Goodby Silverstein & Partners celebrated International Women’s Day by gushing over performative promotional work produced for its client, Argent, featuring a film written by Jeff Goodby.
Okay, just to clarify, International Women’s Day was saluted by a White man who waited over three decades to grant a White woman partnership at his White advertising agency.
Feels like perfectly patronizing performative PR.
MediaPost published a column on how dismantled DEIBA+ programs might affect advertising imagery, which provided a platform for a certain reader-cultural critic to stage a debate.
Check it out below.
With Companies Killing Their DEI Programs, What Happens To Ad Imagery?
By Barbara Lippert, Columnist
International Women’s Day is Saturday, March 8.
But you’d barely have known that in the corporate sector.
Ever since January 20, when President Trump signed an executive order banning DEI policies across the federal level and called on private companies to end their own programs, many corporations have retreated, quashing the progress that they’ve actively promoted for the last 15 years or so.
Corporate megaliths like Target, Meta, Google, etc. have already publicly curbed their diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.
The move has since made Target a target of a 40-day boycott.
Backwards goes the progress, in a silent but deadly way.
In 2017, for instance, female empowerment was a vital part of the zeitgeist, and women’s successes were celebrated by progressive corporate brands and their customers.
That’s when investment management company State Street Advisors decided to advertise a State Street fund that invested in businesses with female leaders, and to mark the one-year anniversary of the company’s Gender Diversity Index Fund.
A straight ad campaign announcing as much would have come and gone without much fanfare.
Working with a team at McCann Erickson, State Street came up with the ultimate universal embodiment of female, and thereby human, possibility and vitality, the statue of “Fearless Girl.”
With her head held high, hands on her hips, this stone nine to 11 year old was placed facing down the famous “raging” Bull on Wall Street.
The reaction was global and seismic. The original plan was to leave her up for a week. She stayed, (but was eventually moved to another spot) and tens of thousands of inspired girls have since made the pilgrimage to pose with their fellow preteen-sized statue; tens of thousands more, along with their parents, have been dazzled and encouraged.
“We believe effective board oversight of a company’s long-term business strategy necessitates a diversity of perspectives, especially in terms of gender, race and ethnicity,” State Street policy announced just last year.
This week, the company has quietly done a 180.
In its updated policy released a few days ago, the 30% gender requirement was gone. Also missing were requirements for companies to disclose the gender, racial and ethnic composition of its board to State Street and to insure that the company has articulated DEI goals. We don’t know if the statue will be removed.
Given these chilling moves, it’s no surprise that the superb Nike Super Bowl commercial, “So Win” is still an object of online backlash.
Narrated by Doeschii, the spot features such female powerhouses as Caitlin Clark, Sha’Carri Richardson, Juju Watkins and Jordan Chiles.
The female-focused spot, the first Super Bowl ad for the brand in 27 years, was imbued with the same majesty, art, and anger of those previously aimed at men.
The message was all about getting over what female athletes have been conditioned to hear: “You can’t be demanding…relentless…dominate…take credit…speak up…..”
So do it, the spot tells us. “So win.”
Of course, in the last decade or so, Caitlin Clark has made women’s basketball culturally relevant and respected, right up there with men’s teams. Other sports still have a way to go.
But on You Tube, Matt Walsh complained about the ad's “mindless girl power routine.”
“At a time when wokeness is dying, Nike is hanging on to it, and so is the NFL and that’s why they are cancelled,” he opined.
On “Real Time with Bill Maher” the comedian/host also took time to take a stab at “So win.”
“I feel like this is a giant zombie lie,” Maher said, explaining the concept as “something that used to be true, that stopped being true, and then people kept saying it.
“If the Democrats are ever going to win again, they have to realize something about the American people: They’re not that savvy about politics, but they know when you’re lying. When was the last time a woman was told: ‘You can’t do this, you can’t be confident’?’
“Who are these imaginary mean old men of the patriarchy?”
Well, Bill, talk about something that “used to be true and stopped being true.”
