Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend
Lobby OkayActivist Okay Activist Archives topic #32999

Subject: "more on how marketers co-opt black culture..." Previous topic | Next topic
PulpHustler
Member since Oct 29th 2003
264 posts
Sun May-29-05 12:30 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
"more on how marketers co-opt black culture..."


  

          

Sorta lengthy, but worth the read i think... Would luv some feedback. and be curious if anyone out here has ever considered going into the advertising/marketing/pr industries....

-------
“What makes this ‘Black’?”
(Pt. 2 of “How Marketers Hustle Black Culture)
By: Hadji Williams

Ever see a TV commercial or print ad with people of color and wonder how/why it came out the way it did? Well, as a 13-year veteran of the advertising and marketing worlds, I’m going to tell you the truth no one in the ad world wants you to hear: It’s called the “Universal Hustle.” The Universal Hustle is how advertisers manipulate black consumers, hiphop and other aspects of urban culture for profit and control. It goes like this:

The marketing industry hustle is divided up into 2 camps: General Markets and Targeted Markets. To clarify, “general market” is to White or Mainstream as “targeted” is to Urban, Black, or Minority.

At my general market gigs, which I did for about 7 years, it was all about reaching mainstream consumers. From a business perspective, “general market” has more to do with race than income. For example: if you’re rich and Black, most marketers still classify you as “urban”; but if you’re poor and white, you’re still considered “general market.” Secondly, when a white-owned company or brand targets white consumers, it’s called a “general market” campaign. But if that same company goes after minority consumers, as many do today, they’re still “general market” clients but now they’re targeting “emerging markets.” Conversely, Black-owned businesses are “urban” no matter who they target. (Harpo, Inc. being the most obvious exception to this.) It’s all about labels and the “general market” label still has the most cache (and money) in business.

Again, marketing is basically 50% educated guesswork, 25% making that guesswork look like hard science, and 25% dealing with the results of the guesswork. Success is well-timed correct guesses based on common ground; and common ground starts with race. The majority American consumer is still white. The clients are usually white. The media outlets we use to reach consumers are either run by/filled with white professionals, targeting white and mainstream consumers or both. Consequently, we always understood that our most important job was to stick to the whiteness script: Understand white/mainstream clients and consumers inside and out. Or else.

While white or mainstream marketing pros simply work on reaching consumers by any mean necessary, clients force Black marketing professionals to answer the same degrading question: “What makes your work ‘targeted’ or ‘inherently Black’?” You see, as a Black advertising professional or marketing firm your biggest bargaining chip isn’t ability but race; but it’s also your biggest crutch.

Simply put, if you can’t do work that’s “inherently Black” most marketers and clients (who are still overwhelmingly white) won’t hire you to do anything else. Conversely, it’s an unspoken but widely enforced industry-rule that “targeted” marketing firms (those which reach black consumers) aren’t allowed to bid on general market accounts (which are geared towards the more lucrative white consumers). Most companies have the mentality of, “Why should I hire a Black marketing firm to reach white consumers when my general market firm does that?” Many also wonder, “Why should I hire a Black firm to reach Black consumers if my general market firm can crossover and reach Black consumers, too?” It’s the marketing industry’s version of Jim Crow and it’s been in effect ever since Aunt Jemima rocked ‘do rags.

Over the years, when I worked on major brands such as Aleve, Cingular Wireless, Mello Yello, Procter & Gamble, SBC, Sprite, Wm. Wrigley, Jr. Co., etc. I did so thru “general market” firms where white consumers were the focus. Occasionally they’d try to reach minority consumers but they usually screwed it up. I lost count of the number of times I saw random white people running around screaming, “How do you say ‘such-n-such’ in Spanish?” or “This won’t offend anyone in Chinatown, will it?” But even today, there’s still a “whites only” mentality at most general market shops, which sucks because again, that’s where most of the real money and opportunity is.

“SPOONY GEE”

My first exposure to “Inherent Blackness” came back in 1999 when I worked on Kool-Aid thru Uniworld, a targeted agency in New York. As their targeted shop, our job was to help Kool-Aid reach black consumers. I think Ogilvy & Mather was the “lead agency,” which meant they handled all of the general market work. (They may have launched the classic Kool-Aid Man campaign back in the day, but I’m not sure.) Anyway, as a Kraft Foods brand, Kool-Aid is a longtime staple in many Black, ‘scuse me, “urban” households. My role was to bring a younger urban perspective to the traditional “drink it and smile about it” flavor Kool-Aid’s targeted work had up until then.

My first TV spot was based on Walt Disney’s Fantasia and my dad. Growing up my dad always made Kool-Aid with the same large spoon. Since he rarely used that spoon for anything else, we called it The Kool-Aid Spoon. Turns out a lot of people who made Kool-Aid had their own special spoon—it was usually the only spoon they had that fit the big pitchers they used.

So I took that “magic spoon” memory and combined it with Fantasia to create “The Magic Spoon,” an animated spot in which a packet of Kool-Aid brings a spoon to life, which in turn stirs up a kitchen full of fun including a pitcher of delicious Kool-Aid. When I presented the spot to my creative directors and superiors they all said the same thing:

“We love it, it’s a great spot. But what makes it inherently Black?”

The fact that everyone liked the spot and understood it was irrelevant. What mattered most was that the spot had no blacks, (no people at all, for that matter), and the music wasn’t hip-hop or R&B, there was nothing overtly “Black” about it. And because of that it was argued that Kool-Aid’s “general market” agency could’ve done this ad. And if general market agencies can reach black consumers then clients don’t need to hire black agencies. And if clients don’t hire black agencies then black professionals have to look to general market agencies for employment. And since general market agencies still won’t hire black professionals in any reasonable numbers, you as a Black marketer are out of work.

So I went back to the drawing board and developed another spot—one that would be clearly Inherently Black. It was a nice “family reunion” spot filled with happy, well-spoken, well-dressed, mainstream-friendly black people drinking Kool-Aid and smiling about how good it made them feel. There were even some black people singing about Kool-Aid at the end. The client loved it, bought it, shot it and it aired a few months later.

“IT'S YOUR WORLD.”

I saw the other end of the “Uniquely Black” spectrum while working on AT&T at the same shop. For years AT&T was king but deregulation, competition, etc. caused them to fall-off a bit. Now they were just big, old and stodgy. So one of my first assignments was to convince young black consumers that AT&T’s online services, then known as “att.net,” were the perfect remedy for all their online shopping needs. Now when you’re dealing with a highly commoditized category like ISPs, you go for the intimate, emotional connection with your audience, you want to get at the heart of what drives people. That’s your best shot at setting yourself apart from the pack…

So I got inside the minds and hearts of our target consumer. What I discovered was at the time for a huge segment of black internet users, the internet’s greatest appeal as a shopping vehicle (outside of convenience and access which everyone offered) is that it offers a sense of equality. No one can discriminate against you in cyberspace because they don’t know what you look like unless you tell them. Anonymity is power for a lot of internet users, especially minorities. Now this was very different from the brick and mortar shopping experiences many minority consumers still have where they can face racial profiling, unfair pricing, inferior customer service, etc. So I developed a campaign based on empowerment and freedom—things that everyone wants, but is particularly relevant to black shoppers.

The first TV spot featured a group of young black teenagers trying to shop in an upscale store. The security guard follows them… The store workers give them second-class treatment, etc. So in a moment of inspired frustration, they decide to go home and shop online using att.net. They get the products they want, it’s safe and secure transaction that leaves them feeling empowered and they live happily ever after.
Everyone loved the spot. But it died. Why? Because while the campaign appealed to black and ethnic consumers, it made whites including the client, uncomfortable. And in the end, even when the audience is black, you have to be concerned with what white people think.

So again, to keep all of this from happening out came the “inherently Black” advertising and marketing—work that appealed to whites as much if not more so than blacks. This is why you see so many marketing schemes and entertainment properties still feature suspect imagery and themes. For all of our significant strides, Black people still have to “prove” their blackness to non-black people in order to succeed.

Our whole relationship to success has become how
well we fit into a scheme we have no control over
and we have not designed.
—Elaine Brown, author/former Black Panther
on Blacks in America’s consumer culture

10% DISS

The worst part of working at a targeted agency is when the client uses the targeted agency’s work without paying for it. I’ve watched it happen for a few years. The program is simple:

The targeted agency shows its work. The client picks a campaign or creative direction. Next they bring in their targeted agencies (Asian, Hispanic, Black, etc.) to essentially translate and tailor the lead agency’s work for their respective audiences. But sometimes the targeted agency comes back with work that’s hipper, stronger, and more relevant than the GM agency’s. (This is often confirmed when the client focus groups everything and the targeted work tests higher or the general market work tests poorly.)

Oftentimes when this happens, the client and/or general market agency mysteriously “puts off moving forward” in lieu of further “brainstorming sessions.” This is where the client and/or lead agency take all the work, including the targeted shops’ ideas off to ‘rethink directions,’ etc. A little time goes by and next thing you know the lead agency has a campaign that’s remarkably similar to what the targeted agency showed weeks back. And if the idea explodes, the lead agency gets all the praise while the targeted agency is rewarded with a couple extra table scraps. (Beat biters, dope style takers…)

TOP BILLIN'?

As I said earlier, agencies are ranked according to their billings or account revenues. Agencies tend to be broken-down by large, small, mid-sized and boutiques. “Large” agencies tend to have billings over $500 million—there are more than a few of them, the most notably: JWT, Grey, FCB, Leo Burnett, W&K, O&M, BBDO, and Needham. And some have annual billings approaching one billion dollars. Typically, the “mid-sized” shops do between $200-500 mill a year and vary by market and there are dozens of them. (Think: Kirshenbaum & Bond, Deutsch, Fallon McElligott, Cramer Krasselt, etc.) “Small” is usually anything under $100 million and those with “boutique” status tend to specialize more in projects for multiple small clients rather than having a stable roster of larger clients to depend on.

Now to give you an idea of some of the entrenched inequities in the game, at their absolute zenith the three biggest “targeted” shops in the country—Burrell Communications, Carol H. Williams and Uniworld, NYC—have never billed more than a healthy mid-sized shop in any year. Why? Clients have never given them enough opportunities to do so. Furthermore, because of the often-incestuous relationships within the industry there still aren’t that many black-owned ad agencies and marketing firms to speak of. While the talent is there, most clients, especially general market ones still aren’t willing to work with enough black ad professionals to support the existence of more than a handful of black agencies.

