Ads Of The World features collections for Chinese/Lunar New Year, Earth Day, Halloween, Holiday (Christmas), Ramadan, Valentine’s Day, International Women’s Day, April Fools’ Day, Father’s Day, Mother’s Day, and more.
But there’s nothing for National Hispanic Heritage Month. ¿Por qué?
Like most White advertising agencies, FCB did not commemorate National Hispanic Heritage Month via social media posts. However, the global enterprise did celebrate International Dog Day.
Why is a variation of this L’Oréal advertisement appearing on the back cover of the September/October 2024 issue of Essence magazine? Perhaps it’s residual reparations for the Munroe Bergdorf misstep.
Also, how many oh-so-committed L’Oréal Groupe brands are partnering with White advertising agencies—where DEIBA+ is a dream deferred, delayed, delegated, and denied? The percentage is probably much closer to 100% than 0%.
The few White holding companies and White advertising agencies that commemorated National Hispanic Heritage Month delegated the duties to resident Latino ERGs. ¡Ay, caramba!
MediaPost published an opinion piece from DXagency CEO Sandy Rubinstein, presenting a persistent POV—Multicultural Marketing Needs A Rebrand.
Rubinstein regurgitated routine rants, including:
• The General Market is a Multicultural Market
• Swapping White people with people of color in advertising is not multicultural marketing
• Most work purporting to be multicultural marketing lacks relevance, resonance, and respect for the intended audience
• Multicultural marketing is not philanthropic, purpose-driven, DEIBA+, box-checking heat shields
• Multicultural marketing deserves more investment than crumbs during Fill-In-The-Minority History Month
• The majority of White people are culturally clueless and woefully unqualified to handle multicultural marketing
In the end, multicultural marketing does not need a rebrand. Rather, Adland needs a reprogramming to eliminate systemic racism.
Multicultural Marketing Needs A Rebrand
By Sandy Rubinstein, Op-Ed Contributor
As an industry veteran in the marketing, media, and television industry with over 30 years of experience, I have a problem with the term multicultural marketing. I’m a Hispanic, female founder of a digital marketing agency who has seen the unfortunate shift over the years that has happened when brands try to reach and cater towards diverse audiences. Multicultural marketing has become synonymous with only race and ethnicity, it’s now exclusionary when it should be inclusive marketing. Let’s be clear: General marketing is now multicultural.
The traditional approach to multicultural marketing is no longer effective. For example, given the growing Latino population in the U.S. more companies than I can count are throwing a Hispanic person into an ad and saying that it’s multicultural marketing, or that it’s quality, and that their work is done.
But most of the time, it’s not even relevant, it serves no purpose and they fail to ask themselves before launching their media buying campaign the necessary questions like “How does that feel?” “What’s the texture like?” to understand how it might resonate. It’s almost always never meeting the intended audience where they are. Instead they are only focused on how they can be visually representative and as a result oftentimes are feeding into stereotypes.
That’s not multicultural marketing. A lot of multicultural campaigns that go to market have produced one-dimensional stories that alienate a large portion of the intended audience. The nuances are the differences, and that’s the most important component that usually gets left out of the equation. What needs to happen instead is niche targeting with relevant content that speaks to that hyper-specific target consumer and audience. Brands need to go deeper to get a better understanding of the consumer.
Multicultural marketing is not your chance to do some social good in the world. It’s not a box that needs to be checked. Brands need to stop trying to appropriate the phrase. This is a for profit business, and thinking about those groups as audiences with inherent value, just like any other place needs to happen. It's not something you have to do, it's something you should do, and it's all about nailing specific audience targeting.
Yes, there are going to be times that the audience happens to be what we call multicultural, but if you just treat it like multicultural, then you're missing the boat entirely. If you focus on hyper target audiences with your media buy, you're going to be much more successful than just investing a small portion of your ad dollars in a one-time marketing campaign during Black History or Women’s History month.
One company that is getting it right is Rihanna’s lingerie and beauty line Savage x Fenty and beauty. They have managed to make women and men of all ages and sizes feel a part of the brand’s messaging and have set the bar high for the new industry standard. Their ads are inclusive of any way a person might look which makes them multicultural by default as a starting point, and not the end point.