It will be interesting to see if advertisers continue to champion half the population in their messages, even while corporate overlords tow the new line.
Here’s the debate…
John Caldwell
DEI policies
have no place in business or marketing because they undermine the very
principles that make companies successful: merit, skill, and innovation. The
push for "equity" over excellence does more harm than good by
prioritizing surface-level diversity metrics over real qualifications and
results. When businesses shift their focus from hiring the best person for the
job to meeting quotas based on race and gender, they lower their own standards
and sacrifice efficiency, creativity, and overall performance. These policies
are inherently racist and sexist, as they judge individuals not on their
abilities, experience, or contributions, but on immutable characteristics.
That’s discrimination, no matter how it’s packaged.
The backlash against DEI policies isn’t about silencing women or
minorities—it’s about rejecting the idea that identity should take precedence
over merit. The idea that organizations like State Street abandoning their
gender quotas marks some kind of "chilling" regression is absurd. If
anything, it's a return to common sense. When companies like Nike push ads
built on outdated narratives of oppression rather than celebrating real
achievements, they insult their own audience. The notion that women today are
universally told "you can't do this" is a "zombie lie," as
Bill Maher put it. Women dominate in many fields, and their accomplishments
should be recognized for what they are—not used as pawns in an ideological
game.
Turning away from DEI isn’t about erasing progress; it’s about ensuring that
progress is real and sustainable. Businesses succeed when they reward hard
work, talent, and ingenuity—not when they make decisions based on race and
gender. The companies pulling back from DEI are making a wise choice, not
because they fear backlash, but because they understand that success is built
on merit, not virtue signaling.
Joshua Chasin
100%
disagree with the above.
This is the line the anti-DEI forces want you to believe. That DEI is anathema
to merit. This is an unfortunate bastardization.
DEI is universally positive and beneficial.
What AREN’T positive or beneficial—and what have in my opinion been a
mistake when implemented in the name of DEI—are two things: quotas; and
differential standards by race, gender, or sexuality. We can agree
that quotas and differential standards should not be part of the hiring
decisions. These things are anathema to merit-based hiring.
Unfortunately, the racists and misogynists on the right have made DEI—which is,
fundamentally, about REMOVING differential treatment by race, gender, sexuality
etc.—synonymous with quotas and differential standards, which is its opposite.
To me, DEI should assure that if I’m on the operating table and the best
surgeon is trans, half-Japanese, half-black, with they/them pronouns, THAT’s
who I want holding the scalpel. I don’t want a mediocre surgeon who got the gig
because he’s a tall blonde white Christian heterosexual man.
Be a champion. Be an ally. We’ll grant you that quotas and differential
standards are counter-productive. But diversity, equity and inclusion are all
things that make us all better. DEI backlash is driven by the narrow segment of
the population that opposes the values of diversity, of equity, and of
inclusion. All things that have made the US great for 250 years.
John Caldwell
The argument
being made here is trying to have it both ways. On one hand, it concedes that
quotas and differential standards based on race, gender, or sexuality are a
mistake. On the other, it insists that DEI as a whole is “universally positive
and beneficial.” That’s the contradiction. The reality is that in practice, DEI
policies almost always include quotas, preferential hiring practices, and the
prioritization of identity over qualifications. The claim that DEI is merely
about “removing differential treatment” flies in the face of how it has
actually been implemented in corporate America and academia over the past
decade.
The assertion that “racists and misogynists on the right” are the ones equating
DEI with hiring based on race and gender isn’t just dishonest—it’s a
deflection. The reason DEI has become synonymous with these policies is because
that’s exactly what companies have been doing. When corporations openly pledge
to hire based on identity rather than merit, when job postings explicitly state
that certain racial or gender groups are “strongly preferred,” and when
training sessions push ideological narratives over practical skills, it’s clear
that DEI is not about removing bias but about institutionalizing a new form of
it.