This revenue inequity also extends to the larger marketplace…

More than ratings or subscribers, the media business revolves around ad revenue. Marketers are the engine and steering wheel for most all media vehicles. High ad sales and sponsorship dollars allow one to reinvest in infrastructure, pay for top media talent, and hot entertainment properties, etc. But when clients allocate crap media budgets to reaching black consumers the black radio stations, black magazines, and black TV programs, everyone suffers. Professionals at black media outlets can’t make the kind of money their white counterparts make. Black media talent can’t make what their white counterparts make. Black entertainment properties (TV and radio shows, etc.) can’t charge what their white entertainment properties charge. And of course Black media companies can’t grow like their mainstream counterparts can.

And again, general market brands reserve their account billings for general market agencies while targeted agencies, be they Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc. are rarely if ever even allowed to compete for general market money; and when they do it’s usually under highly suspect circumstances.

So besides trying to pull urban consumers on their own, general market agencies will form alliances with targeted shops “when needed”; then they (with the client’s support/help) proceed to give them crumbs for accomplishing what would never get done any other way. But this would actually be okay except for a couple key factors:

One: Annually, Blacks spend an estimated $680 billion on products and services supporting mainly non-black-owned businesses; and by 2008, that number is expected to hit $921 billion.(1) Two: Because of mainstream America’s appetite for ethnic culture, most black media outlets and programming reaches far more white and mainstream consumers than general market analysts ever admit to. (Let’s be real: If you just took the number of mainstreamers who watch BET, read “urban” mags and consume Black music, fashion, and entertainment properties you could start your own small country; round up non-black folks who do the same on a global scale and you could colonize the moon.) So while profiting off the Black community from all sides, mainstream businesses continue to screw their Black counterparts out of billions of dollars in deserved revenues and opportunities, not to mention respect. (And of course it’s all perfectly legal, even ethical.)

Anyway, I felt like I had no choice but to play the game. I walked the color line and gave clients what they wanted. And they bought it, either because they didn’t care or because they only cared about profits. The media outlets always ran with it because they got paid. And consumers—black, white, brown, and every hue in between bought it because blackness is product, not humanity. Yet as professionals who made the pie bigger, we never got more than crumbs and slivers our troubles. And save for a couple fresh wrinkles the saga continues, same as it ever was.

I’m not a prostitute but I can give you want you want.
—Missy Elliott (2)


NOTE: This article is an excerpt from Hadji Williams’ upcoming KNOCK THE HUSTLE: HOW TO SAVE YOUR JOB AND YOUR LIFE FROM CORPORATE AMERICA (July 2005) (www.knockthehustle.com // www.barnesandnoble.com). It’s hiphop’s first success guide for business, culture and life. Email him: author@knockthehustle.com // www.knockthehustlechronicles.blogspot.com
------------------

Notes:

1. “The Multicultural Economy 2003, America’s Minority Buying Power” (study) by Jeffrey M. Humphreys, Selig Center for Economic Growth, Terry College of Business, U. of Georgia, 2003.
2. “Work It” (song) Missy Elliot (2003)
----------

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top


Topic Outline
Subject Author Message Date ID
love the liner note for missy elliot...
May 29th 2005
1
opt out
May 30th 2005
2
can't..
May 31st 2005
8
RE: love the liner note for missy elliot...
May 30th 2005
5
      minority marketers and advertisers everywhere feel like they're getting ...
May 31st 2005
9
dope article
May 30th 2005
3
dawg, I didn't know this was your book
May 30th 2005
4
RE: dawg, I didn't know this was your book
Jun 01st 2005
22
All I DO is shit on urban marketing goons.
May 30th 2005
6
Just added your book to my wish list on Amazon
May 30th 2005
7
could someone..
May 31st 2005
10
Because Black folks are getting the shortest end
May 31st 2005
11
RE: Because Black folks are getting the shortest end
May 31st 2005
12
      RE: Because Black folks are getting the shortest end
May 31st 2005
13
           RE: Because Black folks are getting the shortest end
May 31st 2005
15
           Consumer is king?
May 31st 2005
19
                RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 01st 2005
23
                     RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 01st 2005
24
                          RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 01st 2005
25
                               RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 01st 2005
26
                                    RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 01st 2005
27
                                         RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 01st 2005
30
                                              RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 02nd 2005
31
                                                   RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 02nd 2005
32
                                                        RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 02nd 2005
37
                                                             RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 03rd 2005
57
                                                                  RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 03rd 2005
58
                                                                       RE: Consumer is king?
Jun 05th 2005
60
           I agree
May 31st 2005
18
it's another form of blameshifting
May 31st 2005
14
i sorta got the vibe...
May 31st 2005
16
exactly.
May 31st 2005
17
Here's a site for you
May 31st 2005
20
reality...somehow?!?
Jun 01st 2005
21
nothing is wrong with it
Jun 01st 2005
28
      RE: nothing is wrong with it
Jun 01st 2005
29
           @ the end of the day though
Jun 02nd 2005
34
                RE: @ the end of the day though
Jun 02nd 2005
36
                RE: @ the end of the day though
Jun 02nd 2005
38
                seriously, u are in full "whining" mode right now
Jun 02nd 2005
39
                     RE: seriously, u are in full "whining" mode right now
Jun 02nd 2005
41
                     RE: seriously, u are in full "whining" mode right now
Jun 02nd 2005
44
                     RE: seriously, u are in full "whining" mode right now
Jun 02nd 2005
42
                you're right, black people wouldn't eat at McDonalds or drink Kool-Aid
Jun 02nd 2005
40
                     you are using terrible examples
Jun 02nd 2005
43
                          RE: you are using terrible examples
Jun 02nd 2005
45
                          who is"they"?
Jun 02nd 2005
48
                               RE: who is"they"?
Jun 02nd 2005
50
                                    so go respond to her
Jun 02nd 2005
52
                                    are you blind...
Jun 03rd 2005
56
                                         so why are you responding about it in me & suave's convo?
Jun 03rd 2005
59
                                    Nope
Jun 05th 2005
66
                          no, *these* are terrible examples:
Jun 02nd 2005
47
                               RE: no, *these* are terrible examples:
Jun 02nd 2005
49
                                    RE: no, *these* are terrible examples:
Jun 02nd 2005
51
                                         RE: no, *these* are terrible examples:
Jun 03rd 2005
54
                                              RE: no, *these* are terrible examples:
Jun 03rd 2005
55
                it ain't my argument, but i can't bite my lip
Jun 05th 2005
61
                     RE: it ain't my argument, but i can't bite my lip
Jun 05th 2005
63
                     RE: it ain't my argument, but i can't bite my lip
Jun 06th 2005
67
                          I'm reading
Jun 06th 2005
70
                               RE: I'm reading
Jun 07th 2005
72
                                    RE: I'm reading
Jun 07th 2005
74
                                         RE: I'm reading
Jun 10th 2005
75
                                              RE: I'm reading
Jun 10th 2005
76
                     you should have just bit that lip.
Jun 05th 2005
64
                          you're right....i should have
Jun 06th 2005
68
                               Good one
Jun 06th 2005
69
                               hopeless rant...
Jun 06th 2005
71
                               RE: you're right....i should have
Jun 07th 2005
73
RE: more on how marketers co-opt black culture...
Jun 02nd 2005
33
And there you have it.
Jun 02nd 2005
35
      My Two Cents...
Jun 02nd 2005
46
           Co-sign all of this.....
Jun 03rd 2005
53
           RE: My Two Cents...
Jun 05th 2005
62
           Co-sign on the delegation of personal responsibility!
Jun 05th 2005
65

cashone_again
Member since Jan 19th 2005
66 posts
Sun May-29-05 11:17 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
1. "love the liner note for missy elliot..."
In response to Reply # 0


          

thanks, you've destroyed the dreams that i've been building on for the last 10 years (no joke). i'm a double-major in sociology and marketing with a certificate in public relations - all of this is right up my alley. the words about the expansion of the black-influenced market on mainstream buying habits doesn't tell the half of it, cause when you include hispanic and asian business deriving from black markets, the numbers continue to grow.
you've got me wondering what the point is though. why should i embark on a career in sports marketing when 90% of the fan base is white (or at least all the people in the stands are). i can't land a job unless i can reach a white market through the auspices of an "inherently black" demand. nike is the epitome of the nexus to this trend (going into black neighborhoods to find the next trend to sell globally). looking at the big picture, do you think there's a way to buck the system and re-assess the trends? sociologically speaking, there's something bigger going on when whites, hispanics, and asians are more apt to buy something 'packaged w/ blackness,' than we are. the only thing that i see going on are grass roots ad campaigns, and my case in point is my mother (a 20+ year ceo who was considering contracting her company over to burrell comm. at one point). during a water conservation campaign she was running, the ad offered alternatives to benefit water conservation - specifically - (radio spot) voice of a black woman and her grand-daughter talking about planting african flowers in the garden because they used less water. this appealed to whites as well, it was exotic to them, and it reinforced african identity while presenting positive role models. so it can be done, and many markets can be reached at once (in a positive manner - not biting culture). the same can be done for asian and hispanic audiences. but the larger picture remains the same with such a grassroots campaign.
i guess my final question is: is it a question of black marketers becoming the voice of the black community, in an all-white boardroom? or is it (as your post dictates) that we're expected to choose between two images (hustler or affluent sell-out) while we're in the boardroom? obviously we have the best opportunity to re-define, shape and mould (sp?) black-ness, in the same vain as w.e.b. du bois during the harlem renaissance, but i think that we have to re-define blackness within ourselves first. the hustler image, which reaches young kids, and rebellious whites, has to be re-defined in terms of economics - rather than color - in the same way that james dean sold the 'rebel without a cause' image to young impoverished kids during his day. kids love the image cause they don't have shit, and they have no means of getting it (la-la land, it's a dream world). and the 'affluent happy black family' image sells well to our middle class, who've been working their ass off to get to middle management, only to get kicked out of middle class into a "working poor" category - they're sick of all the b.s. and wants to believe that there's a silver lining...somewhere. this image isn't far from the cleaver family image of the fifties. our images have to catch up with the reality of black life, (high divorce rates, people aren't trying to get out of the ghetto - they're trying to get away from their big ass family and move to another state, dealing with the corporate shit from your post - people with grad degrees struggling cause they're the only person of color in the office.) and reflect the full-spectrum of blackness. white media and marketing were forced to endure the same challenge.
but, i can say that we're light years ahead of hispanics. watch ten minutes of telemundo ads and tell me how unrealistic that shit is. it's almost like a minstrel show. white people in brown face selling a product to brown folks. no culture - nada.

'baseball took me from a second-class citizen to a second-class immortal."
-satchel paige

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
k_orr
Charter member
80197 posts
Mon May-30-05 11:01 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
2. "opt out"
In response to Reply # 1


  

          

There's money to be made apparently, lots of it.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
cashone_again
Member since Jan 19th 2005
66 posts
Tue May-31-05 01:19 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
8. "can't.."
In response to Reply # 2
Tue May-31-05 01:24 AM by cashone_again

          

i'm too competitive. plus there are too many folks out there like pulp hustler, who see this stuff going on and feel helpless. their hands are tied behind their backs and there isn't too much they can do about it. the ultimate would be pulling a crew of the most talented together to form an agency that knows this story has been told already, and the blueprint and foundation have been laid - we just have to utilize it in the black community.

