17603: The Naked Truth About Sydney Sweeney’s Novig Controversy.

 

Adweek spotlighted a new Sydney Sweeney controversy, noting the actress has gone from inciting ire with her wardrobe to doing likewise with no clothing.

The latest outcry is for a campaign hyping Novig, a sports prediction market and trading app, which protestors complain is insulting female athletes.

Okay, except research indicates most people interested in services like Novig—over 70%—are young males. So, a naked Sweeney is probably perfectly appealing to the target audience.

The American Eagle advertising offended people of color, while the Novig promotion pisses off White women—a group that has historically wielded greater power and influence than minorities.

In short, this scenario might pose more damage to Novig than Sweeney delivered to American Eagle.

Bet on it.

One Year Post-American Eagle Scandal, Sydney Sweeney Sparks Ire by Going Naked for Novig

The ad has received backlash for reversing years of gains for female athletes

By Robert Klara

Last August, Sydney Sweeney broke the internet with American Eagle spots showing her in a too-tight top and struggling with the zipper of her jeans.

In her new campaign for Novig, Sweeney has solved those wardrobe problems: She’s not wearing anything at all.

“Today, we at Novig unveiled out first national brand campaign featuring Sweeney,” the sports prediction app announced on its website, “bringing to life our belief that the best sports trading experience comes from a platform singularly focused on sports.”

The campaign’s title is “Just Sports.” But judging from the heated response from the public, “Just Sex” might have been a better title. 

Though some men have expressed appreciation for the work (one calling it “better than any sports playing right now,”) women have largely responded with disappointment and anger.

The problem isn’t showing skin, per se (advertising is already full of that). But at a time when female athletes have just begun inching toward parity in pay and fame, people feel Sweeney has turned back the clock to the Playboy era.

“I can’t describe how infuriated I feel when I watch this,” Australian gold-medalist swimmer Ariane Titmus wrote on Instagram, referring to Sweeney’s ads as “a kick in the face to every woman who has dedicated her life to perfecting her craft.”

Women outside the sports realm have expressed their dismay, too.

“Every great female athlete has used her platform to create movement, challenge norms, inspire change and make an impact,” AI executive Indigo Haddington responded on Sweeney’s Instagram page. “All she’s done is get paid for what she’s known for: her body.”

It’s unlikely that Novig or Sweeney were under any illusions that this campaign was about “just sports” in a literal sense. What’s beyond dispute is that the campaign takes a page from a playbook written long ago—a legacy that Sweeney herself seems to have nodded to in her response to the backlash: a post with a series of photos showing athletes, including MMA star Ronda Rousey and football beefcake Rob Gronkowski, showing plenty of skin.

Even so, even in advertising, a revealing image is one thing; a lasciviousness message is another. In 1971, National Airlines ran ads starring their leggy flight attendants who invited businessmen to “fly me.” In the early 2000s, Axe’s notorious “Billions” ad depicted a tribe of libidinous women chasing down a man who’d just used Axe body spray.

And while evidence is mixed that sex really increases sales, a 2013 study published in the Journal of Advertising found that “males evaluate ads with sexual appeals significantly more positively than females.” And when it comes to sports betting, one recent estimate suggested that 70% of the bettors are men.

Not that there’s no upside for the 29-year-old Sweeney, who’s not just the femme fatale here; she’s a partner and equity stakeholder, too.

17160: Improving The Jean/Gene Pool.

Gap keeps it simple and sexy with KATSEYE, hyping its Fall apparel via “Better in Denim.”

 

It’s better than American Eagle.

17153: Headlining American Eagle Sales, Stock, And Sex Appeal.

 

Adweek published content with a headline and subhead reading: American Eagle Ad Controversy Hasn’t Driven Sales, Early Data Suggests—More than three weeks after its Sydney Sweeney campaign lit the internet on fire, the retailer’s market share remains flat.

 

About a week ago, Adweek published content with a headline and subhead reading: American Eagle Sees Biggest Daily Jump in 25 Years After Trump Backs Sydney Sweeney Ad—The president’s support pushed the brand’s stock up 24% on Monday.

 

So, what’s the real headline?

 

Sydney Sweeney hasn’t got great-selling genes—or jeans.

16472: Just Lying Around The House.

 

You can fight ED with a household food—or a brick house fox…?

16406: Replace Viagra With Home Remedy…?

Fix ED by using a household food? A cucumber or zucchini…?

16399: ED WTF.

