Tugging on heart strings (or emotions to broaden it)? Pretty much what every advert in history attempts to do? It’s always about getting a reaction from the viewer in some way.
New Gillette ad
- Thread starter R.N7
- Start date
I like the ad. It sends a positive message that everyone should get behind.
I remember the time when two four year olds were beating the shit out of each other and my friends & I stood around egging them on and thinking, "He He He, Men will be Men". Seeing this ad I now realize that I should have intervened. Thanks Gillette! You really are the best a man can get, be it razors or preachy advice.
What a crock. How’s that going to sell more Gillette products?
Also, thank god we have those two black guys stopping the two white men from being assholes
Wish the ad men would grow a pair of balls and even things out.
Also, thank god we have those two black guys stopping the two white men from being assholes
Wish the ad men would grow a pair of balls and even things out.
Given their social conscience I assume the next razor they'll be launching will be a reusable straight razor which can be resharpened and lasts for years?
I mean there's billions of disposable razors sold each year, such needless waste when the world is already drowning in plastic waste.
I mean there's billions of disposable razors sold each year, such needless waste when the world is already drowning in plastic waste.
Are you sure you understand how advertising works?
From what I gather, we are now in agreement that an advert is not a platform for discussion, but a subject. And therefore, accusing an ad of virtue signalling does not mean that we're de-platforming the subject or discouraging discussion on it, something we're quite merrily doing here and which was my point. Secondly we're also seemingly in agreement that it's disingenuous. What you're saying however, is that it's all right so long the message is positive and it achieves bringing the discussion onto the masses. What I'm challenging here is that the right message delivered in the wrong tone and by the wrong people can actually have a negative effect.
You also posit that the message must become a topic for discussion somehow otherwise how do we move on and progress? And that P&G are helping do this, offering the example of your 6th form discussions. I would argue that these subjects are not enhanced by corporations riding them for publicity. The BLM movement and Kaepernick's kneeling succeeded in bringing the problem of social injustice for African-Americans to the forefront, and hopefully to classrooms too. I don't think Nike's Kaepernick advert offered anything genuine beyond exposure for Nike, or that it enriched the discussion already being had. By definition a corporation will only endorse a message when it's calculated that the message resonates with the majority of its customer base and therefore have a positive financial impact. And in cases of large multinationals where their customer base is basically... everyone, it means they've accepted this message is the mainstream view. The subject of toxic masculinity has been in the news for some time, started by the #MeToo movement, if this hasn't reached classrooms then we're in trouble. Gillette are not on anything new here, nor are they taking any risks.
As for the subtlety question, it depends who you are trying to reach. You take the approach that the injustice suffered by the victims means it should be screamed loudly and boldly from every platform until the message drills home. It's a combative approach and I agree that loud and bold is great for bringing an issue to the front of the agenda. You can't always be timid. It's also great for putting pressure on politicians. Once a subject becomes mainstream though, you gotta be a bit more careful and selective about screaming it in people's faces and more selective about where the message comes from and how. The ones who are already on your side, why are you screaming it at for? The ones who are resilient to change will they be screamed down? Unlikely. You either write them off or you work on a more subtle way to educate them and change them over to your views over time. Horses for courses sort of thing.
Last edited:
No, but I was sure some yahoo will be here in a minute to explain it to me. So, go on, yahoo.
I think it's exactly what's needed to shock men into discussing the type of shitty behaviour that we all think is acceptable when it really isn't. The ol' boys will be boys, lads lads lads approach is abhorrent and we get away with a shit tonne because of it.
Genuinely glad with Gillette.
More so for the utter froth that men with victim complexes that don't actually want to tackle their shitty behaviour are throwing out in complaints.
Genuinely glad with Gillette.
More so for the utter froth that men with victim complexes that don't actually want to tackle their shitty behaviour are throwing out in complaints.
Fantastic ad. The response to it proves is how ironically fragile and snowflakey so many of these Jordan Peterson listening "PC gone mad" types (men and women) have gotten who are so completely and uttery lacking in self-awareness when they demonstrate the kind of behaviour they mythically think "SJWs" exhibit.
Well, judging by your post, you kind of seem to think an ad failed, if the person watching it, doesn’t immediately storm out of its house to purchase the advertised product. That’s not at all how advertising works and not what Gilette is attempting. This is most of all an image campaign for them. They are trying to paint their brand in a positive light, by aligning themselves with progressive causes. This will most likely result in a better image overall and public exposure. That will lead people to subconsciously consider their products above others, as they subconsciously consider Gilette in a more positive light, therefore sales should increase. That’s a relatively slow, steady and long process.
And if you’re criticizing an effect on the topic presented, you also seem to not understand how societal progress works. Nobody thinks someone sees this and suddenly becomes a better person. But ads and campaigns like these start discussions, like the one we‘re having right now and lead to a change of language and acceptance surrounding certain topics. If the public eye is led to campaigns like these, the acceptance for a different kind of masculinity will increase and people fighting for the changes advertised, become more energized. But most importantly, those who already aligned with the presented ideology feel freer to openly stand up for the causes presented. Thus the rules of interaction and human conduct slowly shift towards a more progressive ideology. People who believe in the opposite get discouraged from openly standing up for their believes, as they start to form the idea, that their opinion or ideology is no longer as accepted, thus they risk some sort of backlash, by voicing and actively living out their ideology.
This works in both directions, of course. We’ve seen this with the ascend of the far right through social media.
But I‘m sure you already know this and I projected quite heavily into your post.
Has anyone ever actually heard someone say the word snowflake in real life? Not written on the internet or on a video? It is fecking everywhere on the internet but for the life of me I have never heard it pass someone's lips. Thank Christ.