--c.r.e.a.m.-- and i hate it.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
PulpHustler
Member since Oct 29th 2003
264 posts
Mon May-30-05 06:05 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
5. "RE: love the liner note for missy elliot..."
In response to Reply # 1


  

          

The Universal Hustle is pretty deep. I got friends at "targeted agencies" like burrell and uniworld, etc. and they deal with it 24/7... it's worse for black marketers at "general market" (traditionally white agencies)...

the biggest problem is that when people try to have real dialogue about it with clients and execs, they're usually told to shut up and get back to work or everyone plays dumb and pretends nothing is going on.

i'm not trying to be one of these victimhood-pushers... i think there's a way to market brands, sell stuff and entertain people without degrading various cultures or genders or races in the process. i just want people to know what they're getting into so they can see where the problems are and think about how to fix them along the way.

And yeah a lot of that stuff on Telemundo and Univsion is an absolute sin. I've got friends that work for hispanic agencies too... the stories they tell are just as sad.

and K_orr--i totally appreciate the the luv... i'll try to post some mor excerpt in here--short ones and see if people feel like talking about some of the stuff that goes on the business world, specifically marketing and advertising industry that they may not know about.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
cashone_again
Member since Jan 19th 2005
66 posts
Tue May-31-05 02:14 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
9. "minority marketers and advertisers everywhere feel like they're getting ..."
In response to Reply # 5


          


>the biggest problem is that when people try to have real
>dialogue about it with clients and execs, they're usually told
>to shut up and get back to work or everyone plays dumb and
>pretends nothing is going on.

that's corporate culture. no creativity in a stifling working environment. nobody's willing to breach social norms and mores - everybody believes in "evolutionary" social progression. we need more radicals in the corporate world or diverse companies without hierarchical command.

>i'm not trying to be one of these victimhood-pushers... i
>think there's a way to market brands, sell stuff and entertain
>people without degrading various cultures or genders or races
>in the process. i just want people to know what they're
>getting into so they can see where the problems are and think
>about how to fix them along the way.

there are a couple of things you should check out. first, a book called "Where the Girls Are." it may seem a little off topic, but it's a critical feminist analysis of media and marketing from the 50's to present day. its worth a skim, at the least. women faced (face) parallel issues, and throughout the book - mainstream media's attempts to reach the general market (or target in the case of the female minority) was always about ten years behind reality. there may be psychological reasons (emotional ties to the 20/20 vision that we all have of our past) but she talks about the fight to increase modernity in advertising, marketing and media. truthfully, i think black media is 20 or 30 years behind, cause we're not gonna see a black will & grace for another couple of decades,

second is the work of simmel and mannheim (both sociologists). simmel's work was done in the early 1900's. i'm not trying to school you, but check out the swipe - this is why i've got a double-major (and it's gonna take me four more years to get out of school : )

"in simmel's view, people produce culture, but because of their ability to reify social reality, the cultural world and the social world come to have lives of their own, lives that come increasingly to dominate the actors who created, and daily re-create, them. although people always retain the capacity to create and re-create culture, the long-term trend of history is for culture to exert a more and more coercive force on the actor... First, its absolute size grows with increasing modernization... Second, the number of different components of the cultural realm also grows... Finally, and perhaps most important, the various elements of the cultural world become more and more intwined in an ever more powerful, self-contained world that is increasingly beyond the control of the actors. simmel was impressed - if not depressed - by the bewildering number and variety of human products which in the contemporary world surround and unceasingly impinge upon the individual."

if this isn't the same thing that guru and krs-one said about hip-hop being a culture (rhyme & reason - documentary), and mos def's reference to people talking about hip-hop being some giant that lives in the forest when they ask him about the state of hip-hop, and he replies - 'we are hip-hop.' i don't know what is. the image that's been sold as a representation of black culture has become a beast that feeds upon itself.

anyways, i'll check out your book. i've got a lot to learn before i step onto the battlefield.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

k_orr
Charter member
80197 posts
Mon May-30-05 11:01 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
3. "dope article"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

I'ma repost it in general.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

k_orr
Charter member
80197 posts
Mon May-30-05 12:23 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
4. "dawg, I didn't know this was your book"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

Mayn, I'm copping a copy ASAP.

I'll prolly eat ramen for 2 weeks, but something's are more important.

The legal equivalent of this, from what I understand is way deeper.

But the closest analogue is how attorneys pick juries for various trials. I.E, you don't pick black jurors for particular cases because by virtue of them being black.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
rambunctious
Charter member
13374 posts
Wed Jun-01-05 01:19 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
22. "RE: dawg, I didn't know this was your book"
In response to Reply # 4


          


>The legal equivalent of this, from what I understand is way
>deeper.
>
>But the closest analogue is how attorneys pick juries for
>various trials. I.E, you don't pick black jurors for
>particular cases because by virtue of them being black.


i'd like to hear your thoughts on that.
can you make a post one day about that?




the legendary sigs:
___________________

That nigga couldn't even direct fries into the deep fryer at McDonalds so we can count fast food out of the picture.(c) paps smear on the director of house of the dead

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

DarkStar
Charter member
20015 posts
Mon May-30-05 09:09 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
6. "All I DO is shit on urban marketing goons."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

Maybe K_orr's reposting this elsewhere can frame MY message a little better.

________________________________________
...white feather wings.

http://thelastdaysofrussell.bandcamp.com (soon - "Election Day on Monster Island")

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

YourDrunkUncle
Member since Dec 27th 2003
373 posts
Mon May-30-05 09:32 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
7. "Just added your book to my wish list on Amazon"
In response to Reply # 0


          

I'll definitely add it to my shopping cart the next time I place an order.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Tue May-31-05 07:49 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
10. "could someone.."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

explain to me why mrketing a product to a specific group of people is bad? isnt that what all companies do?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Tue May-31-05 08:59 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
11. "Because Black folks are getting the shortest end"
In response to Reply # 10


  

          

..again. See here:

"But this would actually be okay except for a couple key factors:

One: Annually, Blacks spend an estimated $680 billion on products and services supporting mainly non-black-owned businesses; and by 2008, that number is expected to hit $921 billion.(1) Two: Because of mainstream America’s appetite for ethnic culture, most black media outlets and programming reaches far more white and mainstream consumers than general market analysts ever admit to. (Let’s be real: If you just took the number of mainstreamers who watch BET, read “urban” mags and consume Black music, fashion, and entertainment properties you could start your own small country; round up non-black folks who do the same on a global scale and you could colonize the moon.) So while profiting off the Black community from all sides, mainstream businesses continue to screw their Black counterparts out of billions of dollars in deserved revenues and opportunities, not to mention respect. (And of course it’s all perfectly legal, even ethical.)"

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Tue May-31-05 12:39 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
12. "RE: Because Black folks are getting the shortest end"
In response to Reply # 11


  

          

again...i dont see why any of this is bad. competition and all...

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
PulpHustler
Member since Oct 29th 2003
264 posts
Tue May-31-05 12:58 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
13. "RE: Because Black folks are getting the shortest end"
In response to Reply # 12


  

          

there's nothing wrong with marketing products to specific groups provided the products are safe, etc. my problem isn't marketing, but how and why we market...

there's a difference between "targeting" black conusmers and serviing black consumers. there's a difference between speaking to black consumers usually cultural cues and understanding cultural differences and simply manipulating people's identities for some perverse sense of corporate good.

as much as I hate the global monster that NIKE has become, i think they've been fairly respectful of black people as far as marketing and advertising goes. i haven't seen many "stereotypical" images come out of there lately... then again i could be missing something.

but again, marketing is fine; how most companies go about it isn't.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Tue May-31-05 03:25 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
15. "RE: Because Black folks are getting the shortest end"
In response to Reply # 13


  

          

well, im no expert, but advertising is basically making a product as recognizable as possible and sometimes stereotypes just work best. thankfully we live in america where the consumer is king. black people have a lot of spending power so with the right information many things can change.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Tue May-31-05 05:52 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
19. "Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 15


  

          

"If we understand the mechanisms and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing it," Bernays wrote in his book Propaganda. He also coined the term "engineering of consent" to describe his technique for controlling the masses via public relations/marketing.

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society," Bernays argued. "Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. . . . In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons . . . who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind."

In PR-land the consumers are sheep that need to be sheperded. The various marketing campaigns over the years prove this. PR documents from the past provides plenty of proof of unethical marketing, from the way American tobacco tycoons made it socially acceptable for women to smoke to the way other corporations persuaded people to pave over their landscape and switch to beer as the "beverage of moderation." The companies involved aren't likely to release their records of those campaigns, assuming they still exist. But thanks to propagandists such as Edward Bernays who saved every scrap of paper he sent out or took in folks can see just how policies were made and how, in many cases, they were founded on deception.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Wed Jun-01-05 04:44 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
23. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 19


  

          

There is no more doubt that advertisement has changed our daily landscape. Everywhere we look and read, we get saturated with ads competing for attention, sometimes on different mediums. That much is obvious. Where there is disagreement is on how good it is.

Ads have a singular advantage, in that they make advertisers pay instead of consumers. In essence, the advertiser becomes the consumer in an indirect way. This relieves the consumer of part of all the burden of paying for the product. An extreme example of this would be most television channels. While television advertisements are annoying as a general principle, not everyone wants to pay instead.

The opponents of the "ad culture", "anti-ad activists" we might say, would rather fight against this tendency. But we have to actually be convinced that it's worth being a bit poorer for their cause. There are usually three arguments used to accomplish such a task :

1. Anti-corporatism. Some ads may be considered to be fraudulent, and it can also be argued that advertising gives too much power to corporations in terms of how to manage a given product. This argument has some merits. However, it is usually assumed that claims of fraud of power must be taken as gospel. Anti-ad activists must demonstrate such problems on a case-by-case basis before we can grant them credibility.

2. Culture jamming and anti-consumerism. One may propose that ads are distorting the culture towards material needs. It is uncertain why this is a bad thing. While consumerism does damage some people's situations in the long run, surely fulfilling material needs is not bad as a general rule. Once again, it must be demonstrated that specific problems are inherent to the consumption of certain goods.

3. Control of the public. The nature of advertising is to change minds. This always carries with it certain risks of memetic conditioning. As such, it may seem like a danger to free will and social cohesion in general.



