‘This ad is for white people only’: Ad Standards campaign targets racism and sexism
The advertising industry needs to lift its game and strive to exceed existing standards to deliver more socially progressive campaigns.
That is the message from the industry’s self regulator Ad Standards as it targets sexism, racism and stereotypes in advertising.
As part of the push, Ad Standards has launched a campaign, created by Loud Communications, titled Kinder Conditions. It will span TV, radio, newspapers and billboards, and aims to draw consumer attention to the various Codes which dictate the industry’s accepted standards around motor vehicle advertising, advertising to children, food advertising, sexism and racism.
Fiona Jolly, CEO of Ad Standards, said she hopes the campaign highlights the ability of advertisers and agencies to have more socially progressive messaging in their communications.
“There’s a perception throughout the industry that the Codes in place hinder creativity – well that’s absolutely false,” said Jolly.
“The Codes set the minimum standards. Advertisers should not feel inhibited in going beyond the standards and aiming for more socially progressive advertising, which in turn can help companies achieve better business outcomes.”
Despite the wide-reaching campaign, Jolly said Ad Standards isn’t finger-pointing at any industry or business in particular.
“Although the Codes we’ve highlighted are some of the least complained about, we have to remind people that advertising standards are in place and they are there to achieve the greater good for everyone, advertisers and the community alike.
“In fact, it’s been proven that Australia’s advertising self-regulation complaints system is responsive, cost-effective and efficient – it protects the integrity of brands through a wide range of advertising initiatives that align with community values. It’s a win-win.”
Lorraine Jokovic, CEO of Loud Communications, said there is no denying the campaign is confronting.
An outdoor execution of the ad (Click to enlarge)
“For the TVC, we employed a 1950s’ aesthetic reminiscent of a time where stereotyping was the norm.
“Together, these devices highlight how the industry can progress and move away from outdated clichés which, unfortunately, can offend and discriminate against many groups.”
Click to enlarge
To showcase its support for positive social change in advertising, this year Ad Standards is sponsoring a new Effie Awards category called ‘positive change’ which recognises and celebrates brands that are promoting the greater good through marketing communication.
In the same spirit, Ad Standards is also encouraging advertisers and agencies to nominate an ad that they believe celebrates creativity and goes beyond the already high standards in Australia to create Kinder Conditions.
No, incorrect. The ad industry has to produce campaigns that relate to the people being targeted by them. Nobody elected the ad industry; nobody has indulged them with authority to play social engineering and moral posturing games to feed their virtue-signalling. The ad industry’s job is to reflect the culture, not to direct the culture. It is now evident that Mumbrella – once a bastion of free public discourse about advertising and media – has been infiltrated by ugly leftist activists, and is becoming the problem, not the solution. No doubt its competitors have noticed and will take full advantage.
User ID not verified.
I’m putting ‘Ugly Leftist’ on my business card, Mike. It’s way more exciting than the current, boring, ‘Editor’.
Your enthusiastic feedback aside, you are aware this campaign is by Ad Standards and has nothing to do with Mumbrella? We are simply covering its existence.
Thanks,
Vivienne – Ugly Leftist
Nicely handled Vivienne.
Mike I feel sad for you myopic negativity. You have my heartfelt sympathy for what must be a pretty morose life.
Have a great day everyone.
User ID not verified.
Can someone please tell Channel 9 about this?
“This show is for white people only” is an ongoing issue, too.
https://www.9now.com.au/seachange
User ID not verified.
Anyone who uses the term “leftist” automatically renders anything else they have to say redundant.
User ID not verified.
@Mike
Irony that the use of ‘virtue-signalling’ acts like a loud warning klaxon that your views will be skewed way to the right.
The campaign, regardless of creative is tackling a real problem, the industry, and therefore what we produce, is largely NOT representative of the culture. Largely because we don’t hire enough people from minorities, and therefore don’t actually see the culture that is happening all over the country, but particularly in the large cities where much of ad spend is directed.
Rather like yourself.
User ID not verified.
Likewise ‘virtue signalling’.
User ID not verified.
Question: Who gets to decide which words or terms “renders anything else someone has to say as redundant”?
Answer: The people you least want to
User ID not verified.
@Waronwords
If people use specific words in a stupid way, or to make stupid points, they shouldn’t be surprised when people start to see those words as indicative of a stupid statement.
It’s not about the decision of one person, or even a small group – it’s about the collective understanding of the use of the word. The same way language has always changed, and as Mike said, about understanding and reflecting society.
Just as parents using teen slang makes it less credible, having every right wing nut job use these words makes it less credible when the less nutty on the right side of the divide use them.
User ID not verified.
The comments began with Mike making his accusative point, and Vivienne replying with what appears to be a defensive explanation and adding the epithet “Ugly Leftist”
This is a fair indication of the status quo regarding the assorted armoury of social attack and defence weapons available to the various racist, sexist, ageist, and PC brigades.
News reporters must be free to comment openly, creative directors and artists must be free to create, advertising must target its various audiences. Stereotypes will always exist in spite of social engineering, or because of it.
Don’t lose sight of the fact that we all get old and die (that’s if we are lucky) and a new bunch comes along (faster than you imagine) who look and listen to around 40% of what we had to say, and then laugh at the silliness of it and go their own way; which is exactly what we did.
User ID not verified.
So your belief is that anyone who uses the term ‘virtue signalling’ is immediately rendered right wing and not to be listened to? Rather clever way of deflecting your virtue signalling there my friend.
User ID not verified.
In the context of complaining about diversity and equality, yes – I have yet to see anyone use it that hasn’t been expressing right-wing opinions. Which have largely been outdated and/or stupid.
The key issue is this – people on the right seem to think that people who care about others, and comment as such, are doing so in order to virtue signal to others. Except we’re not. We want a better, more reflective society (As Mike says – we need to reflect culture).
The words act rather like the use of politically correct to mean ‘overly restrictive’ as opposed to ‘not talking to others like an arsehole’.
User ID not verified.
I know what you are saying but there is virtue signalling and then there is virtue signalling. We all have that Facebook friend who floods their feed with every known cause and issue to the point out how good they that it becomes almost needy. I’d hope we all care about issues that affect those around us and do something about it. But when it’s every issue, all of the time, I think it’s ok to use the term.
Good feed again VK. Thank you.
User ID not verified.
So if using a certain word instantly classifies one as ignorant or incredible, do we have to invent new words to explain the concept whose name is now redundant – which would repeat the cycle – or are we to stop talking about that concept entirely?
This is exactly what Orwell predicted with Newspeak.
User ID not verified.