Katie L. sent along a fascinating Starbucks commercial. In it, a succession of workers grow, harvest, roast, taste, and prepare coffee from scratch for a hypothetical customer named “Sue.” At first glance, I thought that the commercial did a nice job of at least acknowledging their workers (if in an overly romanticized way), unlike some commercials for agricultural products that erase them. But I thought again. Because the entire commercial revolves around Sue, the inclusion of all the workers isn’t meant to focus our attention on them, it’s meant to highlight how much work goes into pleasing Sue. We’re supposed to identify with Sue, not the series of workers.
This reminds me of a post about a “hand-rolled” tea sold at The Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf. The consumer was supposed to be excited about the tea not because of its flavor, but because, as I wrote, “it takes a significant amount of human labor to “hand-roll” tea leaves into balls… What could be more luxurious than the casual-and-fleeting enjoyment of the hard-and-long labor of others? ”
This ad has a similar feel. The workers are portrayed only in order to make the intended consumer feel special. They work with Sue in mind, tending carefully to Sue’s future pleasure intently and with care. They find satisfaction in Sue’s satisfaction. Sue is everything. Everyone is for Sue.
This tells us something interesting, no doubt, about American cultural values.
Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.
Comments 25
Ben — August 9, 2011
"Buy our coffee."
"Why should I buy your coffee?"
"'I, I, I'! You Americans! Not everything is about you!"
Soso — August 9, 2011
Good call. This advertisement appears to be all about the name 'Sue' and not even about the person specifically: we see her face for only a moment. As for the workers, with a few exceptions, they don't even have faces! Through-out this advert it is the name that takes centre stage.
Anonymous — August 9, 2011
I'm not seeing why this is problematic. Ads that make a consumer feel special and valued are... good. It's aimed at consumers, so of course viewers are supposed to identify with Sue (and pay more for this coffee as opposed to some other kind you make at home, like I do).
Presumably the people who harvest and ship and taste and serve the coffee are paid, right? They depend on customers to order coffee to make a living. This and the linked hand-rolled tea article are totally going over my head, here in terms of issues with them.
Laughing Rat — August 9, 2011
Fair enough about the Starbucks ad, but I said it then and I'll say it now: You definitely know from sociology, but it seems that you're lacking some basic knowledge of high-quality tea and its production that, yeah, actually is relevant to your interpretation of the tea ad-copy.
Erin Leigh — August 9, 2011
I think it's not just about narcissism - it's about colonialism and the
still-present idea that we as Americans should be served by everyone else, that "those other countries" exist to serve us and to give us their resources. Intentional or not, the effect is to reinforce these notions in Americans' minds.
@SuedeHat:disqus - I guess I'm confused as to why you're visiting a site that's all about sociological inquiry, if you're not interested in critically thinking about deeper meanings in ads, images, etc. The meaning you talk about is the surface layer, what the advertisers created; what this blog does is ask us to look more closely at the cultural messages conveyed.
Gues — August 9, 2011
I feel guilty and choose not to buy certain products because I think of the actual production that may be taking place when I see descriptions of hand-knotted rugs, hand-hooked pillow, hand-carved tchotchke, hand-forged steel patio set... My bias automatically thinks I'm taking advantage or voting for something bad so I'll then choose to buy local or used at an estate sale unless I am certain of the supply chain for that item, not just was assembled stateside. Sue and I sometimes have to trust the worker shown is as advertised.
Jmacdow — August 9, 2011
I'd love to saee part 2 of this commercial which shows the impact to the ecomies of these countries, to peoples lives and the environment all to get Sue her mojo.
Robinliebman — August 9, 2011
Though I can't see the video b/c I am at work, I have seen the "hand-roll tea leaves" post and I think I get the jist of this article. Among those who frequent Starbucks, it may be an appealing concept to have coffee that is "artisanal" or "hand-crafted"; i.e., not something mass-produced by machinery or industry. This way of producing items is supposed to be more 'authentic', whatever authentic means! And for those of a certain status, experiencing things that are authentic is paramount.