This last point is more complex than it seems. Indeed, it brings into light the whole science of memetics - what makes some memes convincing and others unsuccessful. Superficially, it may seem that there is no place for free will in the equation. But this is not true : the mind is always active in processing information from the senses and past information, and we cannot arrive at a proper understanding without this fact.

The proper question, I propose, should not be "should we let ads continue to control us ?", but rather "what makes people suggestible, and some not ?". I would say that this is in no small part due to one's epistemic beliefs. Someone who accepts readily the beliefs of the people and the media surrounding him, will be more likely to "buy" into marketing rhetoric. Someone who is more rational would be more likely to see advertising information thru a more objective light.

Ads exist because they profit, and they profit because people buy their premises. Yet they do not provide much information, but rather concentrate on the superficial. Why this situation exists is a psychological and memetic question, not a social question.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Wed Jun-01-05 08:15 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
24. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 23


  

          

>There is no more doubt that advertisement has changed our
>daily landscape. Everywhere we look and read, we get saturated
>with ads competing for attention, sometimes on different
>mediums. That much is obvious. Where there is disagreement is
>on how good it is.

Well films such as Super Size Me make it all too clear how ads are usually not pro-consumer. The campaign to make people consume more often has disastrous results and food is just one of several products that are pushed via ads. It usually has less to do with what a consumer wants and more to do with the product...often (not always) based on corporate interests.

For example, take the United Fruit Co. Prior to 1870, bananas were unknown in the United States. The first bananas were imported to the U.S. in 1870 and just 28 years later, Americans in the U.S. were consuming over 16 million bunches a year. If you take a look at the ads of the time, several print ads were placed all over the U.S. persuading Americans to eat bananas. There is no disputing the health benefits of eating bananas but it was not consumer demand that drove Minor Keith to construct a railroad in Costa Rica in 1871. His project cost hundreds of lives, including the lives of his family. Keith was a guy who would do anything to advance his own interests. While Keith was building the railroad in Costa Rica he was also executing a much bigger plan. As construction progressed, he planted bananas on the land easements to either side of the tracks. The bananas flourished and with the railroad completed it was possible to economically transport the bananas to eager markets in the United States and Europe.

This same scenario applies to tobacco and later food, including fast food, junk food. PR people took some of the same methods used during the 1870s to push bananas on the public, not because they were good for them but because an entreprenuer wanted to do business in South America. For more info check out: http://www.mayaparadise.com/ufc1e.htm

Edward Bernays was at the forefront of this kind of marketing:

"Bernays liked to cultivate an image as a supporter of feminism and other liberating ideas, but his work on behalf of the United Fruit Company had consequences just as evil and terrifying as if he'd worked directly for the Nazis. The Father of Spin sheds new and important light on the extent to which the Bernays' propaganda campaign for the United Fruit Company (today's United Brands) led directly to the CIA's overthrow of the elected government of Guatemala.

The term "banana republic" actually originated in reference to United Fruit's domination of corrupt governments in Guatemala and other Central American countries. The company brutally exploited virtual slave labor in order to produce cheap bananas for the lucrative U.S. market. When a mildly reformist Guatemala government attempted to reign in the company's power, Bernays whipped up media and political sentiment against it in the commie-crazed 1950s." - from http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/1999Q2/bernays.html

So we go from eating bananas to anti-communism. We can see, in the case, how PR was used not only to persuade consumers to eat bananas but also to support the building of an empire and this idea spread. Many (not all) of the larger corporations that exist today were inspired by the guys who built the UFCO empire. Beginning at around the turn of the century, Americans saw the rise of the mass media and "its role in creating a "virtual public" which was "defined increasingly by its vulnerable condition of isolation and spectatorship. Readers of mass-circulation newspapers and magazines were witnesses to society, no longer within the public square, but from the sanctuary of their parlors." These "webs of communications" became "modern pipelines of persuasion," exploited first by Progressive reformers, then by corporate and government propagandists with the goal of managing an increasingly restive public." - from PR!

>The proper question, I propose, should not be "should we let
>ads continue to control us ?", but rather "what makes people
>suggestible, and some not ?". I would say that this is in no
>small part due to one's epistemic beliefs. Someone who accepts
>readily the beliefs of the people and the media surrounding
>him, will be more likely to "buy" into marketing rhetoric.
>Someone who is more rational would be more likely to see
>advertising information thru a more objective light.

So what is the education or environs that promotes such rational thinking?

>Ads exist because they profit, and they profit because people
>buy their premises. Yet they do not provide much information,
>but rather concentrate on the superficial. Why this situation
>exists is a psychological and memetic question, not a social
>question.

But it really is a social issue.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Wed Jun-01-05 08:44 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
25. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 24


  

          

so people are sheep who will buy anything they see on tv? you dont seem to believe everything you see on tv, so what excludes you from the sheep who buy up everything they see? and how can you prevent people from selling things to other people even if these things may be 'bad' for them. i.e. fast food, cigerettes. in a free country you cannot control people's buying habits, that is why marketing exists!

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                    
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Wed Jun-01-05 10:40 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
26. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 25
Wed Jun-01-05 10:50 AM by Nettrice

  

          

>so people are sheep who will buy anything they see on tv?

I know so many people who get suckered into buying a multitude useless things that pass before their eyes in a blink of a second, repetitively over the course of a day or longer. And it's not just TV...Internet sites & pop-ups, print, radio, billboards, mail circulars, etc.-- all these images & messages take full advantange of rapid cognition but also the American way of jumping to a series of conclusions based on "standards". We have to have the same "nice" car as our neighbor even though we can walk to work, school, or the local grocery store a few blocks away. Sure, for some, a car provides a certain amount of freedom but most folks also want to fit in socially. It's part of a cycle that often begins with a campaign in a corporate board room and, yes, some of these have hidden agendas (such as UFCO).

Again:

"In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons . . . who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind."

In today's Metro there is a article about tobacco firms who studied methods to hook women. "Researchers say they tried to make tasty, stylish cigarettes...they modified their cigarette products to appeal to women." A review of 7 million documents show that weight loss and stress relief were key ways for these companies to sell to women. Perhaps, as a result, while international smoking rates are declining among men they are expected to increase with women. Somewhere in all this is a question of ethics.

>you
>dont seem to believe everything you see on tv, so what
>excludes you from the sheep who buy up everything they see?

I am not excluded but I am more media literate than many of the folks in my circle (family, friends, etc.). In my training (media literacy) I've become better able to decipher the messages I receive from TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, books, billboards, signs, packaging and marketing materials, video games, and the Internet. I've been taught how to analyze, evaluate (and produce) media...even at the blink of an eye. Those 2-3 seconds are critical...we receive TV images at 30 frames per second!

Every day I make an effort to cut down on the amount of time I spend looking at ads. I have lots of ways to do this. I can't avoid these messages but I can make a conscious effort to transmute the pollution through the power of intention. I don't watch much commercial TV or TV programming with ads...and if I do I often get up or change the channel when the commercials come on. My sister does the same thing when she's driving and listening to her radio. I use pop-up blockers. Why spend the time? I think it's worth the effort at the end of the day.

>and how can you prevent people from selling things to other
>people even if these things may be 'bad' for them. i.e. fast
>food, cigerettes. in a free country you cannot control
>people's buying habits, that is why marketing exists!

Media literacy training/education is a start. Understand that it is not my purpose to encourage people to turn off the TVs and radios. I think there can be good media but there's a lot of bad media. I am Libra and its all about balance.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                        
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Wed Jun-01-05 03:22 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
27. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 26


  

          

>>so people are sheep who will buy anything they see on tv?
>
>I know so many people who get suckered into buying a multitude
>useless things that pass before their eyes in a blink of a
>second, repetitively over the course of a day or longer. And
>it's not just TV...Internet sites & pop-ups, print, radio,
>billboards, mail circulars, etc.-- all these images & messages
>take full advantange of rapid cognition but also the American
>way of jumping to a series of conclusions based on
>"standards". We have to have the same "nice" car as our
>neighbor even though we can walk to work, school, or the local
>grocery store a few blocks away. Sure, for some, a car
>provides a certain amount of freedom but most folks also want
>to fit in socially. It's part of a cycle that often begins
>with a campaign in a corporate board room and, yes, some of
>these have hidden agendas (such as UFCO).

so people buy things they see advertised...remind me again what is wrong with this?


>
>Again:
>
>"In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere
>of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical
>thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of
>persons . . . who understand the mental processes and social
>patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which
>control the public mind."

yet you dont see to be effected by these powers...hrm...
>
>In today's Metro there is a article about tobacco firms who
>studied methods to hook women. "Researchers say they tried to
>make tasty, stylish cigarettes...they modified their cigarette
>products to appeal to women." A review of 7 million documents
>show that weight loss and stress relief were key ways for
>these companies to sell to women. Perhaps, as a result, while
>international smoking rates are declining among men they are
>expected to increase with women. Somewhere in all this is a
>question of ethics.

so..they are in the business of making money. they happen to sell a product that isnt healthy. big deal. you make it sound like none of this is the person who starts smokings fault.
>
>>you
>>dont seem to believe everything you see on tv, so what
>>excludes you from the sheep who buy up everything they see?
>
>I am not excluded but I am more media literate than many of
>the folks in my circle (family, friends, etc.). In my
>training (media literacy) I've become better able to decipher
>the messages I receive from TV, radio, newspapers, magazines,
>books, billboards, signs, packaging and marketing materials,
>video games, and the Internet. I've been taught how to
>analyze, evaluate (and produce) media...even at the blink of
>an eye. Those 2-3 seconds are critical...we receive TV images
>at 30 frames per second!
>
>Every day I make an effort to cut down on the amount of time I
>spend looking at ads. I have lots of ways to do this. I
>can't avoid these messages but I can make a conscious effort
>to transmute the pollution through the power of intention. I
>don't watch much commercial TV or TV programming with
>ads...and if I do I often get up or change the channel when
>the commercials come on. My sister does the same thing when
>she's driving and listening to her radio. I use pop-up
>blockers. Why spend the time? I think it's worth the effort
>at the end of the day.

so education is the key in combating the evil marketers who mold society they way they see fit. yet you still put the blame on the marketers and not the people. amazing.
>
>>and how can you prevent people from selling things to other
>>people even if these things may be 'bad' for them. i.e. fast
>>food, cigerettes. in a free country you cannot control
>>people's buying habits, that is why marketing exists!
>
>Media literacy training/education is a start. Understand that
>it is not my purpose to encourage people to turn off the TVs
>and radios. I think there can be good media but there's a lot
>of bad media. I am Libra and its all about balance.

i guess i find it futile to try and eliminate or reduce the amount of what yo ucall 'bad media.' this form of media will always exist as long as it is profitable. i think educaiton is the best way if you are some crazy insane person who has to buy everything they are offered.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                            
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Wed Jun-01-05 08:25 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
30. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 27


  

          

>so people buy things they see advertised...remind me again
>what is wrong with this?

