way as opposed to blackface imagery. You could say, "why isn't she all black?" but from a design perspective you could say they wanted some dichotomy in the image to catch your attention and it also has a layer of sex appeal. I'm more baffled at why they thought they could sell something called a "charcoal donut".
Click to expand...

Because apparently, edible charcoal is a health fad in asia right now.
 
Infinite said:
Which isn't the case here and wasn't even what my post was talking about.
Click to expand...

Fine.

Everyone has the right to a vocalize a problem they have with something, even if there's no logical reason to have a problem.

And I'd argue that people screaming racism at every little thing, real or imagined, is in fact, a huge issue.
 
stutte said:
Fine.

Everyone has the right to a vocalize a problem they have with something, even if there's no logical reason to have a problem.

And I'd argue that people screaming racism at every little thing, real or imagined, is in fact, a huge issue.
Click to expand...

Because...?
 
snack said:
I don't see the racism at all in that ad.

Why are people grabbing at straws?
Click to expand...

Some people live to be offended. I mean come on, "OH SHE HAS BIG RED LIPS, MUST BE RACIST". Yeah, because white women never use bright pink/red lipstick (plus bright pink is in the Dunkin Doughnuts logo). The doughnut is called charcoal so they painted her charcoal, end of IMO.
 
Stet said:
Where's the proof to back that up? With racism clearer in the public consciousness, do you really think the understanding of 'real' racism has gone down?
Click to expand...

In addition, who allowed him to even define what real racism and faux racism is? That isn't even how intelligent discussions work.
 
I'm black, but can't really say I'm offended by it. I see it as someone in black make-up to represent the "charcoal" donut - not someone trying to do blackface. If she was bugging her eyes out, showing off some goofy expression or had some nappy hair I'd be more inclined to believe they were trying to do blackface.
 
stutte said:
Well definitely not this, or miley cyrus, or the like.

This:

http://bc.ctvnews.ca/former-vancouv...up-racist-enclave-in-small-u-s-town-1.1434724

is what is troubling.

The Wild Wing Cafe thing is debatable, and it may come out that it was driven by racism, and if it is, that's the kind of thing that we should be focusing on.

Not this horribly weak shit.
Click to expand...

Meh, I don't care about Miley or DD, but this is an example of powerless dumbasses doing stuff. I don't care about racists congregating in some little shit town in the middle of nowhere. They don't affect my life or the lives of the underprivileged in any discernible way, subtle racism is what drives people to classify blacks as criminal, less attractive and less likely to be intelligent unless proven otherwise. All of these biases are held while shaking their head at overt bumpkin racism and feeling like they're above it all. But bubba with a flag can't really do shit to me, soccer mom Margeret, on the other hand, can drastically affect perceptions of who I am and if people who look like me are worth trying to help.
 
Byakuya769 said:
Meh, I don't care about Miley or DD, but this is an example of powerless dumbasses doing stuff. I don't care about racists congregating in some little shit town in the middle of nowhere. They don't affect my life or the lives of the underprivileged in any discernible way, subtle racism is what drives people to classify blacks as criminal, less attractive and less likely to be intelligent unless proven otherwise. All of these biases are held while shaking their head at overt bumpkin racism and feeling like they're above it all. But bubba with a flag can't really do shit to me, soccer mom Margeret, on the other hand, can drastically affect perceptions of who I am and if people who look like me are worth trying to help.
Click to expand...

I see your point. But getting angry at something like this (not saying that you are or aren't), something that doesn't affect black people or the way they're perceived, is extremely counter-productive.
 
stutte said:
I see your point. But getting angry at something like this (not saying that you are or aren't), something that doesn't affect black people or the way they're perceived, is extremely counter-productive.
Click to expand...

That's fair but it's also entirely counter productive to pretend this sort of discussions shouldn't happen and get up and arms when they do.
 
Thorakai said:
I don't see how culture and context should be the definitive explanation for whether the image is racist or at the very least harmful to the image of black communities. If you rely on the crutch of being mindful of culture and context you remove the ability to discuss whether any action performed by an individual or society is in the best interest of a human's well-being. If there were some culture out there that celebrated sex with minors as a coming-of-age ritual then I think we can all agree that practice crosses a red line, not everything relating to culture and context should be upheld as infallible. Mind you I'm not trying to relate the act of pedophilia to the advertisement image, I'm just illustrating an extreme to show that a red line exists. The discussion should revolve around whether or not the advertisement crosses this line and why.

