Gillette’s wonderfully woke new commercial

[realibrad]

You're free to create advertising telling women to be better, if you think that's necessary. With all the anti-feminists up in arms over this Gillette ad, I'm sure you should be able to crowdsource the funding.

You are presuming my role in this thread.

Amused as well as others, believe that P&G ran this ad to better the world. My argument is that they are trying to create a brand that elevates their product to allow them to sell more and or increase margins. My position is that P&G did this for sales. A company trying to increase sales is not bad at all, but, I think its at best misguided to believe that P&G was being noble here.

 

[Vic]

You are presuming my role in this thread.

Amused as well as others, believe that P&G ran this ad to better the world. My argument is that they are trying to create a brand that elevates their product to allow them to sell more and or increase margins. My position is that P&G did this for sales. A company trying to increase sales is not bad at all, but, I think its at best misguided to believe that P&G was being noble here.

Does that really matter? Is the message changed somehow? Of course not. And if we're going to question P&G's motives then why shouldn't we question yours?
Oh wait, let me guess, you're totally disinterested in every way except you won't give it up, right?

 

[Meghan54]

You are presuming my role in this thread.

Amused as well as others, believe that P&G ran this ad to better the world. My argument is that they are trying to create a brand that elevates their product to allow them to sell more and or increase margins. My position is that P&G did this for sales. A company trying to increase sales is not bad at all, but, I think its at best misguided to believe that P&G was being noble here.

Just curious....what brand is Gillette/P&G trying to create with that advert?

 

[MrPickins]

You are presuming my role in this thread.

Amused as well as others, believe that P&G ran this ad to better the world. My argument is that they are trying to create a brand that elevates their product to allow them to sell more and or increase margins. My position is that P&G did this for sales. A company trying to increase sales is not bad at all, but, I think its at best misguided to believe that P&G was being noble here.

Why couldn't it be both?

 

[realibrad]

Does that really matter? Is the message changed somehow? Of course not. And if we're going to question P&G's motives then why shouldn't we question yours?
Oh wait, let me guess, you're totally disinterested in every way except you won't give it up, right?

What matters to me was the thing I have been talking about. I have taken issue with what Amused tried to say. I have not tried to say the message changes because of intent.

The thing I am discussing is the idea that P&G should be seen as a noble company willing to give up its profits to make the world a better place. P&G ran this because they thought it would help make them money.

But, if you want to question my motives, go ahead. It would be hypocritical of me not to accept that. So, tell me where you think I have gone wrong, and I will listen and respond.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Why couldn't it be both?

Because at no point did the Gillette marketing team gathering in a meeting and state "How can we make the world a better place?"

They asked the question: "How can we get more of these stupid hippie millennials to buy more of our stale product to drive up sales since were losing big time to manual razors and mail-order alternatives?"

 

[realibrad]

Just curious....what brand is Gillette/P&G trying to create with that advert?

As I said before, their market research shows that people in large part see razors as a simple hair removal tool. The goal of this most recent ad was to elevate their brand beyond that tool status which would allow them to increase market share and or margins.

Apple has been the master of this for a while now. Its not just a phone, or computer, but a statement. So, when you think of a razor, you want the customer to think of how they are helping be part of something bigger and better than a hair removal tool.

So, their Brand here is of a socially conscious company that if supported can continue to help the world.

 

[Jhhnn]

Jhhnn, the target was men. Just as a bomb may target an individual, and also kill others.

So, you're now expert at the psychology of advertising, or what?

 

[realibrad]

Why couldn't it be both?

Never said it could not. I already addressed this in post 81.

Its perfectly fine when a company tries to push for something that is helpful to the company and society. The problem is when the thing the company pushes is harmful to society but good for the company.

Can have a party without soda...
Need to relax, try having a beer...
Had a hard day, try some ice cream...

 

[realibrad]

So, you're now expert at the psychology of advertising, or what?

Expert no. It is the field I work in though. I do have some insight on how these things work.

 

[vi edit]

Why couldn't it be both?

Because too many people are programmed to binary decisions. Yes. No. Black. White. Ford. Chevy. Democrat. Republican.

 

[zinfamous]

Really? I wonder just how you got that from this:

"What in the world? I know we all look for moral guidance from giant corporations so this is always welcome. And this is somehing that is completely relevant to their product, shaving and sexual harassment go hand in hand so it only makes sense. It’s obviously a calculated move to capitalize on #metoo but do people legitimately buy this? Nike at least had a history of not just child labor but also the idea of pushing oneself/making sacrifices/all that kind of stuff so it wasn’t so far out of left field. Gillette?