 

What exactly is this urologist recommending for men with ED? Viagra vs. va-va-voom…?

16244: NASCAR Drives Diversity In Reverse.

 

This is how NASCAR hopes to attract a more diverse audience? Really?

15995: All’s Fair In Love And War…

 

Now you can show support for Ukraine by meeting Ukrainian women…? Along with military aid, the gals need proofreading help too.

15871: Miller Lite ‘Ale Wives’ Ails From Revisionist History.

 

Advertising Age reported on a patronizing promotion from Miller Lite—Ale Wives—saluting White women in brewing. The stunt spotlights Mary Lisle, noted as the first female brewer in America.

 

Okay, but what about all the Black women who helped the American beer industry grow and thrive through slavery? Who the hell does Miller Lite think was harvesting hops?

 

(It should also be noted that one of the first Black brewers is identified as Peter Hemings—who was a slave owned by Thomas Jefferson, along with his sister, Sally Hemings [no comment]—and that he crafted beer around 1820. Given that Lisle is credited with running her Philadelphia brewery in 1734, it shows how White women achieved a beer milestone roughly 100 years before Blacks.)

 

Regardless, it’s also highly hypocritical for a women’s tribute to come from the brand that brought you bikini catfights and breast-and-body painting.

 

See How Miller Lite Redesigned Cans To Honor Women In Brewing

 

Limited-time cans honor pioneering female brewer Mary Lisle via 'There’s no beer without women' campaign

 

By Yadira Gonzalez

 

This Fourth of July, rather than praise America’s founding fathers, Miller Lite will honor the “Ale Wives,” releasing limited-edition cans in homage to the forgotten women who brought beer to America.

 

The Molson Coors-owned brand will produce a limited supply of its classic white cans that carry the name Mary Lisle instead of Miller Lite, as a way to honor the woman whom the brand describes as the “country’s first recorded female brewer and her revolutionary contributions to the American brewing industry.”

 

In 1734, Lisle ran a Philadelphia brewery, but “through time, women were excluded from the industry as others saw an opportunity to cash in on the nation’s love of beer, forcing most women out of the business altogether,” according to Miller Lite.

 

‘Ale Wives’

 

Cans include Lisle’s name and face, the tagline “There’s no beer without women,” as well as a brief history of Lisle’s contributions to the beer industry.

 

“When people think of beer, they think of men; there are very few people who realize that we actually have women to thank for beer in America,” Elizabeth Hitch, senior director of marketing for Miller Lite, said in a statement. The phrase “Ale Wives” is a historical term referring to women who made beer—Miler Lite calls them “the unsung heroes who brought beer to America in the first place.” According to the brand, a recent poll found that only 3% of Americans know that fact.

 

Agencies on the project include DDB and Alma and Molson Coors PR agency ICF Next.

 

The cans come during peak beer drinking season: Fourth of July weekend has been known to prompt more beer purchases than any other holiday, given that many families and friends gather for cookouts, according to the National Beer Wholesalers Association. Americans spend more than $1 billion on Fourth of July beer and wine, according to the WalletHub. Miller Lite sees the holiday as the perfect time to school drinkers en masse on women in beer history.

 

“There’s no better time to celebrate and put women back into the history books of beer than on the single largest beer selling weekend in America,” Hitch said.

 

Miller Lite will donate $5 for each case purchased on the online retail sites Drizly and Instacart from June 27 to July 4 to the nonprofit organization Pink Boots Society, which inspires and supports women in the brewing profession. Miller Lite is pledging up to $250,000 to the nonprofit.

 

Men dominate the industry, making up 76% of craft brewery owners according to findings from the Brewers Association, a craft beer trade group.

 

“Women played a pivotal role in bringing beer to America as the first brewers here and are often underrepresented in the industry,” Erin Wallace, Pink Boot Society Board Member, said in a statement, adding that the group's mission “is to assist, inspire and encourage women and non-binary individuals in the fermented beverage industry through education.”

 

Fans can get their hands on Mary Lisle cans by attending an event hosted by Miller Lite in Lisle’s hometown of Philadelphia at the Devil’s Den bar on June 30, where it will be unveiling the limited-time cans. Like many other Miller Lite campaigns, the brand will run a sweepstakes, giving drinkers a chance to win a limited edition Mary Lisle two-pack. Those who are 21 years or older can enter by visiting millerlite.com/marylisle through July 4.

15737: Busch Drives Deceptive Divertsity.