Let me put it this way, there is nothing wrong with advertising a product but when the intention is unethical I take issue with it. People are not hatched from eggs fully formed and able to decipher the difference between something that is less beneficial to them vs something benefits them or people in their family or community. I mean this is okayactivist not okaycapitalist, meaning some (not all) of the people who i discuss these topics have involvement in action to bring about change, be it social, political, environmental, or other change. I'm saying that the media is leaning too much in one direction, serving corporate interests above all else.

>yet you dont see to be effected by these powers...hrm...

In college I used to confront my peers about a similar issue because they came to the BSU meetings and went over the corner store to buy 40 ozs afterwards. Time after time someone would say to me, "But that's you. You can't compare yourself to other people." It used to make me angry but as I got older I could see that I was on a different path than some of my closest friends. I am an educator and media is what I specialize in. To me it's important to stay vigilant about the messages and intentions because I care about Black people and communities. In a way, I've always been about equity...and media rights.

>so education is the key in combating the evil marketers who
>mold society they way they see fit. yet you still put the
>blame on the marketers and not the people. amazing.

Question: Who do you think is behind a good deal of the marketing that targets young Black people? How many of these young people are media literate?

Media literate individuals are active consumers of media...versus passive consumers who are impulsive and easily controlled. This matters to me.

Final question: Where do these young people get educated to become media literate?

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                                
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 05:02 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
31. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 30


  

          

so you are saying that because black people (overall) are not media literate, marketing companies use unethical means to brainwash this group into buying things? what do you mean by unethical?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                                    
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 08:09 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
32. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 31


  

          

>so you are saying that because black people (overall) are not
>media literate, marketing companies use unethical means to
>brainwash this group into buying things?

My question to you is: Who do you think is behind a good deal of the marketing that targets young Black people? How many of these young people are media literate? and

Where do these young people get educated to become media literate?

Overall, people are not media literate because media literacy is still not offered as part of most Americans' core education. It is my opinion that Black folks still get the "shorter end of the stick" and this means the stakes are much higher. I do not believe that victimhood is predetermined but I do believe it is conditioned. I believe that a healthy psyche and education creates more active consumers of media.

>what do you mean by
>unethical?

Well I think that ethics are not just about being good or right (morals).

"Assumptions about ethical underpinnings of human behaviour are reflected in every social science, including: anthropology because of the complexities involved in relating one culture to another, economics because of its role in the distribution of scarce resources, in political science because of its role in allocating power, in sociology because of its roots in the dynamics of groups, in law because of its role in codifying ethical constructs like mercy and punishment, in criminology because of its role in rewarding ethical behaviour and discouraging unethical behaviour, in psychology because of its role in defining, understanding, and treating unethical behaviour." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical

The environment that many of us learn and grow in is often not optimal to sustainability and health, esp. of our (Black) communities. Rather than see this as a deficit (for Black folks) I am putting the blame EQUALLY on the people who sit in the corporate board rooms coming up with the PR campaigns. Why? Because of colonialism, slavery, economics, power, etc. Economics distributes wealth (not $$$) to a few, politics allocates power to a few, society maintains the status quo, and law enforces it. As a result, people with wealth and power, links to politics and law make the key decisions that control the way media is seen and heard in this country (and others). Nowadays people let some unethical behaviors such as dishonesty go unpunished because it maintains this status quo and I have take issue with that.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                                        
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 12:29 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
37. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 32


  

          

i think marketers spend 1 week in the ghetto and say hey, we can adapt our marketing campaign to reach this group of people. marketers are reaching out to this group. you say they are taking advantage of them, but it looks to me that in the end consumers actually like what they buy...so...im not sure where your arguement against marketing companies comes from.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                                            
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Fri Jun-03-05 04:04 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
57. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 37


  

          

>...so...im not sure
>where your arguement against marketing companies comes from.

Oh well. There's a clear history,,,from 1870 (and before) to the present. Also, you never really addressed my questions.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                                                
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Fri Jun-03-05 04:29 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
58. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 57


  

          

>>...so...im not sure
>>where your arguement against marketing companies comes from.
>
>
>Oh well. There's a clear history,,,from 1870 (and before) to
>the present. Also, you never really addressed my questions.
>

here are your questions...

-'My question to you is: Who do you think is behind a good deal of the marketing that targets young Black people? How many of these young people are media literate? and

i know you want me to answer 'white people are behind a good deal of marketing' but im not gonna say that. you see, a lot of different people work for marketing companies and i would argue that the vast majority of black people in marketing perpetuate the black stereotype you see on tv beause they know it works.

i dont think many of the black kids are media literate by your definition. i think every person is armed with common sense when it comes to hearing/seeing/reading media.

-Where do these young people get educated to become media literate?'

this is a leading quesiton. you want me to say 'school' and then you can come back and tell me that that media literacy isnt offered in schools blah blah blah. if you really think a class in media literacy will somehow curb people's materialism im afraid you are mistaken. because afterall this is about materialism. buying to much. spending beyond one's means. if young black people didnt overspend we wouldnt be having this conversation.





  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                                                    
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Sun Jun-05-05 12:02 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
60. "RE: Consumer is king?"
In response to Reply # 58


  

          

>i know you want me to answer 'white people are behind a good
>deal of marketing'

How do you know this? I stated some historical info about the nature of marketing/PR in the U.S. and asked you to tell me what you think about it. I will assert that just because something "works" does not make it ethical or encourage critical thinking/active consumers. The American media reminds me of Plato's cave where the people who are untutored in the "Theory of Forms" (media literacy) are like prisoners chained in a cave, unable to turn their heads. All they can see is the wall of the cave. Behind them burns a fire. Between the fire and the prisoners there is a parapet, along which puppeteers can walk. The puppeteers, who are behind the prisoners, hold up puppets that cast shadows on the wall of the cave. The prisoners are unable to see these puppets, the real objects, that pass behind them. What the prisoners see and hear are shadows and echoes cast by objects that they do not see.

Such prisoners would mistake appearance for reality. They would think the things they see on the wall (the shadows) were real; they would know nothing of the real causes of the shadows.

>i dont think many of the black kids are media literate by your
>definition. i think every person is armed with common sense
>when it comes to hearing/seeing/reading media.

Really? In America, common sense or conventional wisdom that has mass acceptance is usually contrived, meaning somebody paid for it. My point is that it does not matter if the puppeteers are white or Black because they are not the ones who sit in in the board rooms.

>-Where do these young people get educated to become media
>literate?'
>
>this is a leading quesiton. you want me to say 'school' and
>then you can come back and tell me that that media literacy
>isnt offered in schools blah blah blah. if you really think a
>class in media literacy will somehow curb people's materialism
>im afraid you are mistaken.

I disagree. That's why I mentioned "core education". Teaching people how to think critically about media takes more than one class or year. Black youth are not the only ones overspending...the stats still show that the field is not level so while we all get the same messages via the media only some truly benefit. This is especially so for many Black youth at or below the line (low and moderate income)

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Tue May-31-05 05:42 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
18. "I agree"
In response to Reply # 13


  

          

>but again, marketing is fine; how most companies go about it
>isn't.

In ethical marketing the product is designed to appeal to certain (moral or social) standards. Nowadays corporations are tossing the ethics out the window in order to make a buck and that's a big problem.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
suave_bro
Member since Nov 19th 2002
9433 posts
Tue May-31-05 01:48 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
14. "it's another form of blameshifting"
In response to Reply # 10
Tue May-31-05 01:54 PM by suave_bro

          

there are no fathers in the homes, black folks are having more and more children at younger ages, there has been a TOTAL breakdown of the black family in this country and we are too afraid to address that issue out of embarrassment and denial.

now what u have here to two different approaches to this problem and both are counterproductive. one group is arguing that the media be our parents and providers. lil tremaine's father is a player and is nowhere around and his momma is out working 2 jobs, so now the TV should be the parent. then there is group 2 who doesn't necessarily feel that the media should be the black communities daddy, but should be more "understanding" and be "caring" to the black "situation"...

again, none of these groups are preaching personal responsibility or even TRYING to get the root of these problems out of fear of being considered race traitors and sellouts...also, none of these groups are dumb enough to REALLY challenge the media with their "philosophies" because deep down (WAAAAAAAAY DOWN) they know its bullshit. they know that we can do alot better and to literally expect for the media to raise our children is absurd.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Tue May-31-05 03:30 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
16. "i sorta got the vibe..."
In response to Reply # 14


  

          

that this article was blaming marketing companies for how the black community spends its money.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
suave_bro
Member since Nov 19th 2002
9433 posts
Tue May-31-05 05:12 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
17. "exactly."
In response to Reply # 16


          

its all "the machine" @ work against black people, that is how we look @ everything and its rediculous. it's just smart business.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Tue May-31-05 05:54 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
20. "Here's a site for you"
In response to Reply # 14


  

          

Enjoy!

http://www.hotghettomess.com

Ample proof that Black people are going to hell in a handbasket. Tsk, tsk.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
cashone_again
Member since Jan 19th 2005
66 posts
Wed Jun-01-05 12:49 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
21. "reality...somehow?!?"
In response to Reply # 14


          

>there are no fathers in the homes

forget the fathers. i'm sorry, with as many black men that abandoned their families during our generation, and all the 'dear mama' songs that have been put out on cd's by artists - its time to refocus on women - rather than trying to focus on getting men back in to the home.

make their lives easier, 'cause their doing it on their own. "employed women do about two-thirds as much housework and child-care as their non-employed sisters. (non-employed women do approximately 56 hours of housework a week - that's two full-time jobs for the employed) - Juliet Schor - The Overworked American. imagine working 60 hours a week as middle-management, and only getting paid for 40, then coming home to clean up after your kids. and if you have a husband - you've got to clean up after him too. and in the same way that if you don't dress like a thug - you aren't black; women are expected to keep the house clean, or else they aren't women.