Kelsey P — August 9, 2011
Starbucks is also inadvertently illustrating the massive carbon footprint it takes to get coffee from the tropics to its destination.
Am — August 9, 2011
At the same time we often consume products by the dozen because we don't realize how much work came into it. They're just THERE, packaged, shining, existing almost by their own will, so you tell yourself "why not buy this or this". Though i find your analysis interesting and pertinent, I also find it may have a reverse effect : seeing how much labour and travel came into a cup of coffee (or anything else) makes me reconsider how much a luxury item it is. Not only for the price I'd pay for it (the effect they seek) but the frequency I would consume it...
I have had these recent week this funny mind game at meals where I tried to imagine where every bit in it came from. It's quite fascinating when you realize how much labor such a common thing as dinner requires.
Sara — August 9, 2011
Reminds me of copy I saw for a hand-embroidered pillow I saw last week. It sold for $150 and they were saying it took up to a whole week the "artisan" to embroider.
Dalatie — August 9, 2011
There are probably 2 kinds of 'starbucks' drinkers out there... 1) true passionate coffee lovers (who like the beans burned for some reason) and 2) Status seeking yuppies/hipsters/insert your choice of derogatory term for rich, white, and young here (the person clearly being pictured as 'sue' by posters here)
I agree - in todays post-industrial-age-mass-produced world, we have almost NO appreciation for the work that goes into the items we use or consume... we forget that hours of time went into designing the form and function of that box or that pencil or that spray bottle. We are so disconnected that we believe it just magically 'gets made in a factory' - without giving the work needed to develop it for mass production a second thought.
When I look at this ad, I see a reflection of a social trend/movement in which people are seeking more information about the source of the foods and products they are consuming in order to make 'better' choices and live a more 'aware' and appreciative life.
Perhaps that is the goal - to educate and encourage consumer # 2 to slow down - appreciate the craft of the beverage more - and begin to become more like consumer # 1.
I believe that to assume that the end buyer is inherently 'narcistic' because they choose to buy this product is a really inappropriate projection/judgement. An appreciation for quality and pleasure is not inherently narcissistic. It is also not necessarily elite. It is human. (side note - check out this ted talk: http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_bloom_the_origins_of_pleasure.html)
I can only hope that more brands are willing to invest in advertising like this to help "narcissistic americans" learn how to slow down, think, and appreciate exactly how much does go into making it FOR YOU.
William Angel — August 10, 2011
One good source of information on the actual breakdown of how much money each segment of the coffee supply chain gets is the article Breaking Down the Cost of a Cup (of coffee)
A mischievous soul could take the original Starbucks video and superimpose on each depicted segment of the supply chain what percentage of the final retail cost of the cup of coffee each segment receives. As one might expect the original pickers of the coffee receive only a very small percentage of the final cost of the cup.
Andreita — August 10, 2011
I would like to weigh in as a proxy voice for the much-discussed growers. My husband's family and several other families in the small town where he grew up in Costa Rica sell their coffee crop to Starbucks. As luck would have it, a lot of the producers with smaller holdings stopped growing coffee in the few years before Starbucks made offers. The price of coffee made devoting land to coffee plants unprofitable, and many either divided their land and sold it for housing or turned instead to ornamental plants. When Starbucks came in and offered fair trade value for the remaining growers, coffee became much more profitable and made a big difference in the lives of many families in that area. Because of the Starbucks committment to paying fair prices, the neighborhood is much better off.
I now wonder something. Let's say there were a commercial that showed Concepcion de Naranjo and all the changes in the lives of the growers. Would it make Americans more likely to buy the coffee? I would like to think it would.
Starbucks commercial | Consumption and American Popular Culture — February 27, 2014
[…] http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/08/09/indulging-narcissism-starbucks-promises-its-all-for-… […]