 

Busch Light declares:

 

Getting more women drivers on the track starts with giving their careers the fuel it deserves. We’re proud to officially sponsor all women drivers in @NASCAR now and for years to come. Learn more about our commitment here: busch.com/accelerateher

 

Okay, but the oh-so-progressive platform comes in a distant second to Busch’s real racy spirit.

 

15639: Reach Out And Inappropriately Touch Someone.

Looks like AT&T is getting free publicity for its 5G via Lily’s Triple D’s.

15509: Exclusive Clubs, Clubbing Inclusivity.

 

The Daily Mail published a lengthy report on the JWT sex discrimination lawsuit, where a group of White guys accused the White advertising agency of discriminating against them via pink slips. The story made multiple ‘Cancel Club’ references, yet ultimately confirmed that ‘Cancel Club’ gets clubbed and canceled by ‘Boys Club.’ Also clubbed in the report was JWT Creative Director Jo Wallace, who will probably seek solace at her supper club. And it all shows that even Fight Club can’t beat White Club.

 

EXCLUSIVE: ‘If I’d been a young, black, gay woman I’d have been ok’: Two men at ad agency JWT win sex discrimination case after gay female director vowed to ‘obliterate’ Mad Men reputation of being full of ‘white, straight men’

 

EXCLUSIVE: Chas Bayfield and Dave Jenner won a sex discrimination case against J. Walter Thompson (JWT)

 

• Jo Wallace was appointed as global creative director to help the company lose its ‘boys club’ reputation

 

• As well as Mr Bayfield & Mr Jenner, three other male workers were fired, with settlements agreed out of court

 

By Alyssa Guzman and Andrew Young and Tom Pyman

 

A creative worker at a top advertising agency today said he felt like he had ‘a target on my back’ when he was fired after a gay female director vowed to ‘obliterate’ the firm’s Mad Men reputation of being ‘full of white, British, straight men.’

 

Chas Bayfield and colleague Dave Jenner, who were among five men axed from J. Walter Thompson (JWT) after bosses ‘urgently’ wanted to address its poor gender pay gap, have expressed relief after winning a sex discrimination claim against the company.

 

A damning gender pay gap report had sent ‘shock waves’ through the firm as it highlighted there was a serious lack of female representation, a tribunal heard.

 

Female creative director Jo Wallace, 44, was appointed to help lose the company’s ‘Knightsbridge Boys Club’ reputation and jointly held a diversity conference called ‘Crisis: The Mother of All Change’.

 

Ms Wallace, who introduced herself as a gay woman, told the conference: ‘One thing we all agree on is that the reputation JWT once earnt — as being full of white, British, privileged [men] — has to be obliterated.’

 

When Mr Bayfield, who made the famous Blackcurrant Tango ‘St George’ ad, and Mr Jenner expressed ‘valid’ concerns over the safety of their jobs, bosses reacted ‘furiously’ and took it as a ‘challenge’ to their new diversity drive, then made them redundant.

 

Mr Bayfield told MailOnline today: ‘There is a part of me that feels guilty that these laws, that were put in place to protect minorities in the workplace as they should be, have protected a couple of middle-aged, straight, British men. But it is also right the judge found in our favour because it wasn’t right.

 

‘I definitely agreed that there had to be a way to address the diversity issues, but I don’t think it was gone about the right way.

 

‘I remember feeling like I just had a target on my back. I remember thinking, if I was a black 24-year-old woman I’d be fine. If I had been gay, even better.

 

‘But as a middle-aged white man, it felt like my job was in danger and that’s why we went to a lawyer.'

 

A spokesman for Mr Jenner today added that he hoped the judgment would ‘encourage more people to stand up to the ‘Cancel Club’.’

 

Wunderman Thompson, which merged with JWT — the spiritual successor of Madison Avenue, home to a series of advertising agencies that inspired Mad Men, told MailOnline it would be appealing the ruling.

 

Ms Wallace, who used to work for Saatchi & Saatchi and lives with her fiancée in a £1.2 million house in trendy east London, wrote in an article last year: ‘A hell of a lot of people are literally sleeping on the job when it comes to diversifying their creative department beyond white, pale, stale males.’

 

The pair were let go after a meeting with the company and were told to leave.

 

Companies can hire from under-represented communities, but cannot fire employees for race or discrimination.

 

Now the pair, who were behind some hugely successful TV adverts, have successfully sued Wunderman Thompson for sex discrimination.