Businesses have capitalized on women in the same manner. "Businesses subjected women to a barrage of advertising and social pressure, in order to sell more products. Housework was functional for capitalism. Lysol warned that even 'doorknobs threaten ...with disease.' Grapenuts told mothers that breakfast cereal would determine the course of their child's life...Corporate marketing and the home economics movement converged...They helped spread the message that a woman who did not purchase the growing array of consumer goods was jeopardizing her family and missing out on the best life had to offer." Juliet Schor - The Overworked American

>and to literally expect for the
>media to raise our children is absurd.

kids are already raised by the tv. i had two parents in the home, they did well for themselves (economically) - and i was raised by the television. it didn't ruin me, i turned out alright (good value system laid down by my p's) and most people do - tv isn't the devil. But there was a time in my life that i can look back on and see that i was an mtv/bet kid. my style of dress, my mannerisms, the dirt i was getting into, everything. looking back on it, it's like damn what happened there.
i've worked with underprivileged kids, and their parents know that the safest place for them is at home in front of the t.v. when the parents are out working two jobs to make ends meet. it's a risk they have to take to put food on the table.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
k_orr
Charter member
80197 posts
Wed Jun-01-05 06:57 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
28. "nothing is wrong with it"
In response to Reply # 10


  

          

Methinks you're purposely avoiding the main brunt of the essay.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
PulpHustler
Member since Oct 29th 2003
264 posts
Wed Jun-01-05 07:44 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
29. "RE: nothing is wrong with it"
In response to Reply # 28


  

          

I appreciate everyone here for reading the excerpt... it's a short essay from a KNOCK THE HUSTLE chapter entitled "universal hustle" which looks at black and ethnic marketing professionals and consumers and related cultural artfoms are maniupulated for profit and power. It's the result of my 13 years in the advertising and marketing industries working on clients ranging from Mercedes Benz, AT&T, Cingular Wireless, McDonalds, Showtime Networks, Wrigley's Gum and countless others.

It's also the result of a lot of deep throat-style interviews with clients and colleagues with generations' worth of industry experience who let me write their experiences under the vow that i'd never reveal their names because they'd get blackballed and sued.
(in the marketing and ad fields many professionals are required to sign confidentiality agreements that prevent them from talking to the press or working for competing clients for the duration of their employment. I signed one myself once or twice, but screw it. I saw way too much dirt to keep quiet anymore.)


Now to clarify one other thing: For those who commented that this seems like "victimhood/blame the white man" pathology, you're obviously entitled to your opinions, just keep one thing in mind:
These are facts.

When you watch TV and see black folks singing and dancing and rapping for chicken products, it's because the client (who is usually white) and the creators of the ad (who are often white or black but more concerned with getting paid) have decided to portray black folks in that light. When you watch commercials were the people of color are consistently fair-skinned and "mainstream-looking" that's the result of people intentionally perpetuating a specific agenda of the lighter you are (the closer to "white" you are) the more acceptable you are... it's called color casting and the ad world haas been doing it for generations, long before Hollywood, in fact.

I could go on, but the point is, there is no victimhood in me. I'm simply pointing out facts and truths that many people aren't privy to and showing how these tactics affect all of us.

My hope isn't that people say, "let's sue the ad world/let's march on the white man". my hope is that people start paying attention to what's really going on as it relates to marketing, consumerism and culture and decide to stand up to it and protect themselves from the negative aspects of it.

but then again, maybe i'm just a victim...

if you're interested in more excerpts, hit www.knockthehustle.com--you can download a few files that i put up and read more of the book. the files are pretty small.

I'll try and post a few more in here just to share more stuff that i've seen. y'all'd be surprise at what folks of all colors do when they're behind closed doors trying to figure out how to sell stuff.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
suave_bro
Member since Nov 19th 2002
9433 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 10:15 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
34. "@ the end of the day though"
In response to Reply # 29


          

black folks enjoy the same stuff you claim is racist stereotyping. burger king having black folks dance and rap, the bulk of black america sees no problem with it, when every television show has us dancing and entertaining, the bulk of black folks have no problem with it...sure, we might look @ it and say shit like "oh! they got us cooning! oh! they are stereotyping!" but thats not how your average everyday black person thinks...

and on the flipside, look @ what happened to "City of Angels" back in 2000. a serious black hospital drama that couldnt compete with the tom niggery on UPN and WB. black folks flocked to go see "mad black woman" and "SOUL PLANE" while mario van peebles "Badaaaaaaass" damn near went straight to video...you are holding black people to too high a set of standards man. its 2005, have you ever slowed up long enough to ask if black folks ENJOY these stereotypes? i know we do. to market something to black folks u have to ghetto-ize it, throw some hip hop flava up in dea', have em shakin' and gettin' krunk in the shows/commercials, have a black woman shake her fat ass in the twix commercial, have some negroes in braids using ebonics in a mcdonalds commercial...IT WORKS!!

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 12:25 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
36. "RE: @ the end of the day though"
In response to Reply # 34


  

          

exactly. would these products sell to black people if these stereotypes were not used as effectively in ads? also, youve got conflicting interests. take that mcdonalds chicken commercial a while back where a black lady use a little black slang 'ebonix' when she ate her chicken. some black people thought it was racist because it stereotyped black people. but then you have a group of people who think ebonix should be an acceptable form of communication and that the white man is shitting on it! what would these people think about that ad? my brain is going to explode one of these days figuring out all these okayactivists.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
k_orr
Charter member
80197 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 01:25 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
38. "RE: @ the end of the day though"
In response to Reply # 36


  

          

>exactly. would these products sell to black people if these
>stereotypes were not used as effectively in ads? also, youve
>got conflicting interests. take that mcdonalds chicken
>commercial a while back where a black lady use a little black
>slang 'ebonix' when she ate her chicken. some black people
>thought it was racist because it stereotyped black people. but
>then you have a group of people who think ebonix should be an
>acceptable form of communication and that the white man is
>shitting on it! what would these people think about that ad?
>my brain is going to explode one of these days figuring out
>all these okayactivists.

The problem that you and Suave Bro are having, is that you don't realize that black people are not monolithic.

I guess that comes from looking @ black issues from white eyes, and thinking that there can only be 1 way to look at it.

As to Suave, the sheer fact that Bill Cosby's attitude towards lots of issues in black american life is shared by nearly a majority of black folks, should tell us all that it's very difficult to figure out what black people are about - and that it;s silly to generalize in this context.

The article however goes out of its way to show how much white industry, in this case advertising, is unwilling to acknowledge the diversity of black, insists on obvious (ie stereotypical black cues), and only if it's consistent with a white understanding of blackness.

But this level of obviousness seems to escape the both of you.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
suave_bro
Member since Nov 19th 2002
9433 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 01:41 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
39. "seriously, u are in full &quot;whining&quot; mode right now"
In response to Reply # 38
Thu Jun-02-05 02:00 PM by suave_bro

          

>The problem that you and Suave Bro are having, is that you
>don't realize that black people are not monolithic.

- see there you all go again puting peoples opinions on a message board before real world events - if what you just typed out is true, it would reflect in the market. allow me to break it down for you in the most simple way i know how...if u put 20 black folks in a room and 17 of them want to see UPN, SoulPlane, listen to ying yang twinz and lil john and the other 3 want to watch Hotel Rwanda, listen to BlackStar and dead prez, want to go to the poetry sessions and protest and march etc., those 3 are simply SOL when it comes to the media! what station/media outlet can survive by simply catering to 4% of a population?


>I guess that comes from looking @ black issues from white
>eyes, and thinking that there can only be 1 way to look at
>it.

- once again, that is simply your frustration talking - hell, you wouldnt be debating anything if what we were saying wasn't true.

>As to Suave, the sheer fact that Bill Cosby's attitude towards
>lots of issues in black american life is shared by nearly a
>majority of black folks, should tell us all that it's very
>difficult to figure out what black people are about - and that
>it;s silly to generalize in this context.

- well an overwhelming majority of black folks that agree with cosby are OLDER than my generation. anybody that knows anything about the media knows that it has to cater to the group that spends/GENERATES the most money and thats teenagers/young folks. look @ BET, they have gotten rid of ALL of their programming for "adults" because teenagers watching the bullshit boosts those ratings and im not mad @ them, ratings are the ONLY thing in the television industry. this isnt 1995...


>The article however goes out of its way to show how much white
>industry, in this case advertising, is unwilling to
>acknowledge the diversity of black, insists on obvious (ie
>stereotypical black cues), and only if it's consistent with a
>white understanding of blackness.

- once again, u are waiting on an outside influence to "help us out"...your frustration and whining stems from the fact that black folks are complacent and apathetic towards this "problem" which they dont see as a problem at all. white people have a perfect understanding of what being "black" is all about, the problem is that when they throw it back in our faces, we get embarrassed (at least the "intellectual" negroes do), prime example was when a few years back Ford was asked by jesse jackson to pull that magazine ad of a black man with a ford truck in his gold teeth. now, go to any black community in america or turn it on BET right now and u will see gold teeth/grills. its become a part of our culture and has been for quite some time...however, when white folks say "HEY! lets use a black guy with gold teeth to sell this product" its racist....now, that reaction stems from A) we are embarrassed and ashamed of our own culture or B) we are simply looking for something to pin on whitey to call him racist over because that is just-what-we-do or C) a little of both.


>But this level of obviousness seems to escape the both of
>you.

- give it up man, u are whining because folks dont see things the way u do. just accept it and move forward with life.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
k_orr
Charter member
80197 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 02:32 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
41. "RE: seriously, u are in full &quot;whining&quot; mode right now"
In response to Reply # 39


  

          

>>The problem that you and Suave Bro are having, is that you
>>don't realize that black people are not monolithic.
>
>- see there you all go again puting peoples opinions on a
>message board before real world events - if what you just
>typed out is true, it would reflect in the market. allow me to
>break it down for you in the most simple way i know how...if u
>put 20 black folks in a room and 17 of them want to see UPN,
>SoulPlane, listen to ying yang twinz and lil john and the
>other 3 want to watch Hotel Rwanda, listen to BlackStar and
>dead prez, want to go to the poetry sessions and protest and
>march etc., those 3 are simply SOL when it comes to the media!
>what station/media outlet can survive by simply catering to 4%
>of a population?

How old are these people?

I know my parents and their friends (black parents and elders have more money than the children they support) don't want to watch UPN and the like.

So if you're coming up with an ad for "Swiffer", and you want to show it on Gospel Sunday on BET, do you call in Slim Thug to do the voice over? Do you call in Mos Def? Obviously not. You get Claire Huxtable or Lynn Whitfield, or someone that the people with the money identify with.

I see you trying to box black people into a box, but I actually know black people, and don't exist in some sort of fake racially distorted vaccuum in which every black person is represented on the videos shown for 106 and Park.

>>I guess that comes from looking @ black issues from white
>>eyes, and thinking that there can only be 1 way to look at
>>it.
>
>- once again, that is simply your frustration talking - hell,
>you wouldnt be debating anything if what we were saying wasn't
>true.

Actually, anytime I see people make dumb arguments I have to stifle myself to not comment on them.

I know tons of black folks, from criminals I work with, to their church going grand parents who pay their legal fees. I know teachers, lawyers, mechanics, unemployed mf's, homeless cats....

Blackness is diverse.
To think otherwise is to close your eyes from the way of the world.

