Byakuya769
Member
Because every ad with black people is taken down because overly sensitive cry baby blacks complain. Right? RIGHT!?!RoadHazard said:
What a dumbass post. Do better, man.
Is this Nivea ad really racist?
- Thread starter Milchjon
- Start date
- Status
What a dumbass post. Do better, man.
Phonomezer
Banned
Spokker said:
Sarah Palin isn't helping.
Napalm_Frank
Member
Everyone should just stop using black people in ads to stop racism once and for all.
Some people really need to grow some skin. It's like they want to find racism in everything.
Some people really need to grow some skin. It's like they want to find racism in everything.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Majine said:
Yeah, there was a freaking outrage over that here in Sweden a few years back. So stupid. The original is called "Nogger" because it's covered with nougat, it has nothing to do with the other n-word (duh). Then they made a version with a liquorice coating, and decided to call it "Nogger Black", because, well, it's black! It was obviously not intended to be racist in any way, but of course people took it that way.
So you think that PSP ad is perfectly fine and normal? Yea, how about no. As humans we are able to look at context and form opinions around that.RoadHazard said:
The fact that Nivea actually used this ad doesn't make their marketing department look racist, it makes them look incompetent.
Phonomezer
Banned
Spokker said:
She better RE-ANIMATE herself. or is that racist too? :O
krypt0nian
Banned
Clearly the work of nazis.
No it's not racist.
No it's not racist.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Baby Milo said:
Only if you personally put it into that context, where it was never meant to be put.
ChocolateCupcakes
Member
If it was just a guy throwing his afro head then no but the "re-civilize yourself" part is a bit questionable.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
ChocolateCupcakes said:
But would you still think it was questionable if it was a white guy? If not:
RoadHazard said:
dustytruly
Member
it's saying RE-CIVILIZE yourself... it's assuming i was civilized once before... that's good enough for meBaby Milo said:
dustytruly
Member
oh shhhhhh-
ChocolateCupcakes
Member
Yeah, I would. The ad is just guilty of poor wording and imposing a standard of "proper" work attire.RoadHazard said:
RoadHazard
Gold Member
ChocolateCupcakes said:
Ok then, that's fine. The ad isn't really imposing that standard though, society is. You're just not considered professional if you show up to a job interview with messy, unkempt hair and beard. I personally don't like it, I think you shouldn't be judged by those criteria (though there are limits to that, of course), but that's just the way it is.
ChocolateCupcakes
Member
Fair enough. But the ad is definitely backing up the standard. I think the reason why black people will find this racist is because blacks are going through a time when they are finally proud of their natural hair. So now that they can finally feel good with the hair they are born with but then this ad comes around reminding everyone of a standard that the hair is unkempt when that isn't necessarily true.RoadHazard said:
Bay Maximus
Banned
I don't personally find it offensive. It appears Nivea is just playing it safe which is the right PR move here imo.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
WTF? SMFH Sony. The incompetence is baffling.Drkirby said:
Joel Was Right
Member
No. To be honest people who find racism in these type of ads puzzle me; their mind must be on persecution overdrive. Says a lot about their world view
Deified Data
Banned
That's what I was getting at, yes. Fact is, a squeaky-clean ad is always going to be better than one that's subtly-racist. Whether you take offense or not, it's extremely easy to not offend people.Mammoth Jones said:
ThisWreckage
Banned
People are going to see what they want to see. That PSP ad with the black woman and the white woman is a wonderful example. I find it funny that no one had a problem with the black woman and white woman ad where they were both on equal footing. Even funnier, no one said a thing about the black woman being dominate over the white woman ad. The ad where the white woman was shown being dominant over the black woman? No sir, you've gone too far. I am outraged to the point where I will ignore the other two ads to make my point.
It must be a nightmare to work in marketing. Having to walk on eggshells because of sensitive, easily offended people that look for injustices in every little facet of their lives.
It must be a nightmare to work in marketing. Having to walk on eggshells because of sensitive, easily offended people that look for injustices in every little facet of their lives.
I dunno, this one seems pretty racist to me. It's equating the natural state of black hair -- the Afro -- with being uncivilized. In addition there's a long history of blacks trying to hide their natural hair and make it more "white."
In the seventies, when I grew up, the embrace for the Afro hairstyle was explicitly political and about righting what was seen as the wrong of generations of black people hiding their natural hair with awful, and sometimes painful, hair products that allowed them to mimc white hair styles.
And the severed head thing is just kind of fucked up.
In the seventies, when I grew up, the embrace for the Afro hairstyle was explicitly political and about righting what was seen as the wrong of generations of black people hiding their natural hair with awful, and sometimes painful, hair products that allowed them to mimc white hair styles.
And the severed head thing is just kind of fucked up.
Joel Was Right
Member
besada said:
Watch the documentary Good Hair
Ghost_Protocol
Member
Stop with the ridiculous false equivalency B.S. Black people in this country (and in the rest of the world) have a history of being treated as, and thought of as sub-human and uncivilized. White people don't. The ad says "Re-civilize yourself" , with an image of a light-skinned, well-dressed, black man tossing the head of a dark-skinned, nappy headed black man - a symbol which that editor obviously believed would be a good representation of an "uncivilized" person. Re-civilize yourself? Seriously?