The hypothetical about the surgeon is particularly misleading. No one is
arguing that an unqualified White man should be chosen over a highly skilled
surgeon of any background. That’s a strawman. The real issue is whether
identity politics should play any role in that decision at all. The best
surgeon should get the job based on skill, experience, and performance—not
because they check a demographic box. Yet, under DEI-driven hiring practices,
there is a very real risk that identity does play a role, which directly
undermines the meritocracy that makes any profession, from medicine to
engineering to business, function at its best.
The claim that DEI backlash is driven by people who oppose “diversity, equity,
and inclusion” is another bad-faith argument. Opposing DEI as it currently
exists does not mean opposing diversity. It means opposing forced diversity at
the expense of competence. It means opposing “equity,” which in practice means
engineered outcomes rather than fair opportunities. It means rejecting an
approach that demands inclusion for some by excluding others. The United States
has thrived because of meritocracy, not because of social engineering. If the
best way to make the country great is to ensure that people succeed based on
ability, then DEI—as it is actually implemented—stands in direct opposition to
that.
Dan Ciccone
There is a lot of conflation here.
DEI is not going away. It's the “equity” that many companies struggle with (and society in general) as it’s not quantifiable. There is not a single company, nor the U.S. government, that is doing away with trying to achieve a diverse and inclusive workforce—but it is the equity arm that is being challenged and causing angst and confusion. Equity purports “systemic disadvantages” and you’d be hard-pressed to find universal agreement on what “system disadvantages” exist from group to group.
As far as ad imagery, is there some kind of study or proof that brands are now not going to cast people of certain races or sexual preference?
The Nike girl power ad is a perfect example—half the audience who saw it thought it was great and the other half thought it was 20 years behind and belittling.
No product can be everything to everyone.
John Caldwell
This argument tries to separate “equity” from DEI, but the problem is the entire framework. DEI prioritizes identity over merit, embedding race, gender, and sexuality into hiring, promotions, and marketing. It’s not just “equity” causing issues—companies have openly prioritized demographic goals over competence, leading to inefficiency and backlash. 
Many White advertising agencies celebrate International Women’s Day and Women’s History Month by spotlighting their own female staffers—ultimately displaying an abject lack of international representation and minimal diversity overall.
Havas celebrates International Women’s Day, Women’s History Month, and DEIBA+ initiatives—and promotes its Superwomen report to boot. That’s checking lots of boxes at once.
Like the brands they service, most White holding companies and White advertising agencies dramatically decreased public acknowledgement of Black History Month 2025.
However, also like the brands they service, holding companies and agencies enthusiastically embraced and performatively promoted International Women’s Day and Women’s History Month.
In Adland, White women enjoy priority, privileged, and power status on the DEIBA+ org chart.
While brands deserted Black History Month, International Women’s Day experienced no such abandonment. From Google to Brown Bag Seafood Co.—and everything in between—the ladies got their flowers.
A few closing thoughts on Black History Month 2025 in Adland…
Brands, White holding companies, and White advertising agencies decreased BHM-related public acknowledgments, performative PR, and heat shields versus recent previous years.
It’s not clear if the decrease resulted from political pressure—or if enterprises simply took advantage of the social climate to excuse a lack of engagement.
It’s unlikely Adland completely abandoned the annual event. Rather, the “celebrations” became internal affairs, delegated to ERGs, CDOs, and resident representatives for the underrepresented—optional lunch-and-learns that staffers declined, talent exhibitions that received polite applause, and/or templated companywide emails that were unopened or immediately trashed. In these anti-DEIBA+ times, internal equals indifferent at best, and disinterested at least—with a growing legion of not-so-silent hostile resistors.
Will International Women’s Day and Women’s History Month be equally ignored? Unlikely, as White women still receive priority and privileged status on the DEIBA+ org chart.
As for BHM in Adland, it’s time to put twists on the popular clichés associated with the annual event:
It’s not just Black history, it’s, well, history.
Black History. Now ignored during February—and all year long.