There’s no doubt in the value of trying to connect and resonate with underrepresented groups. According to PQ Media, $45.8 billion is expected to be spent on U.S. multicultural advertising this year. Understanding subcultures while also creating content that resonates with a mainstream audience separates a winning campaign versus one that is not appropriate in connecting with diverse audiences.
Brands and the agencies they work with need to not only be on top of current trends, but trends to come because consumers are very savvy today and they can tell when messaging is inauthentic. Brands need to do a better job at taking into account the origins and backgrounds behind a certain group of people. You have to really micro target your conversations to the relevant audience.
Let’s call it what it is: niche marketing. Not multicultural marketing, and not diversity, equity, and inclusion. Stop talking about DEI and confusing the two. What matters is the audience and needing to communicate to these audiences in the right ways. There should always be a prioritization around cultural sensitivity in marketing that celebrates not just the differences between different groups, but also the commonalities.
Not sure what Kuhnhenn Brewing Company was thinking when creating a label for cocoa-flavored beer—featuring Count von Count from Sesame Street.
For starters, the brand should have gone with Count Chocula.
Somebody should count how many cans of brew were consumed by the responsible designer before drafting the label.
Grammarly can help you deliver peak marketing performance by cutting communication overload—via lame promotional posts that overload your feed. Brilliant.
Adweek published a provocative perspective from Wil Power Integrated Marketing CEO Wil Shelton, who spoke out about the unspoken contract between Black-owned businesses and Black consumers.
The Silent Agreement Between Black-Owned Businesses and the Communities That Built Them
There’s an unspoken contract that sometimes becomes a double-edged sword
By Wil Shelton
There is an unspoken, yet ever-present cultural contract between Black-owned businesses and the Black communities that built them. It’s an invisible agreement that is rarely talked about but always understood; a relationship rooted in shared struggle, history, and identity.
For Black businesses, especially in industries like beauty, this contract is both a gift and a weight. On one hand, it offers a deep connection to a loyal, invested community. On the other, it comes with expectations, sometimes unrealistic, that the business must never “sell out,” change, or stray from its origins.
Take the recent backlash against Mielle Organics, a brand that had long been celebrated for catering specifically to the needs of Black women’s hair. Mielle, known for its beloved Rosemary Mint Scalp & Hair Strengthening Oil, was acquired by Procter & Gamble in 2023. Shortly after, a wave of outrage swept through Black social media. Consumers who had supported the brand from its humble beginnings felt betrayed.
Allegations of hair loss linked to the product have only fanned the flames, with many voicing concerns that the formulas would be altered, or worse, that Mielle’s commitment to its core Black customer base would disappear.
A history of loyalty
At the heart of this backlash is the cultural contract, the unspoken agreement that Black-owned businesses should remain loyal to the communities that built them. For many Black consumers, buying Black isn’t just about getting a product—it’s an act of resistance and resilience, a way to support Black excellence in a system that has often excluded or undermined it. These consumers have emotionally and financially invested in Black businesses, feeling a sense of pride every time they choose a Black-owned product over mainstream competitors.
This relationship between Black-owned businesses and their customers is rooted in shared history. Black entrepreneurs have long faced systemic barriers to success—whether through lack of access to capital, discriminatory business practices, or the simple fact that many mainstream businesses didn’t cater to the needs of Black consumers. As a result, the Black community has rallied around these businesses, supporting them not just out of necessity, but out of a sense of cultural pride.
But with that support comes an expectation to stay true to yourself and the people who helped build you.
The challenge of growth
The tension arises when Black businesses grow and seek to expand beyond their original base. For many Black consumers, expansion can feel like a betrayal, even when it’s simply a business decision.
When a beloved Black-owned brand is acquired by a major conglomerate, it can feel as though the brand has sold out and abandoned the community for the promise of bigger profits. The fear is that, once acquired, the brand will lose its authenticity, connection to the community, and cultural relevance.
This is why Mielle’s acquisition by Procter & Gamble sparked intense reactions. Many Black consumers were immediately wary, fearing that the product formulas would change or that the brand would lose its connection to Black women’s specific hair needs. These fears aren’t baseless—there is a long history of Black-owned brands being watered down or diluted after being absorbed by larger corporations. And in an industry like beauty, where trust is everything, even the slightest change can lead to feelings of betrayal, almost as if it’s an act of contempt for the very audience that helped the brand rise in the first place.
