General Motors likely wants to avoid fueling controversy over its multicultural marketing shifts. But a comment left at Essay 4750 introduced new questions to ponder.
Ludlow + Grand—a blog whose banner reads, “an online editorial about cultural entrepreneurship”—published a perspective about multicultural marketing and GM. MultiCultClassics even posted an initial response. View it all here or click on the essay title above to visit the L+G blog. Plus, MultiCultClassics offers addendum thoughts below.
----------------------------
Are Multicultural Agencies The New Segregationists?
In a society that’s more diverse, more cultured and more dynamic than ever before, it’s fundamentally important to be inclusive of all perspectives. But I wonder who in the advertising industry helps or hurts the cause.
Ask any 1st or 2nd generation immigrant in the States how they connect with their ethnic culture—Mexicans, Koreans, Romanians will say that they watch telenovelas from the “home” country. Ancestral countries still strongly define and influence perceptions. And I bet the most popular shows on Telemundo or AZN are not original programming… they’re imported from Mexico or Brazil, Korea or China.
My question then, Are American-based multicultural agencies the best qualified to produce “in-language” advertising for each respective ethnic group—if ethnicity is the most important criterion?
I think not.
1. Global agency networks with best-in-class multicultural offices abroad are better suited and more authentic.
2. Import international campaigns for non-English speaking American consumers a la “Betty la fea”
3. General agencies have a greater responsibility and role to create inclusive, respectful messages to reach acculturated minorities who speak English and consume English-language media. Simply, ethnic stereotypes perpetuated is not creative for a creative business.
P.S. maybe GM should harness the full power of its general market agencies with global networks and drop its multicultural agencies as was mistakenly reported before.
http://agencyspy.wordpress.com/2007/11/26/gm-mixes-up-its-multicultural-accounts/
http://multicultclassics.blogspot.com/
To the start of a healthy conversation.
K.
[MultiCultClassics’ initial response…]
HighJive:
Well, not sure it’s possible to start a healthy conversation with an argument based on ignorant and flawed thinking.
It’s a bit insane to refer to multicultural shops as the new segregationists. Most of these agencies have been relegated to their segregated, oppressed states by an industry whose failure to embrace diversity inspired minorities to launch the separate ventures. Where are these general market shops with best-in-class multicultural units you reference? Remember, the major multicultural shops have already been purchased by holding companies (e.g., Publicis has Burrell, IPG has GlobalHue, etc.). Do you believe for a second that Vigilante or Lápiz are best-in-class organizations? Tell it to shops like Grupo Gallegos. Or any major Black shop.
Would love to continue the conversation, but your cultural cluelessness on the topic rivals the arrogance of your White bosses running McCann. Spend some time working in a multicultural shop, dude. To be honest, you probably wouldn’t last a week.
----------------------------
[MultiCultClassics’ addendum thoughts…]
There’s a lot to critique in the Ludlow + Grand perspective.
First, MultiCultClassics might have misread the notion regarding “Global agency networks with best-in-class multicultural offices…” The author appears to suggest multicultural agencies abroad should be utilized to produce messages for U.S. minority audiences. Interesting idea. Really stupid too. While U.S. minorities still enjoy programming and media from their countries of origin, there’s a big difference between entertainment and advertising. Plus, you must consider acculturation, assimilation, generational evolution and more. To think, for example, that an advertising agency in Mexico is best qualified to speak to Mexican-Americans is about as goofy as declaring a British shop should deliver advertising for a predominately White American audience (God only knows what the author envisioned for U.S. Black audiences). There is plenty of evidence to show that “global” campaigns rarely translate across continents and cultures.
It’s bad enough that the Ludlow + Grand perspective was hatched by someone claiming to be a cultural expert. But the guy is also a Vice President for McCann Erickson. Technically, this is not surprising, as McCann is certainly capable of harboring such inane, disrespectful and arrogant viewpoints on multicultural marketing (Note: The L+G blog presently features a blurb stating the opinions belong only to the author—although MultiCultClassics suspects the disclaimer was recently updated to incorporate the legalese). After all, McCann declined joining Madison Avenue shops that pledged to work on industry diversity with New York City’s Commission on Human Rights. The agency was probably too busy dealing with the discrimination lawsuit from an ex-employee charging ageism.
However, the aforementioned items are not the most outrageous elements in this scenario. What’s totally fucked up is that McCann serves as an AOR for—you guessed it—General Motors. The McCann office in Birmingham, Michigan, will handle the Saab account starting January 2008.
When GM was hit by public outrage to the alleged false reporting on its multicultural marketing shifts, the automaker moved fast with damage control. GM North America Vice President Mark LaNeve actually posted comments on blogs (including MultiCultClassics) to clarify his official position on the matter. Yet here is a representative from a GM general-market advertising agency not only dissing multicultural marketing, but even suggesting the automaker should pursue the course of action it vehemently denied ever considering. Welcome to Madison Avenue 2007.
To overreact, should the L+G piece be labeled as the ill-conceived editorial of a confused individual? Or is it another example of an exclusive, scheming agency sneaking in its true opinions—and using what appears to be an in-house minority to do the deed? Was GM aware of this latest sentiment? Whatever. But since it looks like GM and its general-market shops are indeed messing with multicultural marketing professionals, MultiCultClassics decided to revise and unveil the following parody ad.
2 comments:
HighJive you are a RACIST. You have a double standard for those you criticize and for yourself. You dont like the negative stereotypes of African Americans (rightly so) yet you yourself make these sweeping, racist stereotypes of Whites. And when you catipalize "White," you might as well say Honky. I dont think every white person or so called white agency is an Uncle Tom.
Whats also funny is how you say that that ludlow author wont last at a multicultural shop. Its like you saying that person isnt "black enough" "asian enough" "hispanic enough."
And what FUCK is this "in-house" minority bullshit you expose. That's stupid. Its naive, racist and really elitist.
Your thinking is very 19th century.
Out of curiosity... do you think that those Washington Mutual ads with the black WAMU bank agent and group of bankers who all happen to be white and old are racists.
If you are for equality of all people, then you want dont you be true and be pissed off when any group is denigrated.
Well, racist has certainly become a subjective term, and it’s probably a subject for another post. But we’ve never denied having strong, biased opinions on topics.
It’s not true we “make these sweeping, racist stereotypes of Whites.” Hey, some of our best friends are White.
We will admit, however, that when faced with words, thoughts and actions we deem offensive, we try to hurl back an equally explosive volley. Being polite rarely works in these scenarios. Having to provide repetitive explanations for things most people should inherently understand is irritating too. Sorry if that offends you.
You completely misread our contention that the Ludlow + Grand author wouldn’t last a week in a multicultural shop. The belief is based on a great deal of experience and behavioral patterns. First, through his words and ideas, the L+G author demonstrated a cultural cluelessness that would make it difficult for him to succeed at a multicultural shop, where cultural sensitivity and expertise are required. Second, the author displayed an arrogance that also doesn’t play well in most multicultural shops, where exploration, collaboration and openness are critical. Third, most multicultural shops demand workers who can think and execute much faster than the standard big agency executive. There are a host of other points. But honestly, it had nothing to do with the author not being fill-in-the-race-or-ethnicity enough.
Naïve, racist and really elitist? Why, you’ve just defined the typical Madison Avenue agency, dude.
Finally, we are pissed off when any group is denigrated. At the same time, the groups that receive the greatest amount of denigration usually receive greater concern. Again, sorry if that offends you.
Thanks for reading and commenting. Progress demands being frank and open. Your expressed opinions are duly noted and appreciated.
Post a Comment