 

Mr Bayfield and Mr Jenner are in line to receive compensation from Wunderman Thompson after winning claims of sex discrimination, victimisation, harassment and unfair dismissal.

 

They lost claims of age discrimination, race discrimination, and sexual orientation discrimination after the judge ruled they had no impact on their dismissal.

 

The complaint becomes a test case at a time when employers are trying to close gender wage gaps. JWT has one of the most unequal salary structures in the advertising industry, according to data released under government rules.

 

After the pay gap figures were published JWT implemented a plan to increase diversity through methods such as ‘unconscious bias training for staff’ and a ‘blind recruitment policy’ which would see details such as gender removed from job applications.

 

The male-dominated world of advertising is epitomised in the US TV drama Mad Men which portrays sharp-suited, smooth-tongued executives plying their trade on New York’s Madison Avenue in the 1960s.

 

Mr Bayfield today said since his dismissal he has struggled to find work and Mr Jenner has left advertising, adding that they have been perceived as ‘whistle-blowers’ in the industry.

 

The married father, now 54, of Cricklewood in London, said: ‘We were concerned about diversity and female and minority representation but we were also worried about our job safety — the word ‘obliterated’ is a powerful word.

 

‘The gender pay gap was mortifying for the company — because it was an awful gap — and their approach was to go gung-ho on who they perceived to be the enemy. They rigged up a kangaroo court and fired us.’

 

Mr Jenner’s lawyer told MailOnline: ‘There is nothing inclusive or productive about vilifying one group of people to lift up another.

 

‘As this decision demonstrates, there is nothing lawful about it either.

 

‘Hopefully the judgment will encourage more people to stand up to the ‘Cancel Club’ and rediscover their value as individuals in promoting a tolerant and all-inclusive society.’

 

Three other male creatives who were sacked settled out of court, Mr Bayfield said.

 

The complainant said today that his redundancy was a ‘tragic’ example of how the battle against discrimination was victimising ‘people who aren’t particularly vulnerable, like British men.’

 

In an exclusive interview with MailOnline, he said: ‘I feel very pleased at the result. I think the agency was believing it was doing the right thing and wanted to be seen to be diverse, and on the side of all the people who have been historically overlooked.

 

‘They had their shocking pay gap figures which were the worst in the whole industry. They wanted to so do something really quickly and there was this knee jerk reaction at a conference they spoke at.

 

‘But I felt very much that they were taking discrimination from one place and putting it in another place which was completely the wrong way to do it. There were so many other ways they could fix that problem.

 

‘I was fully on board with the notion that it was a problem which needed fixing and we do need to get more people from different cultures and different countries and more women in high positions.

 

‘I ended up speaking out, saying that the tone used in that talk actually makes it sound that you are going to fix the problem by getting rid of us — British straight men of a certain age.

 

‘That is really where it all kicked off and their response to that was really quite explosive, and two days later we were on a list to be made redundant.

 

‘I am very glad that the tribunal looked into all the background and detail, and saw what was going on. The agency was very, very angry because they thought we were opposed to their agenda which we weren’t. We were just getting clarity on, ‘Where does this put us?’

 

‘It’s tragic that the legislation which was put there to protect vulnerable people is now used against people who aren’t particularly vulnerable, like British men.’

 

He said that his former employers had six weeks to lodge an appeal if they felt the law was interpreted wrongly. But if there is no appeal, he expects the tribunal to rule on awarding payouts to him and Mr Jenner.

 

Mr Bayfield said he had ‘not worked a huge amount’ in the last three years and had ‘certainly never achieved the level he was at with JWT’.

 

He added: ‘Work has been quite scant, particularly through the pandemic.’

 

But he said he and his Australian-born wife Claire and their 12-year-old daughter were now preparing to emigrate in six weeks time to Hobart, Tasmania.

 

‘I know there are some very good job opportunities out there, so I am very excited about making a new start, away from all this.’

 

Mr Bayfeld said his decision to emigrate was partly due to him being made redundant, but he added: ‘When your wife is from Australia, it is always at the back of your mind that you might end up there. But it’s been massively accelerated by the absence of work over here.

 

‘My wife is an occupational therapist and is very employable anywhere, so she found a job very quickly.’

 

A judge ruled that JWT bosses unfairly got ‘rid’ of Mr Bayfield and Mr Jenner, 52 and 50 at the time, because it ‘immediately assisted the gender pay gap issue’.

 

The London Central tribunal heard both men are straight, white and British. Their work regularly received praise from colleagues and industry peers.