The sentiment on products for Black hair
In a fascinating twist of consumer allegiance, brands like Olaplex and Aussie, though not crafted specifically for Black hair, have garnered rave reviews from Black consumers.
These products were initially marketed to a broader, more general audience but have found a loyal following among Black women, who often struggle to find effective solutions within the confines of products labeled “for us, by us.” This dynamic raises a critical question that strikes at the heart of consumer behavior in the Black community: Is the effectiveness of a product ultimately more important than the cultural specificity that surrounds it?
For many Black women, the answer is revealing. While there is a deep desire to support products tailored to the unique needs of Black hair, the reality is that the products specifically marketed toward them aren’t always delivering the best results. As a result, many in the community have begun to look beyond the traditional boundaries of Black-owned brands for solutions that simply work.
It’s a profound reminder that the integrity of the product itself—its ability to perform and fulfill its promise—sometimes carries more weight than its cultural origins. In the end, what matters most is whether the product truly respects the texture, beauty, and uniqueness of Black hair, regardless of where it comes from.
Not all acquisitions end in disaster
While the fears surrounding corporate acquisitions of Black-owned brands are real, it’s important to recognize that not all acquisitions result in disaster. Some large corporations have demonstrated a commitment to maintaining the integrity of Black-owned brands and even enhancing them. Numerous companies have stuck to original formulas, ensuring quality remains consistent while using their larger resources to scale production, innovate, and improve distribution.
SheaMoisture, for example, was acquired by Unilever in 2017. Initially, many Black consumers feared the worst—that the brand’s commitment to Black hair care would be watered down. However, instead of altering the essence of the products, Unilever worked vigilantly to maintain the authenticity of the brand while expanding its reach. This acquisition allowed SheaMoisture to introduce new products, tap into wider markets, and remain true to its original mission of serving the Black community.
This example underscores that acquisitions don’t have to come at the expense of community trust or product quality. The key lies in transparency and communication. When a brand is acquired, new ownership must engage directly with the community to make clear that the brand’s core values will remain intact. Black consumers need assurance that the products they trust will continue to meet their needs, both in terms of quality and cultural relevance.
A double-edged sword
The cultural contract between Black-owned businesses and their communities can sometimes become a double-edged sword. On one hand, it ensures that these businesses stay connected to their roots and remain accountable to the people who helped build them. But on the other hand, it can also handcuff Black business owners, making it difficult for them to grow or evolve without backlash. The very loyalty that sustains the business can also be what limits it.
This dynamic places Black business owners in a tough spot. Do they stay small, true to their original base, and risk stagnation? Or do they seek growth, potentially alienating the community that brought them to prominence in the first place? The weight of this unspoken contract is heavy, and the fallout from violating it can be swift and unforgiving.
Rewriting the contract
The Mielle Organics controversy highlights the need for Black-owned businesses and their communities to redefine this cultural contract. Growth and success shouldn’t be seen as betrayals but as milestones in a larger journey. Black businesses should be able to scale up and reach broader markets without losing the trust of their core base.
The onus is on both sides. Black business owners need to remain transparent, ensuring that their growth doesn’t come at the expense of their community’s trust. This means communicating openly about changes, involving the community in decisions, and staying true to the brand’s original mission, even as they evolve. At the same time, Black consumers need to allow room for their businesses to grow, understanding that expansion doesn’t have to mean a loss of authenticity.
Ultimately, this unspoken cultural contract doesn’t have to be a barrier to growth. It can be a foundation, one that allows Black businesses to stay connected to their roots while reaching new heights. But it requires an honest dialogue, a willingness to redefine the terms, and an understanding that, as the great theologian Kendrick Lamar once said, “They not like us.”
Black businesses, and the communities that support them, operate by a different set of rules—rules that prioritize loyalty, trust, and cultural relevance above all. But if we can rewrite this contract, Black businesses can thrive without losing themselves in the process.
Advertising Age reported on a “growing trend” whereby small independent creative agencies are winning big major accounts.
A closer look leads to wondering if the phenomenon is a “growing trend” or simply business as usual.
After all, it appears that accounts continue to be assigned via Corporate Cultural Collusion and cronyism, whereby past relationships prompt advertisers to award work to professional pals, sans a formal competitive review.