The message is the message, I agree a lot of men still to this day don’t treat women as equals. Not all certainly, but enough that it’s still a very relevant issue in the world. But thanks Gillette for virtue signaling that to me? I’ll be sure to buy your overpriced products now. Moralizing and virtue signaling as a marketing tool on something irrelevant to the product you’re selling. #sobrave "

You sound triggered to me. Whatever conclusions you may have drawn about UglyCasanova's objectivity and as often as I find it suspect, I don't really think this kind of putting words in his mouth that his OP actually refutes amounts, itself, to objective fair play. His OP is couched in concern for the moral wisdom of allowing morality to issue from corporations, it clearly seems to me. What you want to read into his motivations for pointing that out, 'broflake', strikes me as symptomatic of triggered ideological rage. You justify your attempt to silence his concern based on your certainty that he is a moral evil and does not deserve fair play. You have become what you fear, it would seem.

But Corporations are people too, my friend.

 

[Paratus]

Do you somehow imagine that it doesn't register with women?

@realibrad

I thought you work in advertising? Women will see this ad and be more positively predisposed to expensive Venus razors.

Again missing the forest for the trees or tree.

 

[Vic]

Because at no point did the Gillette marketing team gathering in a meeting and state "How can we make the world a better place?"

They asked the question: "How can we get more of these stupid hippie millennials to buy more of our stale product to drive up sales since were losing big time to manual razors and mail-order alternatives?"

No, that's not what they said. They said, "How can we generate as much controversy as possible in order to get our brand out in front of the public and near the top of the newscycle while not tarnishing the brand with a negative image at the same time?"

IMO their solution was both obvious and genius.

 

[realibrad]

@realibrad

I thought you work in advertising? Women will see this ad and be more positively predisposed to expensive Venus razors.

Again missing the forest for the trees or tree.

The message was a mixture of signaling and pathos to get men to be better people. You are absolutely right that in a sense the ad was also for women. Considering the role women play in buying products, they were targets. The message though was directed at men.

 

[realibrad]

No, that's not what they said. They said, "How can we generate as much controversy as possible in order to get our brand out in front of the public and near the top of the newscycle while not tarnishing the brand with a negative image at the same time?"

IMO their solution was both obvious and genius.

No, that is not how P&G runs their marketing. Perhaps the agency thought that, but, not P&G. That is a common misconception of how marketing works.

 

[Vic]

No, that is not how P&G runs their marketing. Perhaps the agency thought that, but, not P&G. That is a common misconception of how marketing works.

Do you work for P&G or something?

 

[realibrad]

Do you work for P&G or something?

As I said before, I am close with people that work for P&G, as well as the general world of CPG.

CPG is largely brand driven, and you do not associate your high value long term brands with controversy. That is brand suicide in the long run.

 

[Vic]

As I said before, I am close with people that work for P&G, as well as the general world of CPG.

CPG is largely brand driven, and you do not associate your high value long term brands with controversy. That is brand suicide in the long run.

Why is this ad controversial?

 

[Moonbeam]

Why couldn't it be both?

Exactly or some of each.

 

[realibrad]

Why is this ad controversial?

You are telling your customers they should become better people. That runs the risk of making those people feel something negative. If you think that group is small, then its worth that risk. P&G thought, and possibly still do think that the opposition group is small enough that the positive will not be smaller than the negative. P&G also likely did not think it was even close, as again, they do not want to risk well established brands with this type of thing unless you are very sure its safe.

 

[brycejones]

Man the snowflakes are riled up over this.

Start your own razor company if it pisses you off so much.

Beadickrazors.com might be available. Maybe make the handle dick shaped.

 

[mikeymikec]

You are telling your customers they should become better people. That runs the risk of making those people feel something negative.

Uh, have you considered that a heck of a lot of advertising does this?

 

[feralkid]

Jhhnn, this commercial was for men. Did you watch it? It opens with their slogan "the best a man can get" and goes from there. Jhhnn, did you get lost again?

Did you ever consider that women may see this Ad and consider buying a Gillette Venus razor, some other Proctor & Gamble products, perhaps along with a few shares of P&G stock?

I guess you got lost thinking about those smooth balls you read about.

 

[realibrad]

Uh, have you considered that a heck of a lot of advertising does this?

Not typically with CPG that is well established as a market leader. Too much risk. You do not know what you are talking about.