Everybody’s got an opinion. Here’s a new collection responding to recent AdAge articles. Plus, Hadji Williams delivers spirited rants at knockthehustleblog.typepad.com. Click on the essay title above to view his perspectives.
Four initial reactions to the AdAge article presented in Essay 1056…
> ad agencies should reflect the demographic of the marketplace. in other words, they should be a microcosm of the marketplace. that’s when interesting ideas and a dynamic creative environment is given further impetus and the agency truly represents the pulse of popular culture from which it draws/reflects its ideas. — Scarborough, ON
> Omnicom is the only brave one here. Signing is the easy thing to do but will only lead to inappropriate hiring and promotions. Instead, Omnicom invested their money into everyone’s future. That donation will not only brighten the future of those students but all the agencies will benefit from an enlarged pool of qualified minority candidates. Agencies don’t care about skin color -- they care about expanding their business. They would have been more successful by now if they’d had good candidates available. This isn’t anyone’s fault, but Omnicom actually took action while everyone else is simply giving lip service. — Dallas, TX
> If signing the Human Rights Commission diversity agreement represents nothing more than an opportunity to “shunt this potentially embarrassing issue to the background,” as Matthew Creamer and Lisa Sanders seem to suggest, shame on our industry. As the leading publication of American advertising, ADVERTISING AGE should be mindful of the signals such language sends. Unless, of course, your publication takes the position that advertising’s stunning lack of diversity is merely an embarrassment, rather than an injustice. Valerie Graves Chief Creative Officer Vigilante New York City — New York, NY
> The whole “issue” is ridiculous! Any agency, no matter how big or small, as a private company operating in a free market should have the solemn right to select and hire its employees based on TALENT, SKILLS and QUALIFICATION, and NOT on skin color! Actually, the commission request is much more racist in its core — as it will mean that, for example, a white Copywriter or Creative Director with better portfolio or more appropriate experience should be neglected in favor of a black candidate, just because of the “minority quota”... Such quota would be understandable for government and city jobs, but for the private sector? How about Wall Street then? How about Silicon Valley? And how about the percentage of black students in Ivy League colleges? And do you ever wonder how many white vs. black candidates apply for each top agency position? Of course, when 90% and more ARE white, the end result would be obvious... Milko Stoyanov Chicago — Chicago, IL
More comments posted in response to the article presented in Essay 1036 (initial comments presented in Essay 1042)…
> I didn't know that getting a job at one of New York’s best advertising agencies was a “Human Right”. With competition as keen as it is, no company can afford to reject talented people. This is especially true in the ad business. If discrimination has occurred, then hire a lawyer and file suit. Otherwise, this appears to be more of an inquisition than an investigation. If the “Human Rights Commission” wants to play hardball, as they appear to be willing to do, then Madison Ave should remind the Mayor that NYC isn’t the only place where space can be rented to ply our trade. — Kansas City, MO
> I’m a young, educated black professional seeking to switch gears into the creative side of the advertising industry, so I won’t go into where my sympathies rest with all this. I’ve been following AdAge’s solid coverage for months, as well as the typical predictable provocative reactions such as those of the esteemed poster from Windham, ME above. Assuming nothing but a truly sincere, legitimate belief that no amount of intervention is warranted, would be effective, nor proximate to the actual offending parties, please tell me this, my brother: how much interaction do you have at every level with every person involved on each account? Would the cologne/body odor, jewelry, clothing, hair coloring, height/weight, shoes, tattoos earned in service to community and country vs. those created for aesthetic value -- get scrutinized by you, for everyone, men and women, old and young alike, on the agency and client side? And who would do that review for you? Are you breaking the law if you refuse to hire a person or agency with a minority of people that don’t fit the image you wish to project? Yes, if you are stupid enough to admit it publicly. Is that bad business for you in the long run? Yes, it is if you can admit to yourself personally. It’s not simply about diversity and quotas, it’s about the value of perspective and talent, and mettle everyone brings to their work -- not how much metal they have in their face. As a side note, I hear Omnicom is going to do $2.5 million over five years for a diversity proposal of some sorts and to create a marketing program at Medgar Evers College. It was announced at the annual Congressional Black Caucus summit at Washington, DC. Ironic because Omnicom is the holding company of DDB behind the Bud Light “Steve and Zagar” campaign celebrating a white guy and a “stereotypical cultured savage” (implied Yanomamo); as well as TBWAChiatDay behind the Starburst spot with a white guy pretending to be Jamaican. Still think a more informed diverse perspective in a more informed diverse America isn’t warranted? — Washington, DC
No comments:
Post a Comment