Having said all of this, I don't appreciate the dismissive comments of people being offended by this image or that it is only white people that are getting up-in arms. We know the woman is suppose to be covered in charcoal and the color of her lipstick is suppose to represent the Dunkin' Donuts logo, but it isn't far fetched that the marketers were also trying to make a connection to blackface when all the elements of the advertisement put together give something strikingly similar. It's not like the image of blackface exists in a vacuum in the Unites States either. The blackface caricature spread internationally and can easily be found used as logos or advertisement in areas where the black population is non-existent. Don't be surprised when people are disturbed to see an image born out of racism spreading out and changing into something used to sell doughnuts.
Click to expand...

I gotta apologize for the comment binge of my part; don't log in very often so I tend to miss a lot xD.

I see what you're saying man, but this actually touches on another issue altogether. It's a question of what do we do as a society to deal with these relics of the past. We can either throw them away in a vault and make it taboo, or we can reintroduce them but alter the connotations to be positive instead of negative.

If you go the former route, all you're doing is giving them more power, b/c people are naturally going to be interested in something you tell them is off-limits. But if you do the latter, you may get some missteps (this ad could be seen as a misstep I suppose, depending on your view), but over time the effort will solidify itself and for future generations those things will have a positive connotation.

Take the "n-word" for example; the fact I had to censor it just now out of fear if I could get banned for using it (in a historical discussion context) says a lot about the power the word has even still, but because we've made it taboo instead of actively changing its connotation into a positive. "Nigga" may be used by some as an insult ("That nigga's dumb" i.e "That fucker's dumb"), but for me and plenty of people these days regardless of race, as a positive ("What's up my nigga" i.e "What's up my friend"), tho it is a generational thing.

Which feeds back into my earlier point; young people just don't have much power in society, it's really the older zealots who do, and it's their beliefs and values that are status quo..even in the risk of proactively taking negative stereotypes and making them positive. I'm generalizing yes, but it's for the sake of making the point.
 
Eh, this isn't really racist. Definitely culturally insensitive though.

Anyways, I wish this stuff wasn't getting blown up (assuming it is). It just leads to more, "those people complain about everything" despite the fact that this is probably literal white knighting led by non-blacks. Now when something actually important about race comes up, stuff like this is pointed to as people getting worked up over nothing and it's all ignored and swept under the rug.

Thanks for nothing white knights. Accidental sabotage is still sabotage.
 
The lips are the color of the word Donuts from their logo. They also used yellow eye liner to match the word Dunkin from their logo. The black is just to represent the new charcoal (black) donut. I don't believe this had any intention of being black face, but I can see how it would look that way at first glance.
 
Kinitari said:
It's not as simple as all that. If we take the hair in the ad by itself, I wouldn't think anything of it.

Now if you combine the hair, with the blackness, with the lips and the fact that this was a transformation after eating this chocolate donut, it's harder to see it as unintentional. Each of these things in a vacuum can absolutely seem meaningless - but together?

If I was eating rice in a commercial would it mean I was aping Asians? Of course not.

But if I sat down to eat some new "yellow" rice, and suddenly my top hat transformed into a straw hat and my eyes squinted because I was overwhelmed with the taste - would you think that was by accident?
Click to expand...

This post is just... I don't know.
 
"All cultures must abide by what American audiences, based on American history, consider to be racially insensitive. Also, black people now own a patent on braids, all shades of the color black, pink lipstick and chocolate."

Some of you are like conservative freshmen's caricatures of "stupid liberals."
 
Byakuya769 said:
Meh, I don't care about Miley or DD, but this is an example of powerless dumbasses doing stuff. I don't care about racists congregating in some little shit town in the middle of nowhere. They don't affect my life or the lives of the underprivileged in any discernible way, subtle racism is what drives people to classify blacks as criminal, less attractive and less likely to be intelligent unless proven otherwise. All of these biases are held while shaking their head at overt bumpkin racism and feeling like they're above it all. But bubba with a flag can't really do shit to me, soccer mom Margeret, on the other hand, can drastically affect perceptions of who I am and if people who look like me are worth trying to help.
Click to expand...

Clearly this gorgeous top model with the exquisite overly complicated hairdo and make-up is taking all black people back a hundred years. She practically looks like a monkey really.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Apple releases bizarre, otherworldly commercial
36
2K
Grildon Tundy replied
  • Poll
The pull-down ad bar thing
Community 
44
887
AgatonSax replied
Stale Donuts >>> Fresh Donuts
Opinion 
44
3K
Plies replied
Hulu to add ads to their ad free tier
32
2K
MayauMiao replied
Who handles ad placement on this site?
35
2K
Boralf replied
Top Bottom