Essay 823

Below are comments posted on AdAge.com in response to Bob Garfield’s crazy column criticizing ads for Oreos and Sony (see Essay 820).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Garfield shows some personal visions in the Oreos work that hopefully aren’t shared by the general (or minority) public. Wonder how he reacted to the classic ads using Andy Griffith to hawk Ritz Crackers — did he see racial undertones there too?
— Anytown, NY

>Seriously AdAge... this is the first time I have disagreed with anything you have written. The spot didn’t communicate anything racial... he’s the face for the contest, it plays off of American Idol... I don’t see the derogatory feel you are writing about. The PSP spot sounds way more fishy.
— Irvine, CA

>Unfortunately, many people desire to sweep under the rug, an issue that truly, and loudly exists TODAY, and hasn’t relegated to past wounds that are slow to heal. On one hand I can see a point for the attempt to lessen racially charged advertising, but at the same time, I feel it’s really not a bad idea to put those messages out there. If for no other reason, to create a forum for discussion that doesn’t exist elsewhere--to keep society from forgetting that racism has not, and is not going away. The longer we suppress it, the more volatile the tender box becomes. If we open forums more often, of any sort, this offers relative relief valves for the pressure cooker that becomes suppression and not reduction or elimination.
— Las Vegas, NV

>As a black woman, it never occurred to me that the Oreo ad with Randy Jackson was racially provocative. And I certainly haven’t heard any negative comments about him from anyone I know. I just thought it was a perfect fit, since Jackson is an Idol judge. Period. I do know how people of color (not just blacks, by the way) can react to someone who they deem as “too white” – I’ve been on both sides of the debate. But jackasses aside, I can’t see why this particular ad is an issue at all. And honestly, I haven’t heard anyone use the term “Oreo” as an insult since 1975!
— NEW YORK, NY

>I saw no relation to race in the ad at all, sorry Garfield. I am biracial, black and white, and I haven’t heard any of Oreos representing any other racial usage beside mocking us mixed folks. Black folks who act white, supposedly, are referred to as proper, uppity, or boughy in our bling vernacular. This was harmless, I’m hyper-sensitive to racial marketing and this ad struck no nerves.
— Normal, IL

>I totally agree with what you said, using race to provoke emotion is a tactic used by bottom feeders who have no other legs to stand on. It’s always the cheap and safe route when it comes to stirring up some controversy. What I don’t like is the fact that race is only called out in certain cases. When a product that is popular amongst African-Americans uses race to advertise, race is no issue and advertisers are free to do and say anything that would relate to African-Americans but when a product like Oreo, that isn’t as tightly knit with the African-American community, decides to do something targeted then arms start flailing and all of a sudden sensitivities flare. Why can companies like Ecko or Phat use advertising that can be racially slanted? Is it because their products are more desirable and African-Americans are willing to turn a blind eye? Negative stereotypes like graffiti artists, gang members and so on are freely used in these campaigns. You can’t have it both ways; it’s like the Seinfeld episode of the dentist who converted to Judaism so he can tell Jewish jokes... If the African-American community is interested in cleaning up its image and is going to be offended by mainstream companies then they should also target some of the smaller brands who openly use these negative stereotypes to peddle their wares.
— New York, NY

>Dude, how does your foot taste? Caveats of “I didn’t make these misconceptions up” should not be an excuse for “that being said, let me devote a few hundred words to calling Randy Jackson an Oreo and bringing up half the stereotypes still left in the book.” Okay. Randy’s the host of the contest. People come audition for him. Got it. Had Simon been the host, you could have had the same concept, and it wouldn’t have been a problem. I seem to remember a laudatory review some years ago for a deodorant commercial wherein the smelly guy happened to be black. The reviewer commented, to paraphrase, Finally, we’ve reached the age where anyone can be the goat, and we don’t even think of crying racism or sexism. Guess that age is over.
— Parsippany, NJ

>What do you do when a well-known brand becomes subsumed by the popular culture to represent something other that what it was originally? Take as a case in point, SPAM. Not a universally enjoyed product, but one of some consumer value (and comic value as well with thanks to Monty Python). Surely SPAM has no racial undertones, but issues of acceptability nonetheless. Clearly, you cannot control all aspects of any brand or product once it is part of the fabric of life. Yet, there is no reason why a company, Nabisco included, needs to acknowledge or even directly address such underlying intonations about their product. And further, why debate each and every instance of communication from a company with its consumers just because some small-minded group has chosen to tag a segment of the population with the name to incite hate or demonstrate a level of (self-perceived) superiority? This is JUST an ad for a cookie.
— Ambler, PA

>Randy Jackson is not relevant enough within the circle of black America to warrant for any black person labeling him an “oreo”; and believe you me, the only way he could be considered one is if WE label him as such. He simply doesn’t matter that much to us. Randy can yell out “dawg” as much as he wants to. The only thing you’ll ever hear us calling him — consequently — is corny or lame. The moment he starts tap dancing and screaming “mammy” across the airwaves, those labels will change. But until then — frankly — we just don’t give a damn.
— New York, NY

>This has to be the same guy that thought the fairy commercial is anti-gay. He’s got to be a 60s style, rabble-rousing, socialist or just a tabloid writer that luckily got hired by AA.
— Highland, IN

>I guess I am a fool -- I did not see the Oreo ad as anything but a man and a cookie promotion. Maybe more people should be as foolish and take things at face value, without trying to find a hidden agenda -- especially because the issues they find come from within and are their own.
— Tampa, FL