The scenario presents other issues:
• Minority-owned firms—which are typically small, as well as segregated into multicultural marketing siloes—routinely get disqualified from pitching major accounts. The excuses include the presumption that these companies lack the resources to handle big accounts. Yet the Ad Age content shows small White advertising agencies face no such restrictions.
• Minority-owned firms can even be shut out when the account calls for cultural expertise, as demonstrated by the recent Panda Express pitch. The business landed with Opinionated, who hired a multicultural shop to serve as consultants of color when the client mandated understanding the Chinese American experience and perspective. This sly tactic—which has forever been executed by White advertising agencies, especially for accounts with government contracts—was identified as Prime Redlining.
• When White holding companies create small White advertising agencies to exclusively service big accounts, the newly fabricated shops still enjoy priority status above any multicultural marketing enterprises within the network.
In summation, the “growing trend” could just be an offshoot of the persistent big problem known as systemic racism in Adland.
Small Creative Agencies Are Winning Major Accounts—Inside The Growing Trend
GM, Häagen-Dazs and Liberty Mutual Insurance have recently turned to shops with fewer than 100 employees
By Ewan Larkin
Small independent creative agencies are having a moment.
While holding company agencies are still the tried-and-true option for many marketers, several creative shops with fewer than 100 employees are turning heads and winning sizable accounts.
In the past month alone, Preacher won lead duties for GMC, snapping up some business from Publicis Groupe’s Leo Burnett, while Bandits & Friends won Liberty Mutual Insurance’s creative account, replacing Omnicom Group’s Goodby Silverstein & Partners. Meanwhile, nine-person shop nice&frank scooped up Häagen-Daz sand Opinionated nabbed Panda Express.
As marketers move more work in-house, some are turning to smaller creative agencies to work directly with senior executives and move quickly, according to industry insiders interviewed by Ad Age. And these shops are making changes, too, implementing niche strategies to court prospective clients and tapping new tools to help service them.
Marketers’ changing needs
Many brands are now in-housing work they’ve looked to larger agencies for in recent years, such as data, analysis and measurement, said Tom Denford, CEO and co-founder of consultancy ID Comms.
The data supports that theory: Some 30% of marketers said they moved more creative work in-house in the last 12 months, according to a June report from Canva and trade association MMA Global. That survey found 31% of surveyed marketers plan to move work in-house in the next year.
But brands still cannot internally replicate agencies’ steady “heartbeat of passionate creativity,” and marketers aren’t concerned about the size of the shop that helps meet that need, Denford said. (Nearly two-thirds—61%—of respondents in the Canva report said outsourcing was better for creative quality.) Small independent agencies are also set up to produce robust creative work, he added.
“If you run your own creative agency, or you join a small independent agency, you will absolutely have more freedom to work in the ways that they want, because it's going to be privately owned,” Denford said. “You can be a bit more provocative. In fact, you probably push your clients to be a bit more provocative.”
Some holding company agency executives, however, said that a broader breadth of resources and talent allows them to better orient themselves around clients’ specific needs.
“If a client just needs a strategic and creative solution, we can deliver that. If they would like the full scale of our capabilities through TBWA and Omnicom, we're able to provide that as well,” said Ben Myers, North American chief marketing officer at TBWA. “We can assemble the right team to solve the problem.”
Holding company agencies are certainly still in demand. Earlier this month, AstraZeneca added WPP to the global creative roster of its massive oncology business. And Kenvue, the consumer health company that was spun off from Johnson & Johnson last year, recently awarded creative work across select brands to Interpublic Group of Cos.’ FCB and Omnicom’s BBDO while also continuing to work with Stagwell’s Doner.
Why smaller shops are finding success
Small agencies are also in high demand because of their talent. Many of these shops are composed of senior practitioners who voluntarily left holding companies or had their roles cut, according to several agency executives who spoke to Ad Age.
“With these smaller agencies, you’re not going to compromise on talent,” said Stephen Larkin, chief marketing officer at Erich & Kallman, who formerly spent seven years at IPG’s R/GA.
Some small agencies are winning business due to relationships formed while their executives worked at larger holding company shops. For example, Bandits & Friends Co-Chief Creative Officers David Suarez and Danny Gonzalez previously worked at GS&P, where they created Liberty Mutual’s recurring characters, LiMu Emu and Doug. Nice&frank Chief Strategy Officer Graham North also worked at GS&P, where he founded Brand Camp. Brand Camp has supported Blackstone, which has also worked with nice&frank.