>>As to Suave, the sheer fact that Bill Cosby's attitude
>towards
>>lots of issues in black american life is shared by nearly a
>>majority of black folks, should tell us all that it's very
>>difficult to figure out what black people are about - and
>that
>>it;s silly to generalize in this context.
>
>- well an overwhelming majority of black folks that agree with
>cosby are OLDER than my generation. anybody that knows
>anything about the media knows that it has to cater to the
>group that spends/GENERATES the most money and thats
>teenagers/young folks.

Actually, what marketers want is to attract young people who have oodles and oodles of disposable income.

But if you stay on the topic and look @ the products that pulphustler was trying to promote, your generation is not going out in droves to scoop up some koolaid.

So you really have to distort what is being discussed in order to arrive at your foregone conclusion.

look @ BET, they have gotten rid of ALL
>of their programming for "adults" because teenagers watching
>the bullshit boosts those ratings and im not mad @ them,
>ratings are the ONLY thing in the television industry. this
>isnt 1995...

And you know this because you sat in on the Viacom BET meetings, which were of course open to the public.

>>The article however goes out of its way to show how much
>white
>>industry, in this case advertising, is unwilling to
>>acknowledge the diversity of black, insists on obvious (ie
>>stereotypical black cues), and only if it's consistent with
>a
>>white understanding of blackness.
>
>- once again, u are waiting on an outside influence to "help
>us out"...your frustration and whining stems from the fact
>that black folks are complacent and apathetic towards this
>"problem" which they dont see as a problem at all.

Actually I'm not waiting on anything.

What is going to change the minds of black people, the ones you're talking about, about how they want to live their lives is not going to come from Madison Avenue.

It doesn't come from Church, cause half the mf'ers out getting drunk and fucking on Saturday night, clean up for Sunday morning.

It doesn't come from school, cause we've seen how much those things have been an abysmal failure.

It's certainly not popular media, cause black people as a whole didn't suddenly start making moves when PE was running the airwaves.

Life is far more complex than that.

There's no one domino to tip over, an everything falls into place.

You keep stressing personal responsibility, but you fail to see how little value PR is to folks who are still stuck in the same environment.

The good kid still goes to poor schools and might catch a stray.
Those same good kids go to college and can't compete with their suburban counterparts.
The suburban black kids get tracked into sports and music and not math and science.

And their 'educated" parents encourage lil Darnell to run track, and not run the debate team.

I could go on and on, but whatever problem you want to talk about, has lots and lots of factors - none of which lead to some sort of clear solution, that "if only black people did...."

The thing is black people are doing that shit, in millions, and it's not getting them anywhere.

now what?
k. orr

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                
suave_bro
Member since Nov 19th 2002
9433 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 03:27 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
44. "RE: seriously, u are in full &quot;whining&quot; mode right now"
In response to Reply # 41


          

>How old are these people?
>I know my parents and their friends (black parents and elders
>have more money than the children they support) don't want to
>watch UPN and the like.

- same here. my folks dont want to watch that shit. in fact, my pops watches nothing but movies now on DVD or on Starz...my mother watches A&E! they cant even stomach BET or "black" shows any more...

>So if you're coming up with an ad for "Swiffer", and you want
>to show it on Gospel Sunday on BET, do you call in Slim Thug
>to do the voice over? Do you call in Mos Def? Obviously not.
> You get Claire Huxtable or Lynn Whitfield, or someone that
>the people with the money identify with.

- I agree. and actually there are tons of commercials that showcase black folks in a positive/intelligent light (remember those fannie mae commercials?) but of course, things actually going in our favor and showcasing us in a positive light makes for boring convo...u aint a real activist if u cant nit pick and find something wrong in everything...

>I see you trying to box black people into a box, but I
>actually know black people, and don't exist in some sort of
>fake racially distorted vaccuum in which every black person is
>represented on the videos shown for 106 and Park.

- again. ratings speak for themselves, if bet 2night and lead story were bringing in huge ratings for BET, those programs would still be there.


>I know tons of black folks, from criminals I work with, to
>their church going grand parents who pay their legal fees. I
>know teachers, lawyers, mechanics, unemployed mf's, homeless
>cats....
>
>Blackness is diverse.
>To think otherwise is to close your eyes from the way of the
>world.

- blackness isn't as diverse as you are trying to make it out to be. if blackness was diverse condie rice and janice brown would be household names in the black community, as would colin powell and clarence thomas...hell, ron brown and vernon jordan are ???'s in our community too..how many black folks know who dr ben carson is? mae jemison? please...tupac, biggie, hov, 50 cent, bishop magic don juan? cmon now...u are asking for folks in the media to be blind and ignorant to how we are and what makes us move to buy products...shit i just saw lil john selling shades in a circuit city ad the other day, do u think that brotha from the west wing could push a product to black folks like lil john? oh, but we are a diverse thinking group..riiiiiight.


>Actually, what marketers want is to attract young people who
>have oodles and oodles of disposable income.

- wow. companies starting out too!? amazing i didnt know this...

>But if you stay on the topic and look @ the products that
>pulphustler was trying to promote, your generation is not
>going out in droves to scoop up some koolaid.

- last time i checked kool-aid is like water in the ghetto.


>And you know this because you sat in on the Viacom BET
>meetings, which were of course open to the public.

- lol. my bad..those shows were pulled up because some white men in black suits and shades told them to take off all programming that made black folks think beyond booty shaking and self destructive behaviors...DA MAN OUT TA GET ME!!!


>Actually I'm not waiting on anything.
>What is going to change the minds of black people, the ones
>you're talking about, about how they want to live their lives
>is not going to come from Madison Avenue.
>It doesn't come from Church, cause half the mf'ers out getting
>drunk and fucking on Saturday night, clean up for Sunday
>morning.
>It doesn't come from school, cause we've seen how much those
>things have been an abysmal failure.
>It's certainly not popular media, cause black people as a
>whole didn't suddenly start making moves when PE was running
>the airwaves.
>Life is far more complex than that.
>There's no one domino to tip over, an everything falls into
>place.

- u havent said anything new right here.


>You keep stressing personal responsibility, but you fail to
>see how little value PR is to folks who are still stuck in the
>same environment.
>The good kid still goes to poor schools and might catch a
>stray.
>Those same good kids go to college and can't compete with
>their suburban counterparts.

- nigga please. I did better than alot of those rich white kids at my college, i did WORSE than alot of them too but shit i wasnt in there struggling and about to quit...its funny, its okay for you 2 brush the entire black community with a broad stroke when it comes to victimhood but if i say we need to do better im in the wrong...amazing.

>The suburban black kids get tracked into sports and music and
>not math and science.
>And their 'educated" parents encourage lil Darnell to run
>track, and not run the debate team.

- my ex gilfriend and her sister come from the burbs, her sister is at florida state right now on the deans list.

>I could go on and on, but whatever problem you want to talk
>about, has lots and lots of factors - none of which lead to
>some sort of clear solution, that "if only black people
>did...."

- well puting 99% of the blame out outside sources...well...just look around you..

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
k_orr
Charter member
80197 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 02:32 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
42. "RE: seriously, u are in full &quot;whining&quot; mode right now"
In response to Reply # 39


  

          

>>The problem that you and Suave Bro are having, is that you
>>don't realize that black people are not monolithic.
>
>- see there you all go again puting peoples opinions on a
>message board before real world events - if what you just
>typed out is true, it would reflect in the market. allow me to
>break it down for you in the most simple way i know how...if u
>put 20 black folks in a room and 17 of them want to see UPN,
>SoulPlane, listen to ying yang twinz and lil john and the
>other 3 want to watch Hotel Rwanda, listen to BlackStar and
>dead prez, want to go to the poetry sessions and protest and
>march etc., those 3 are simply SOL when it comes to the media!
>what station/media outlet can survive by simply catering to 4%
>of a population?

How old are these people?

I know my parents and their friends (black parents and elders have more money than the children they support) don't want to watch UPN and the like.

So if you're coming up with an ad for "Swiffer", and you want to show it on Gospel Sunday on BET, do you call in Slim Thug to do the voice over? Do you call in Mos Def? Obviously not. You get Claire Huxtable or Lynn Whitfield, or someone that the people with the money identify with.

I see you trying to box black people into a box, but I actually know black people, and don't exist in some sort of fake racially distorted vaccuum in which every black person is represented on the videos shown for 106 and Park.

>>I guess that comes from looking @ black issues from white
>>eyes, and thinking that there can only be 1 way to look at
>>it.
>
>- once again, that is simply your frustration talking - hell,
>you wouldnt be debating anything if what we were saying wasn't
>true.

Actually, anytime I see people make dumb arguments I have to stifle myself to not comment on them.

I know tons of black folks, from criminals I work with, to their church going grand parents who pay their legal fees. I know teachers, lawyers, mechanics, unemployed mf's, homeless cats....

Blackness is diverse.
To think otherwise is to close your eyes from the way of the world.

>>As to Suave, the sheer fact that Bill Cosby's attitude
>towards
>>lots of issues in black american life is shared by nearly a
>>majority of black folks, should tell us all that it's very
>>difficult to figure out what black people are about - and
>that
>>it;s silly to generalize in this context.
>
>- well an overwhelming majority of black folks that agree with
>cosby are OLDER than my generation. anybody that knows
>anything about the media knows that it has to cater to the
>group that spends/GENERATES the most money and thats
>teenagers/young folks.

Actually, what marketers want is to attract young people who have oodles and oodles of disposable income.

But if you stay on the topic and look @ the products that pulphustler was trying to promote, your generation is not going out in droves to scoop up some koolaid.

So you really have to distort what is being discussed in order to arrive at your foregone conclusion.

look @ BET, they have gotten rid of ALL
>of their programming for "adults" because teenagers watching
>the bullshit boosts those ratings and im not mad @ them,
>ratings are the ONLY thing in the television industry. this
>isnt 1995...

And you know this because you sat in on the Viacom BET meetings, which were of course open to the public.

>>The article however goes out of its way to show how much
>white
>>industry, in this case advertising, is unwilling to
>>acknowledge the diversity of black, insists on obvious (ie
>>stereotypical black cues), and only if it's consistent with
>a
>>white understanding of blackness.
>
>- once again, u are waiting on an outside influence to "help
>us out"...your frustration and whining stems from the fact
>that black folks are complacent and apathetic towards this
>"problem" which they dont see as a problem at all.

Actually I'm not waiting on anything.

What is going to change the minds of black people, the ones you're talking about, about how they want to live their lives is not going to come from Madison Avenue.

It doesn't come from Church, cause half the mf'ers out getting drunk and fucking on Saturday night, clean up for Sunday morning.

It doesn't come from school, cause we've seen how much those things have been an abysmal failure.

It's certainly not popular media, cause black people as a whole didn't suddenly start making moves when PE was running the airwaves.

Life is far more complex than that.

