Your views on advertising’s gender stereotypes says something about you
The recent decision by the UK's Advertising Standards Bureau to govern ads that play to gender stereotypes has divided many. The stance you take reflects the role you believe advertising plays in society, writes Havas group account director Nick Braddy.
On July 18 the UK’s ASA made the historic decision to lay down new standards to hold advertisers accountable. Standards that highlight and attempt to prevent the social harm advertising can cause in exacerbating gender stereotypes. This decision has been met with controversy and has divided the marketing and advertising community.
It was the article by Michelle Smith (research fellow in English Literature from Deakin University) about the ASA’s announcement that got me thinking. In particular this comment by “Mike” on Smith’s article:
“What absolute nonsense. If a campaign crosses a cultural line where the majority are [sic] offended, it will fail. Market forces are the most effective form of conditioning.”
Australia has largely moved beyond acceptance of extremely objectifying ads for products with no inherent connection with sex. Supplied: CC BY-NC-SA
This commentator’s view was in line with many others across the industry globally that disagreed with the ASA’s decision, especially in the US where they don’t have a regulatory authority.
The opposing view, one that welcomed the new standards, was best articulated by Richard Huntington, Saatchi & Saatchi chairman and chief strategy officer, and his opinion piece: “Thoughtlessness is our greatest threat”.
In this piece Huntington highlights the power of advertising on both persuasion to act in a way our marketers want, and on unintended consequences such as stereotyping:
“Both agencies and brands must be more aware and take greater responsibility for advertising’s impact on us all, and not simply on those for whom the message was intended.”
Huntington: Thoughtlessness is our greatest threat
These opposing views ladder up to something greater, representing different overarching ideals. One of free market capitalism, i.e. market forces balance all – if we don’t make good products and associated communications, it won’t sell. And one of neutral third party intervention, i.e. free markets don’t protect people, therefore at times a neutral authority is required to intervene.
So what’s your opinion on the ASA’s new standards? Are you a free market capitalist who believes boundless commerce balances all? Or do you believe we have a social responsibility to those who we market to and third party intervention is welcome?
However you answer is your opinion, but take the time to ask yourself why, as it’s connected to something you believe and ultimately value. Forming a belief isn’t difficult; it is conditioned and often deep rooted from experiences throughout your life. It’s taking the time to know why that is key, where these values come from and how they were formed.
This often means a level of self-enquiry of which many aren’t willing to do. But if you take a step back and realise the relationship between your values and choices, then understanding the ‘why’ in what you value is critical to understanding the ‘why’ in the choices you make in every day life.
We go to great lengths to uncover consumer insights to better shape the choices we make in marketing to them, however when it comes to ourselves we rarely take the time. Understanding why you value what you value and why you make certain choices unlocks a level of self-awareness and emotional intelligence that is critical to effective leadership and decision making.
So let this ASA ruling challenge you to ask yourself what you believe, what you value and most importantly why. It will start a path of self-enquiry and understanding that will help you in all forms of life, professionally and personally.
Nick Braddy is Havas’ group account director.
I hate reading opinion pieces that have no opinion or no insight.
I love the set up. And I’m across the issue but add something to the issue – have an opinion.
User ID not verified.
Mate you know you’re in Australia right?
User ID not verified.
Isn’t it quite simple? As an advertising agency/consultant, if you want to sell a toy truck and the people most likely to want a toy truck are boys 3-10YO with brown hair and you don’t target boys 3-10YO with brown hair (parents purchasing for the target) or you don’t understand that they are the target market then you should NOT be appointed to the account. In fact, I would suggest you stop applying the teachings of the Church of Life of Brian to your advertising.
Stereo typing is not a problem. It’s bad advertising – but then again, at least it makes other advertising better.
User ID not verified.
Both?
I feel conflicted about policing of creative work, even as a feminist. If we are going to use the Chiko Roll ad as an example… we risk regulating out nuance, fun and irony along with it and having to pull ads that “cause offence”. Much like comedy, policing creative work makes me feel uncomfortable in general.
Honestly, I’m as progressive as they come, and I understand why this is happening… but I think the focus is on the wrong things.
The answer is broader and bigger than regulating ads about a chick in a bikini. The real answer is in changing the makeup/culture of the industry and encouraging more diverse voices to be heard throughout the creative process.
I fundamentally believe that with the right surroundings, the majority of people don’t like hurting or marginalising others. And for what it’s worth… I still laugh at that Chiko Roll ad. I hate to think we’ll lose our Australianness and become as sensitive as Americans. Ew.
User ID not verified.
Gender stereotyping in Australian advertising was the primary reason (the second being the frequency, length and lower quality of ads in Australia) that I ditched terrestrial TV back in 2001. I have never gone back.
DVDs, YouTube, torrenting and now NetFlix have more than filled the gap.
User ID not verified.
Amazing to think that there is no gender stereotyping on DVDs, YouTube, NetFix nor any torrent sites. Who would have thunk it!
User ID not verified.
Your position on the issue is likely to be based on whether you believe advertising is a trade or a profession.
When it comes to values and beliefs it is clear that trades people focus exclusively on maximising the sales or return. That is perfectly reasonable and what most clients expect.
However if you believe that advertising is a profession then practitioners are required to have regard to the impact their activity has on society. Knowingly promoting hate or racism, discrimination against any social group be it gender, religion or disability is totally unacceptable as Bell Pottinger PR recently discovered in the U.K.
Their membership of the professional chartered body representing the PR profession was terminated. Their survival is unlikely.
With professional status comes wider reponsabilities as well as professional status and rates of remuneration. The question is not if but when the advertising industry in Australia will step up to the plate.
John Oldfield Director of the IPA (retired)
User ID not verified.