 

In April 2018, a gender pay gap report revealed there was a pay gap of 44.7 per cent.

 

Ms Wallace had been brought in five months earlier ‘on the need to shake up the creative team to ensure they were seen as experts in non-traditional advertising, and to lose the reputation as the ‘Knightsbridge boys club’.’

 

Ms Wallace, who has been described as a ‘fearless champion of female success’, held the ‘hard-hitting’ diversity presentation with executive creative director Lucas Peon in May 2018.

 

It caused ‘controversy’ when Ms Wallace said JWT’s reputation — ‘white, British, privileged, straight men creating traditional, above the line advertising’ — needed to be abolished.

 

Later, Mr Bayfield sent an email to a boss saying: ‘I found out recently JWT did a talk off site where it vowed to obliterate white, middle-class straight people from its creative department. There are a lot of very worried people down here.’

 

Mr Peon and Emma Hoyle, the company’s HR director, called a meeting with Mr Bayfield and Mr Jenner to discuss their concerns about job safety.

 

Though Mr Bayfield and Mr Jenner said they believe women and minorities should have a fair chance, they were angrily accused of challenging the diversity pledge.

 

Employment Judge Mark Emery said they were treated in such a hostile manner it amounted to ‘victimisation’.

 

Judge Emery said: ‘Both Ms Hoyle and Mr Peon were angry from the outset of the meeting, and it continued in this vein. Voices were raised by Mr Peon and Ms Hoyle, and Mr Bayfield and Mr Jenner were forced to defend their position.

 

‘Their explanations were not at the time accepted and their points of view were angrily dismissed. [There was a] failure to accept that they had any valid concerns about the presentation… their views were regarded as unacceptable.’

 

Within two days it had been decided that Mr Bayfield and Mr Jenner would lose their jobs to redundancies.

 

Mr Peon had unfairly made his mind up before even carrying out an assessment of other senior creatives to see who would be axed.

 

He claimed their performance was at fault, but the judge ruled the work never had concerns.

 

Judge Emery said: ‘We concluded there was a consensus amongst [the company’s] senior management team that Mr Bayfield and Mr Jenner had overstepped the mark with their comments in their emails and at the meeting, that there was anger at what [the company] considered a challenge to their plans on the gender pay gap issue.’

 

The judge added: ‘We considered that a significant factor in [the company’s bosses] minds at this time was the gender pay gap issue, and that a reason for dismissing Mr Bayfield and Mr Jenner was there would be an impact, both in terms of the figures, and by the prospect of having senior positions opening which could be filled by women.

 

‘We considered that this factor, their sex, was on the mind of [the company] when determining to dismiss them, an equal factor with that of the anger at their complaints.

 

‘This would immediately assist the gender pay gap issue within the creative team, it would rid the team of two creative directors who were because of their sex seen as resistant to change; also female creative directors were exactly what [the company] were seeking.’

 

A woman in a similar position would not have faced the same backlash, the judge added.

 

Adrian Scotland, partner at Judge Sykes Frixou, which represented them in the case, said: ‘We were always confident the Tribunal would find in our favour, but you take nothing for granted.

 

‘I am delighted for my clients. They are courageous human beings, having risked their careers to take on a global corporation with the reach and influence of WPP.

 

‘The experiences outlined in this case are sadly commonplace. It is a growing part of the work we do day-to-day.

 

‘Every good thing is vulnerable to corruption and with the billions poured into the diversity economy it should be no surprise that there are more and more bad actors appearing.

 

‘It is important that people feel able to question and challenge bad ideas, especially when they hide behind a benevolent cause.

 

‘There is nothing inclusive or productive about vilifying one group of people to lift up another. As this decision demonstrates, there is nothing lawful about it either.

 

Hopefully the judgment will encourage more people to stand up to the ‘Cancel Club’ and rediscover their value as individuals in promoting a tolerant and all-inclusive society.’

 

A spokesperson for Wunderman Thompson, which merged with JWT, said: ‘We will be appealing the tribunal’s ruling on events that took place within the J. Walter Thompson business in 2018.

 

‘We do not tolerate any form of discrimination or harassment and are committed to providing an inclusive workplace in which everyone is treated fairly.’

 

Wunderman Thompson told MailOnline: ‘No claim was brought against Jo Wallace in relation to the events that took place within the J. Walter Thompson business in 2018. She did not dismiss the claimants, and was not involved in the redundancy decision-making process.’