If the person in the ad was white, the words "uncivilized" wouldn't have even popped into that person's mind.
EDIT: The skin tone is the same, I initially thought the head being tossed was darker.
Also, the PSP ad is just stupid, not racist. How is an interracial catfight a good way to promote the release of a new system color?
If the person in the ad was white, the words "uncivilized" wouldn't have even popped into that person's mind.
EDIT: The skin tone is the same, I initially thought the head being tossed was darker.
Also, the PSP ad is just stupid, not racist. How is an interracial catfight a good way to promote the release of a new system color?
The Faceless Master
Member
is it racist to call a white guy porch monkey?Celsior said:
Oppo
Member
Not racist. Move along.
I reject this. For a couple of reasons.
One, the term "uncivilized" has been out of vogue in the common vernacular for many decades.
Two, because these observations you project onto the base imagery of the ad are what you carry with you. A child wouldn't see the inherent "unfairness". In the case of the PSP black/white ads, I do think it was ill considered to show the two apart, with one dominating over the other. But only because you know the common projection, not because there is anything to the base imagery itself. You may as well call Chess racist, that's where you end up with that argument.
?Ghost_protocol said:
I reject this. For a couple of reasons.
One, the term "uncivilized" has been out of vogue in the common vernacular for many decades.
Two, because these observations you project onto the base imagery of the ad are what you carry with you. A child wouldn't see the inherent "unfairness". In the case of the PSP black/white ads, I do think it was ill considered to show the two apart, with one dominating over the other. But only because you know the common projection, not because there is anything to the base imagery itself. You may as well call Chess racist, that's where you end up with that argument.
The_Technomancer said:
It wasn't racist at all. It's a catfight by two women, not a struggle for racial dominance. The two people symbolize the black and white versions of a frigging games console. The problem is that lots of people are so hung up about race, racism and are so afraid that anyone could be offended that they deliberately misread the intentions of that ad campaign. It's only a racist ad if you're obsessed with seeing racism everywhere.
Discussions like these remind me of a very old joke about a man being shown a set of inkblots, and interpreting them all as pictures of people having sex. When the psychiatrist says the man is clearly obsessed with sex, he answers: "Look who's talking, you're the one with all those dirty pictures."
Soleil rouge
Member
For the second day in a row, on three different threads: Whites telling non-Whites what is and what isn't racist. lol
OpinionatedCyborg
Member
so asian people see racism in everything? that's fucking racist dude... I am offended.Mr. B said:
Ghost_Protocol
Member
Soleil rouge said:
They can't help it. Racism is too personal a thing for people who haven't experienced first hand on a regular basis to be able to easily recognize, unless it's overtly offensive. And by overtly offensive, I mean really overtly offensive.
An image of a black person tossing away a nappy headed version of himself with the caption: "Re-civilize yourself" is unquestionably racist. That does NOT mean it was intentionally racist. I've met dozens of people in life who've said ridiculously racist things to me with absolutely no idea that what they said was racist.
The people drafting the ads were most certainly not black, and likely did not, as many in this thread do not, believe that the combination of that image with that caption might appear offensive. When you don't live with those kinds of experiences, you are not able to recognize it as easily as others who do, can.
If I had to nominate one of the two ads as racist, it wouldn't be the PSP one. I'd like to think (as would the ad creators) that we can use skin colour (like hair or clothing) in terms of aesthetic in art now without it having more sinister undertones.The_Technomancer said:No but this is:
I see far more post-colonial bitching potential in the civilize statement.
PSP ad just looks 80s rock glam.
Soulscribe
Member
Ooof. Yeah I would not greenlight that ad. Even if their intentions were fine that's just bad execution.
As for the PSP ad, I just laugh at how ridiculously race-baiting it is. Out of any kind of imagery they could have gone with, they chose that? It's more just stupidity than outright racism. lol
As for the PSP ad, I just laugh at how ridiculously race-baiting it is. Out of any kind of imagery they could have gone with, they chose that? It's more just stupidity than outright racism. lol
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
The_Technomancer said:No but this is:
Yeah but you haven't seen the entire ad.
Sylver said:Yep but with the other two images not so much.
Here you go.
theignoramus
Member
bearded, nappy headed negro=uncivilized, menacing. clean cut black person=tolerable and socially upright.
it's well known that unkempt black folks have been used as de facto symbols of animal like menace and negativity. (see Willy Horton)
http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-250_162-10002700-12.html
there's almost nothing whites fear more than an unkempt black man and this was basically proved when the George Bush sr. campaign used Willie Horton to devastating effect. I remember reading something which said "white women were chilled to the bone by that image of Willie"
it's well known that unkempt black folks have been used as de facto symbols of animal like menace and negativity. (see Willy Horton)
http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-250_162-10002700-12.html
there's almost nothing whites fear more than an unkempt black man and this was basically proved when the George Bush sr. campaign used Willie Horton to devastating effect. I remember reading something which said "white women were chilled to the bone by that image of Willie"
- Status