If it's pissing off Piers Morgan and co and promotes a positive message then it's probably alright.
But at the same time I agree with those who are saying that this isn't some sort of altruistic act from a company with a well-developed moral conscience but instead a company capitalising on changing social trends for more profit. As has been the case with a lot of companies lately. Still, not necessarily all bad so long as people recognise that.
But at the same time I agree with those who are saying that this isn't some sort of altruistic act from a company with a well-developed moral conscience but instead a company capitalising on changing social trends for more profit. As has been the case with a lot of companies lately. Still, not necessarily all bad so long as people recognise that.
Would actually be a very good thing to do.
For someone who throws around the word 'snowflake' more frequently than a Daily Mail headline generator, Piers Morgan doesn't half piss the fecking bed over the the most innocuous of shite. He's constantly up in arms about stuff that has little to no impact on him, whilst claiming it's the rest of the world that is constantly offended.
Someone needs to step up, be the hero and just chin the cnut.
Someone needs to step up, be the hero and just chin the cnut.
Piers is
Women buy Gillette products too.What a crock. How’s that going to sell more Gillette products?
Also, thank god we have those two black guys stopping the two white men from being assholes
Wish the ad men would grow a pair of balls and even things out.
They might lose a few idiots like piers Morgan, but they might gain a lot of new female users.
I didn't see anything in the ad that would cause this level of butthurt. Personally the ad did slightly annoy me on a few levels. All the "bad" guys were white which is the "safe" option. And like others said i don't want some company getting on a high horse. Also I saw something where the director of the ad has a shady past. If true that would take it from mildly annoying to plain stupid.
Trying to stop someone from catcalling in New York sounds like a lost episode of Dave Chappelle's "Where Keeping it Real goes Wrong"
Sure. Pink it & shrink it (& charge more).
I guess I don’t like being preached to in an ad. If this was a public service message that’s another thing...
"And let it be noted that there is no more delicate matter to take in hand, nor more dangerous to conduct, nor more doubtful in its success, than to set up as a leader in the introduction of changes. For he who innovates will have for his enemies all those who are well off under the existing order of things, and only lukewarm supporters in those who might be better off under the new. This lukewarm temper arises partly from the fear of adversaries who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of mankind, who will never admit the merit of anything new, until they have seen it proved by the event."
I like this one.
What kind of public service message would be ok?
For what it’s worth I used to work for Gillette, women made up a higher proportion of sales from a retail perspective than men due to women traditionally doing the groceries more.
Awesome quote wasted on Gillette if we're being honest
I kind of see nothing wrong with it.
Edit: Apart from being a shitty advertisement for their products, it's more of a statement from the company, and that statement is perfectly fine in my book.
Edit: Apart from being a shitty advertisement for their products, it's more of a statement from the company, and that statement is perfectly fine in my book.
Last edited:
I'm sure they do and I wouldn't be surprised at all if they're being paid for their involvement. For example, it recently came out that Piers Morgan and Greggs (of vegan sausage roll fame) have the same PR agency. Does anyone seriously think that's a coincidence?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I wonder do the likes of Piers Morgan and James Woods realise that by very publicly announcing their intentions to boycott a product in this way they will be giving the company involved exactly the kind of exposure they were looking for.
The recent trend for major brands to use how woke they are to flog some more tat is kind of cringey. You could argue that it's well intentioned but the only thing they give a shit about is sales and, personally, I find it icky when corporate greed is dressed up as social justice.
I took my Henry vacuum cleaner back.
Also this. As ads go, it's a pretty crappily made one.
And equally Malcolm X believed the nonviolent message of Dr King was effectively inaction and dithering and encouraged his followers to use of more direct action to achieve equality. There's grades to everything.
Not to mention that it ain't exactly comparable at all, because we're not discussing the merit of the argument at all here (I believe everyone here agrees) but whether multi-nationals riding in late in a social movement to profiteer off it while preaching moral goodness is doing the movement any good.
The message is fine, just dont appreciate a corporation (trying to shift more product) providing that message. To me comes across as preachy and has the opposite affect.
There's nothing really wrong with the commercial. But what's the motivation behind it? All I see is another big company jumping on whatever the current bandwagon is, to raise their profile and sell more products. It's a cynical marketing strategy by P&G to position themselves as one of the "socially conscious" brands when their previous record shows they are anything but that.
http://powerbase.info/index.php/Procter_&_Gamble:_Corporate_Crimes
Too many people are happy to celebrate morons like Piers Morgan getting wound up to care about the ridiculousness of big corporations hijacking current, serious issues for their own benefit.
Fair enough and I'm quite cynical in general but I hear that line about a long of things e.g. with films and TV.
Yeah, that's pretty much what I see as well. I just don't think there is anything wrong with companies jumping on a bandwagon about trying to improve society. It won't make me buy more or less of their product, so as a ad it's pretty shit, but it's not like I think their message is bad.
Good on them I say. I mean, I won’t buy their products since I’m all about the Philips Norelco, but good on them. Also, it’s pissing off cnuts like Piers Morgan and other right wingers so I’m happy with that. Keep em coming.
I suppose it’s still better than corporations profiting from tone deaf messages. Even if it’s just for sales, at least the message is being put out there.
PersonallyI wish it had a lighter touch; I think it's heavy-handed, unsubtle and patronising... but it is certainly a massive success in its ambition to be talked about. Priceless presence and media coverage for the brand. ROI must be huge.
When do you reckon they'll start championing the cause?
Just tired of companies trying to push a social message like anyone bases their character off what a corporation thinks of them. I hope they take a financial hit, not because I am offended, more because I want them to sell me my products and shut the feck up.