Consistent access to senior practitioners is key, too, said Steve Boehler, founding partner of consultancy Mercer Island Group. In smaller agencies, executives “are going to work on the business” and, on a daily basis, know “what’s going on in that piece of business,” he said.
Rachel Jaiven, head of marketing for Häagen-Dazs U.S., which considered holding company agencies in its recent creative review, said the brand was looking for a relationship where it could work directly with strategic senior leaders, and a team that could be agile.
“We’re a huge brand … but it’s a small core team that’s making decisions, and we need to have an agency that understands that and can move quickly with us,” Jaiven said, adding that speed can sometimes be an issue with larger shops.
Several indie agency executives told Ad Age their senior leaders actively support clients’ daily business needs. But small agencies may struggle to maintain this strategy as they add more clients, one holding company agency executive said.
“It comes down to time. There’s only so many hours in the day,” this person said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “We’re not factories … Our products are our ideas and people, and you can only spread yourself so thin.”
Shops must work to hire savvy talent to service clients’ businesses, which executives can then help guide and train, according to this person. “That’s how agencies scale."
How they’re getting it done
Indie and smaller agencies “have to offer something different than everyone else offers” to get on marketers’ radar, according to Mark Figliulo, creative chairman and founder at Fig, citing his agency’s machine learning-powered data tool StoryData as an example.
Many agencies are specializing or putting a unique spin on the agency model, but there are other ways to stand out and win new business.
While pitching for Panda Express, Opinionated enlisted cross-cultural agency TDW+Co, which has experience connecting with Asian communities in addition to other demographics—a move that showed “humility and self-awareness that you don’t always find in the industry,” said Fabiola del Rio, the company’s VP of integrated marketing communications.
Technology can also make the difference. Bandits & Friends, which has 15 employees, uses a variety of tools to help with administrative functions such as IT and invoicing, said Courtney Berry, president and founder at the New York-based agency.
“I think that’s what allows us to operate in such a way that we can service larger clients without necessarily getting to a point of being unwieldy,” Berry told Ad Age.
Nice&Frank, recently named Ad Age’s 2024 Newcomer of the Year, aims to eschew the traditional pitch process by inviting prospective clients to a “get-it-all-out session,” a meeting where the agency creates prompts (and sometimes games) for marketers to share their greatest concerns, biggest challenges and past successes and failures.
“We ask frank questions, provide hot takes and get genuinely vulnerable with them,” said nice&frank President Tamera Geddes.
So far, so good. The agency, which has worked with PepsiCo, MLB’s San Francisco Giants and fitness brand Les Mills, said it hit $4.5 million in revenue during its first full year in 2023.
“We, of course, can’t always avoid the pitch process, but the honest truth is (that) once bring our true selves (and this process) to the table, it creates an entirely new environment and vibe that most of our clients simply want to get on board with,” said Geddes.
Preacher is extremely deliberate about the reviews it undertakes because of the sheer time and effort required, said Krystle Loyland, co-founder and CEO of the Austin, Texas-based agency.
“We’re doing very few pitches per year, and they’re ones that we really believe we have a right to win, and ones that we think we can uniquely solve for better than anybody else, because we need that kind of confidence to be able to win these,” Loyland said. “It’s less about big versus small … but just how intentional the agency is about these choices.”
The 4As published performative PR, proclaiming its commitment to the classic acronym DE&I.
The 4As exposition also promoted another acronym—MAIP—along with assorted heat shields such as Vanguard and partnerships with DEIBA+ advocates.
TBF, the 4As has no real power or influence in Adland. White advertising agencies might feign interest, but their action—or inaction—communicates NVM and STFU.
Ultimately, the 4As revolutionary rhetoric reflects a simple acronym: BS.
Equality for all: The 4A’s commitment to save DE&I
By Cathy Chan Butler
“DEI must DIE,” the infamously bold statement from Elon Musk at the end of 2023, is a tone that unfortunately led us to where we are today.
Just four short years ago, everyone was making DE&I pledges in response to the tragic murder of George Floyd. Today, many are driving away from their commitments, casting doubt on the sincerity of DE&I initiatives and exposing them as a mere public relations exercise, ready to implode that the first sign of turmoil.