MultiCultClassics is often occupied with real work. As a result, a handful of events occur without the expected blog commentary. This limited series—Delayed WTF—seeks to make belated amends for the absence of malice.
Muse by Clios spotlighted an International Women’s Day stunt—Decoding Women—designed to address gender abuse and sexual violence by helping predatory French men figure out women.
The 2,000-page book featured a single sentence repeated on each page: “If it’s not yes, it’s no!”
Quick! Somebody send copies to the skunks at Havas Paris.
To Combat Gender Abuse, This 2,000-Page Book Helps Men ‘Decode’ Women
It repeats a single phrase over and over
By David Gianatasio
There’s zero need to read between the lines.
Consentis, HandsAway and TBWAParis created a 2,000-page book that subverts expectations and crushes cliches to help men gain a clearer understanding of women.
“Courting women has always condemned men to hypothesis, trial and error, total doubt and sometimes even regrettable mistakes,” the tome’s synopsis says. “‘Decoding Women’ offers, at last, to lift the veil on feminine complexity by delivering exhaustively and without concession everything you absolutely need to know before embarking on the conquest of women.”
Of course, this isn’t about “complexity” or “conquest” at all. Quite the opposite, in fact. The book simply repeats these six words, over and over, page after page after page: “If it’s not yes, it’s no!”
A back-cover QR code guides readers to the HandsAway website and other resources.
Deployed ahead of International Women’s Day on March 8, the book sells for 1 euro (about $1), with proceeds benefiting the two aforementioned nonprofits in their war against gender abuse and sexual violence.
The campaign follows a troubling report from France’s High Council for Equality Between Women and Men. That annual study found that 37 percent of women experienced “situations of non-consent,” while 25 percent of young French men believe it’s sometimes OK to engage in violent behavior to earn respect.
Those guys should pick up a copy of “Decoding Women” immediately. And make sure to read every single word. Commit them to memory. Maybe then the message will start to sink in.
Pizza Jungle in Nigeria celebrated International Women’s Day by declaring:
Her Dreams Are Wild
Her Goals Are Real
Her Voice Is Powerful
Her Imagination Is Limitless
Okay, but Her Campaign Is Lame.
Newgen Software and Buffalo Soldiers in India hatched this International Women’s Day campaign, offering the lengthy and ludicrous explanation below. A peek at Newgen and Buffalo Soldiers leadership shows the concept is performative propaganda, as the MAD greatly outnumber the BAD at both organizations—which is really SAD.
Here’s the explanatory excrement:
Newgen Software approached Buffalo Soldiers to come up with a Women’s Day Video that starts the right kind of conversations at workplaces by breaking biases.
The Ask:
If we are sparking conversations that challenges the prevailing notion, we need a first of a kind extended campaign in the B2B space that addresses how Newgen breaks systemic biases and raise awareness about the theme of “Investing in Women.”
The Campaign:
We suggested featuring female leaders to tackle ‘How women are simply perceived as ‘BAD’ at corporate roles’. In the development phase, the idea of men joining the convo too was explored and how ‘MAD’ they are to always motivate their women peers and facilitate room for their growth. Because it’s time to UNBIAS.
In the face of modern day adversity, women have stopped limiting themselves to sheer circumstance. They have become the voice of change, the wind that inspires a new era. Their work has brought not just promises to life but a change in perception. So when others think women are BAD, we believe them to Be A Differentiator.
In the case of gender equality, men have been key motivators for women to rise up. It is not about stepping aside or doing favors but giving credit where credit is due, and appreciating talent regardless of where it originates. So when others think men are MAD for supporting change, we believe them to Making A Difference.
This Women’s Day in 2024, we captured these mavericks owning stereotypes and busting the myths that have held us back as a society.
The digital film was directed by award-winning director Saurabh Dubey, whose debut film ‘Never Ask Why’ won 63 awards across global film festivals in 2023.
The digital-first campaign is running across LinkedIn, Meta, YouTube and Newgen’s offices in India and United States.
