media: marketing

Singapore Airlines  is known for its “Singapore girls.” Here is a video that shows lots of images of how pretty Asian women, there to serve others, have been used in their advertising (the creator of the video claims to be a Singapore girl):

Apparently the Singapore Girl is such a phenomenon, she’s a figure at Madame Tussaud’s:

I had no idea that when most people think of Singapore, they think of this “pretty, smiling…girl.”

Anyway, I think it’s an interesting example of the way non-White women are often portrayed as exotic (the Singapore girls have become a symbol of Singapore itself) and also of what sociologists refer to as emotion work. The Singapore girls aren’t there just to bring us drinks and make sure we’re buckled in; there’s there to make us feel pampered and to warm our hearts–to do the type of emotion work (constantly smiling, being extremely attentive, being at the passengers’ service and making it seem like a joy) that makes customers feel cared-for and special…and thus willing to pay high prices for those business seats. And clearly these women are part of the decor–pretty, polite, accommodating women for passengers to enjoy while they fly.

Gwen Sharp is an associate professor of sociology at Nevada State College. You can follow her on Twitter at @gwensharpnv.

The Scion is an interesting study in marketing.  Scion (noun: descendant) is a subsidiary of Toyota.  Why Scion? Well, Toyota wanted to sell cars to young, hip, urban guys but (as we all know) Toyotas are for fuddy duddies (yeah I’m talkin’ to you).  So Toyota started Scion.  Scions are really just Toyotas, less the fuddy duddy baggage.  Toyota has marketed Scions accordingly.   Here are some commercials:

Scion advertising features young people of color, usually men, in urban spaces (found here):

I have a Scion.  This one:

When I walked into the Madison, Wisconsin Toyota dealer to purchase it, there were a dozen middle-aged white men with pot-bellies, and a Latina that looked about 16 years old.  She was the Scion salesperson.  (Hi Celia!)

Also appealing to its intended customers, Toyota encourages you to customize your Scion.  When I purchased the car, I had the option of adding neon trim around the bottom of the car, glowing cup holders, and giant speakers that took up the entire back seat.  Factory installed.  (I opted for all three, of course.)

Scion encourages these additions.  As the commercials show, Scion emphasizes customization and the individualization of your car.  “United by Individuality” is one of their advertising themes (found here):

Underneath each of these unique Scions is the name of its owner.  These names include Carlos V., Claudell D., Javier C., Benilda D., Jesus V., Kekai K., Nickoli C., Mario N., Einar A., Jose S., and Jose R.  They’re definitely not marketing to the stereotypical Toyota crowd.

The marketing of the Scion points to how we separate old from young and then layer the binary with further binaries: boring/exciting, suburban/urban, conformity/individuality, and even white/non-white.  Toyota doesn’t sell Scions by constantly reminding us that Scions are Toyotas (with all the dependability and efficiency that Toyotas are known for), just the opposite.  And youth, Toyota appears to believe, want to differentiate themselves from dull, grown-up, suburban, whitebread conformity as much as possible.

But here’s the twist:

Celia (who I bought my Scion from in Madison, Wisconsin) told me that, despite all of their efforts, the “boxy” Scion (the one on the left in the first print ad) is bought disproportionately by elderly people.  Why?  Because the spacious interior holds a wheelchair just as easily as a mountain bike or a drum kit and the height of the car makes it easy to get in and out of without having to pull yourself up or lower yourself down.

Marketing, thanks to human creativity and free will, has its limits and marketers can’t always predict how their strategies will play.

That’s the refrain anyway.

But whose sex is sold?  And to who?   If it was simply that sex sold, we’d see men and women equally sexually objectified in popular culture.  Instead, we see, primarily, women sold to (presumably heterosexual) men.  So what are we selling, exactly, if not “sex”   We’re selling men’s sexual subjectivity and women as a sex object.  That is, the idea that men’s desires are centrally important and meaningful, and women’s are not (because women are the object to men’s subjectivity).

That women’s object status and men’s subjectivity is sold to women in women’s magazines (for example, Cosmo and Glamour always feature scantily clad women on the cover) in no way undermines the idea that men’s sexual subjectivity is being sold.  It’s just that it’s being sold to all of us.

For example, if this ad was selling Tango with sex, they’d both end up naked in the fourth frame, no?

The new ad spots for M&Ms also illustrate this nicely. m&ms have been anthropomorphized in advertising for some time. There is only one female m&m and she is, by no accident, the green M&M. If you remember from elementary school, green is for horny. That, also, is no accident.

So male M&Ms come in multiple colors, flavors, shapes, and personalities, but female M&Ms are just sex objects.

In the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue this year, M&Ms went with the theme (found here):

The ad campaign extended beyond Sports Illustrated:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDoJNymbU1Q[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubChW7SLhKE[/youtube]

To sum, if it was simply “sex sells,” we’d see an even pattern of sexualization. But we don’t. More often than not, it is women who are sexualized. What is being sold, really, isn’t sex, but the legitimation and indulgence of (supposedly heterosexual) men’s sexual desires.

Kirsti M. alerted us to an M&M advertising campaign in Australia, where you could vote for your favorite color. All but one of the M&Ms are depicted as males (again, the female is Miss Green).

Here is a screenshot of the page for Red, a satirical take on a Marxist revolutionary:

Some highlights from the text:

Favorite quotes: “The revolution is now!”

Favorite books: “100 Steps to World Domination”

Weight: “Perfect for my shell”

A poster:

Here is a screenshot of the page for Miss Green (notice the others aren’t Mr. Blue or Mr. Red; only the female M&M has a title):

Highlights from the text:

Miss Green, working the polls.

About me: I may have a pretty hard shell, but I assure you I’m sweet on the inside.