This shift is evident through numerous corporate actions this year. Most recently, Jack Daniels, Harley-Davidson and Molson Coors ended diversity initiatives, citing mounting pressure from conservative activists. But they are hardly alone. Tractor Supply and John Deere have also backtracked on their DE&I efforts. And lest we forget, earlier this year, Microsoft reportedly laid off an entire DE&I team after initially putting millions of dollars into it.
An equal, if not more harmful, action is companies like SHRM, the leading organization for HR professionals, announcing that it would drop the term “equity” and focus on inclusion and diversity, or “I&D,” moving forward.
Removing equity is not progress; it’s regression. It gives companies and their employees a false sense of security. It speaks to a deep lack of understanding of the importance of both inclusion and equity.
Equity is measured in terms of outcomes. Equity is often the harder and messier work that addresses systemic barriers through efforts such as salary parity, parent and family policies, institutional leadership programs and succession planning. It drives necessary, long-term change.
The challenge of meeting equity goals have led to increasing emphasis on inclusion, or rebrands to a new acronyms like Diversity & Belonging (D&B), Merit, Excellence & Intelligence (ME&I), or dropping DE&I programs altogether.
The hard truth is that equity efforts need a strong commitment from leadership and sustained, outcome-driven investments to succeed.
By neglecting any letter in DE&I, organizations risk not only perpetuating systemic inequalities and hindering their ability to attract and retain top talent, but damaging their reputation. This neglect feeds the cycle of underrepresentation in leadership, hinders creativity and ultimately, impacts the bottom line.
The potential reputational damage to organizations makes it all the more important for us at the 4A’s to remain laser-focused on DE&I.
Our DE&I work began more than 50 years ago when we founded the Multicultural Advertising Intern Program (MAIP). Since then, we have seen more than 4,500 ethnically diverse professionals make their mark on the industry through hands-on training and exposure. Our work has expanded to the Vanguard leadership program, providing accelerated opportunities for mid-level Black and LatinX professionals.
But there is more to be done, and we must continue to evolve and transform to keep up with the changing needs of agencies and individuals we support. We’ve created salary benchmark studies, diversity surveys, guidelines for investing in diverse media companies and candid, action-oriented events, such as Advancing Talent and the Equity and Inclusion Congress. These initiatives help us understand the state of DE&I in our industry, assess progress, needs and gaps and tailor offerings to address them.
We are not stopping here; we must also continue to do what our members need most: advance DE&I. We’re committed to meeting their ongoing needs and equipping them for the future.
Moving forward, we’ll focus on three key areas in need of evolution and which align to our renewed mission: to empower and equip individuals and companies with unparalleled resources that accelerate careers.
Expanding leadership development: We have successfully improved the outcomes for thousands of ethnically diverse students through our 4A’s Foundation programs. Moving forward, we will expand the acceptance criteria, evolve the curriculum to include more one-on-one coaching and skills-based learning and broaden our reach within and beyond the advertising, marketing and communications industry. This evolution recognizes the need to scale faster for greater reach and impact, serve more individuals, deepen their skills and improve economic opportunities.
Research, resources and tools: Our research has provided an industry-wide view of DE&I benchmark data, salary and compensation reporting. We will expand these resources to include diagnostic tools such as a DE&I Maturity Model, Accessibility Appraisal, Pay Equity Analysis and Talent Assessment and Succession Planning tool. We will also reinstate our annual benchmark survey to track progress. These changes recognize the need to provide members with action-oriented resources and tools so they can see how they are tracking against their goals.
Partnerships: We recognize that our members also include individuals with disabilities, who are neurodiverse, veterans, LGBTQIA+ and more. We will expand our learning and resources through partnerships with experts such as Understood.org, Do the WeRQ and others and continue creating programs with partners that reflect the world in which we live.
The 4A’s is committed to every letter in DE&I. To achieve generational and societal change, we must advance DE&I through individual and systemic actions.
While we celebrate progress on inclusion, a continued full focus on all aspects of DE&I will drive lasting, systemic change. We and our members will ensure this by prioritizing every letter in the acronym.
Cathy Chan Butler is the 4A’s EVP of talent, equity and learning.