Favorite quotes: “When I’m good, I’m very good, but when I’m bad I’m better.”

Favorite books: “How to Work the Polls”

Interests: Right now I’m focusing all my attention on the top position.

Campaign policy: All beaches to be nude beaches.

Age: Let’s just say I’m experienced.

A poster:

So again we see the sexualization of the female M&M (she’s “experienced,” focusing on the “top position,” she’s “working the polls” while wrapping her go-go-boot-clad legs around a tree in the manner of a stripper on a stripper pole, her arms and legs are much longer and thinner than the other M&Ms’ are).

In this vintage ad (1970s?), it is clear that it is his “plans” for her that are being appealed to:

NEW! These ads for hearing aids are apparently aimed at men only:

Other great examples include these posts with ads promoting organ donation, an air conditioning technical school, selling pasta, vegetarianism, aviation, cars, war, travel, dentistry, food, more food, houses, and mortgages.  (To see the reverse dynamic, click here and here.)

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.

February is Black History Month, the month in which companies tout their support for the Black community.  MultiCultClassics, a blog that focuses on company outreach to people of color as employees and consumers, has been asking some interesting questions about this phenomenon.  Cynically, perhaps, it is suggested that it is all a big marketing scheme aimed at a good 13 percent of the American population.   Hmmmm.  For example:

This message was appearing on the screens at a grocery store…

…and HighJive decided to test the theory.  The blogger went to the grocery store website, searched for information regarding “Black History Month,”  and found only this:

(Post here.)

Sport is socially constructed.  What counts as a “real” sport is determined by social convention, as any hard core cheerleader will tell you.  Sports are also gendered and the degree to which an athletic activity is feminized correlates pretty closely with whether or not we feel it is a “real” sport.  This translates into an interesting phenomenon in which excelling at athletic activities deemed feminine and not-really-sport includes obscuring the athleticism involved.  That is, part of what it means to be a good athlete in that sport is to be able to hide exactly how athletic you are.

Feder makes this point in her excellent article, “A Radiant Smile From A Lovely Lady.”  She explains that female figure skaters are required to perform femininity and hide their athleticism with costume, make-up, feminine gestures, and softened movements.   One coach was quoted as saying, “I always tell my girls: think like a man, but act and look like a woman.”

At the time her article was published (1995), the U.S. and International Skating Union still called them “ladies” and required them to wear skirts (after Debi Thomas wore a unitard at the Olympics, horror of horrors).  Women were only allowed to do one triple jump (while men were required to do at least two) and they were disqualified if they did a back flip.

Further, media coverage of women skaters tends to focus not on their physical prowess, but on their dreams, how beautiful they are, and their relationships… all drenched in soft lighting and pretty music.  Feder quoted commentators saying that when women jump they “float like a leaf”; their jumps are “less like stunts than whitecaps bubbling out of waves.”

What does Sasha Cohen have?  “Unstoppable” strength?  Oh.  No.  “Unstoppable charm.”

Because of ice skating’s reputation as a feminine not-sport, men who choose to figure skate are often subject to a lot of policing.  Their masculinity is fundamentally called into question by their proximity to so much femininity.  And, don’t forget, this is a bad thing… or so we are led to believe.

This, of course, is sexist, homophobic, and illogical (tell me again why the guy with his hands all over the girl is gay?).

I go over all of this because of a new campaign by Skate Canada to change ice skating’s image in response to the low participation of boys men in the sport.  Instead of, however, challenging the misogyny, rigid masculinity, and irrationality of the “male ice skaters are gay” attack, they have decided to endorse the attack and simply re-frame ice skating as hypermasculine.

In this clip from CBC sports, representatives of Skate Canada explain how they’ve been policed for their participation, and then explain how “tough” ice skating is and how they’re the ones “dealing with all the… pretty ladies.”  So ice skating is redeemed by reframing the  sport as (athletically and sexually) hypermasculine, instead of calling into question hypermasculinity itself.

Of course, it’s much easier to re-frame your object to fit cultural norms than it is to change cultural norms.  I get it.  It’s practical.  And that’s exactly the point.  When it comes down to it, most people will re-frame rather than fight and this is why social change is so difficult.

While some companies are capitalizing on Obama’s election, others are using the end of Bush’s presidency in advertising.   Check out the ad at the bottom of this page:

(Veet is for hair removal.)

Found here.

Nearly a month ago Daphne L. sent us this poster advertising the new television show about lawyers, Damages.  I saw it all around town and maybe you did, too.

I have been trying to think of something interesting to say about it.  I have rejected my first instinct–that the ad represents woman-on-woman violence designed to titillate men and reproduce the stereotype of women as catty–as totally off.  I am not having any luck coming up with an idea of how it fits into our collective consciousnesses. 

There is certainly something fascinating here, but it may just be the way in which Glenn Close is looking calmly into the camera, while the brunette doesn’t even seem to notice or care that she is there.  Perhaps some advertising is just meant to surprise or disturb the reader and be memorable by virtue of failing to make any sense at all.  

I leave it to you, oh readers, to articulate objections, explanations, and defenses.  Or shall we just simply agree with Daphne that it is “unnerving” and leave it at that?

My student, Jacob G., just returned from a semester abroad in Australia. He reports that Foster’s beer is nearly nowhere to be found in Australia and, when it is, it is not considered centrally Australian, but instead, cheap and nasty. This is in dramatic contrast to Foster’s beer commercials. For example:

So, Foster’s beer is being marketing to the U.S. with the notion that it is essentially Australian. Australian-ness, if you watch many Foster’s beer commercials, includes hypermasculinity. This is troubling for Australians–many of whom, I suspect, are not particularly hypermasculine–but it also interesting in that it illustrates how a product can be marketed by branding it with a nation.