There's no one domino to tip over, an everything falls into place.

You keep stressing personal responsibility, but you fail to see how little value PR is to folks who are still stuck in the same environment.

The good kid still goes to poor schools and might catch a stray.
Those same good kids go to college and can't compete with their suburban counterparts.
The suburban black kids get tracked into sports and music and not math and science.

And their 'educated" parents encourage lil Darnell to run track, and not run the debate team.

I could go on and on, but whatever problem you want to talk about, has lots and lots of factors - none of which lead to some sort of clear solution, that "if only black people did...."

The thing is black people are doing that shit, in millions, and it's not getting them anywhere.

now what?
k. orr

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
40thStreetBlack
Charter member
22390 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 02:28 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
40. "you're right, black people wouldn't eat at McDonalds or drink Kool-Aid"
In response to Reply # 36


  

          

unless they have stereotyped commercials. brilliant.

------------------------------------------------------------
Now you know - and knowing is half the battle!

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
suave_bro
Member since Nov 19th 2002
9433 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 03:02 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
43. "you are using terrible examples"
In response to Reply # 40


          

mcdonalds would make billions without a commercial as would pepsi and cola, those commercials are simply "reminder" ads just to keep the product fresh on consumers minds, this is why mcdonalds can afford to have commercials that target EVERY demographic (hell, they even have a spoken word ad)...

however, what is the name of that cell phone company that uses the slogan "where u at!?" better yet, if you wanted a product to reach a certain market (black), how would YOU do it? and would your strategy produce RESULTS ($$$) or would u be happy playing the political correct card and stay broke...

does anybody remember MBC? how is that black owned television station doing!? the one that said they would offer up decent morally sound programs directed @ black folks...I havent heard from them since 2001.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 04:34 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
45. "RE: you are using terrible examples"
In response to Reply # 43


  

          

they dont get it. a business exists to make money. a businees makes money by selling a product/service. you sell a product/service more effectively by advertising. you advertise more effectively by researching demographics. if the research tells you black people have lots of money, you sell your product to them. they are not forced to buy it. however some would say that they are forced to buy it indirectly by brainnwashing and coercion. apprently some people do not have the education required to filter media. it could just be that some people are materialistic and buying things makes them feel good. anyway...why should person A care how person B spends their money?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                
40thStreetBlack
Charter member
22390 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 07:53 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
48. "who is"they"?"
In response to Reply # 45
Thu Jun-02-05 07:54 PM by 40thStreetBlack

  

          

Because I haven't seen anybody say any of that bullshit your talking about.

--------------------------------------------------------------
"Like, may the Force, like, be with you - ZOINKS!"

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                    
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 08:54 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
50. "RE: who is"they"?"
In response to Reply # 48


  

          

netrice believes that the majority of black people are media illiterate and therefor companies take advantage of that by creating marketing campaigns...

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                        
40thStreetBlack
Charter member
22390 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 10:00 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
52. "so go respond to her"
In response to Reply # 50


  

          

--------------------------------------------------------------
"Like, may the Force, like, be with you - ZOINKS!"

- Jedi padawan Sha'a Gi

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                            
foxnesn
Charter member
5240 posts
Fri Jun-03-05 02:12 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
56. "are you blind..."
In response to Reply # 52


  

          

she and i have been debating this thing since tuesday...

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                                
40thStreetBlack
Charter member
22390 posts
Fri Jun-03-05 05:13 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
59. "so why are you responding about it in me & suave's convo?"
In response to Reply # 56


  

          

>she and i have been debating this thing since tuesday...

That's nice, but I don't follow every single debate other people are having with each other around here.

--------------------------------------------------------------
"Like, may the Force, like, be with you - ZOINKS!"

- Jedi padawan Sha'a Gi

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                        
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Sun Jun-05-05 08:29 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
66. "Nope"
In response to Reply # 50


  

          

>netrice believes that the majority of black people are media
>illiterate and therefor companies take advantage of that by
>creating marketing campaigns...

I believe that most people are media illiterate. That's why they are required to take my classes.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
40thStreetBlack
Charter member
22390 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 06:04 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
47. "no, *these* are terrible examples:"
In response to Reply # 43


  

          

"and on the flipside, look @ what happened to "City of Angels" back in 2000. a serious black hospital drama that couldnt compete with the tom niggery on UPN and WB."

City of Angels wasn't competing with The Parkers and the Wayans Brothers, it was competing with ER and Chicago Hope.

>mcdonalds would make billions without a commercial as would
>pepsi and cola, those commercials are simply "reminder" ads
>just to keep the product fresh on consumers minds, this is why
>mcdonalds can afford to have commercials that target EVERY
>demographic (hell, they even have a spoken word ad)...

the issue is not targeting commercials at a demographic in of itself, but rather the manner in which it's done.

>however, what is the name of that cell phone company that uses
>the slogan "where u at!?" better yet, if you wanted a product
>to reach a certain market (black), how would YOU do it? and
>would your strategy produce RESULTS ($$$)

I would do it the way PulpHustler wanted to do it. And yes, that would produce results ($$$).

>or would u be happy
>playing the political correct card and stay broke...

No, but I wouldn't be shucking and jiving either, which is something you sound like you have no problem doing.

------------------------------------------------------------
Now you know - and knowing is half the battle!

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                
suave_bro
Member since Nov 19th 2002
9433 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 08:34 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
49. "RE: no, *these* are terrible examples:"
In response to Reply # 47


          

>"and on the flipside, look @ what happened to "City of
>Angels" back in 2000. a serious black hospital drama that
>couldnt compete with the tom niggery on UPN and WB."
>
>City of Angels wasn't competing with The Parkers and the
>Wayans Brothers, it was competing with ER and Chicago Hope.

- no. city of angels was created specifically to make the NAACP happy after constant complaints about how there was a lack of black representation on network television (they didnt have SHIT to say about cable), black people knew the shit was on television, we just didn't watch it.

>>mcdonalds would make billions without a commercial as would
>>pepsi and cola, those commercials are simply "reminder" ads
>>just to keep the product fresh on consumers minds, this is
>why
>>mcdonalds can afford to have commercials that target EVERY
>>demographic (hell, they even have a spoken word ad)...
>
>the issue is not targeting commercials at a demographic in of
>itself, but rather the manner in which it's done.

- I know this, this is what im reffering to, what you consider stereotypes and cooning we find entertaining. that isnt the media's fault that's on us...


>>or would u be happy
>>playing the political correct card and stay broke...
>
>No, but I wouldn't be shucking and jiving either, which is
>something you sound like you have no problem doing.

- look, shuffling, cooning, buckdancing whatever u want to call it, black folks like it and white folks are getting paid off of it. you mad nigga?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                    
40thStreetBlack
Charter member
22390 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 09:58 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
51. "RE: no, *these* are terrible examples:"
In response to Reply # 49


  

          

>- no. city of angels was created specifically to make the
>NAACP happy after constant complaints about how there was a
>lack of black representation on network television (they didnt
>have SHIT to say about cable), black people knew the shit was
>on television, we just didn't watch it.

Yes. Those complaints were about a lack of black representation in serious network dramas. Thus it was competing against shows like ER and Chicago Hope, not those garbage UPN sitcoms.

>- I know this, this is what im reffering to, what you consider
>stereotypes and cooning we find entertaining. that isnt the
>media's fault that's on us...

PulpHustler's post explains in explicit detail how it is the media's fault.

>- look, shuffling, cooning, buckdancing whatever u want to
>call it, black folks like it and white folks are getting paid
>off of it. you mad nigga?

No, I'm disappointed. You mad coon?

--------------------------------------------------------------
"Like, may the Force, like, be with you - ZOINKS!"

- Jedi padawan Sha'a Gi

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                        
suave_bro
Member since Nov 19th 2002
9433 posts
Fri Jun-03-05 08:56 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
54. "RE: no, *these* are terrible examples:"
In response to Reply # 51


          

>Yes. Those complaints were about a lack of black
>representation in serious network dramas. Thus it was
>competing against shows like ER and Chicago Hope, not those
>garbage UPN sitcoms.

- okay im going to explain this one more time, if your brain cant register it then i will have to leave it be: the show was targeted specifically for BLACK. PEOPLE. ER, chicago hope are not. black people dont want to watch hospital dramas even when they deal with "black" issues (that show tackled the DL brotha issue on there long before oprah did), we want to laugh and watch UPN...

>PulpHustler's post explains in explicit detail how it is the
>media's fault.

- well that is just where we disagree.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                            
40thStreetBlack
Charter member
22390 posts
Fri Jun-03-05 12:22 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
55. "RE: no, *these* are terrible examples:"
In response to Reply # 54


  

          

>- okay im going to explain this one more time, if your brain
>cant register it then i will have to leave it be: the show was
>targeted specifically for BLACK. PEOPLE. ER, chicago hope are
>not.

You have a strange knack for stating the blatantly obvious and missing the blatantly obvious at the same time. City of Angels was targeted specifically for black people who tuned out ER and Chicago Hope, so that black people would have their own serious medical drama to watch just like the white folks watching those other shows made for them.

>black people dont want to watch hospital dramas even when
>they deal with "black" issues (that show tackled the DL brotha
>issue on there long before oprah did), we want to laugh and
>watch UPN...

Well I didn't see that episode, but overall City of Angels just wasn't that good. But it was still much better than the crap on UPN, so I can't argue with you on that.

>- well that is just where we disagree.

OK.

--------------------------------------------------------------
"Like, may the Force, like, be with you - ZOINKS!"

- Jedi padawan Sha'a Gi

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
cashone_again
Member since Jan 19th 2005
66 posts
Sun Jun-05-05 01:39 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
61. "it ain't my argument, but i can't bite my lip"
In response to Reply # 34


          

> i know we do.
>to market something to black folks u have to ghetto-ize it,
>throw some hip hop flava up in dea', have em shakin' and
>gettin' krunk in the shows/commercials, have a black woman
>shake her fat ass in the twix commercial, have some negroes in
>braids using ebonics in a mcdonalds commercial...IT WORKS!!

you may be playing devil's advocate, but in all seriousness. in 1919, oklahoma (tulsa) was known around the states for having a separate but equal black market that thrived (there was a ton of shit that went down that year, riots in chicago, mass lynchings, the list goes on..). hypothetically, if the black (target) market were to split from the white (general) market - on a separate but equal status reminiscent of malcolm and marcus' call for a separate state, and blacks maintained business by keeping money in the community. all things being equal (in terms of access to mass mediums and technology) do you think that these sale points, that you stand behind in the above quote, would exist? would an autonomic black sales force present these images to the black community and expect to thrive?

The wisest man is generally he who thinks himself the least so.
- Boileau

I don't know anything.
-Satchel Paige

Dance like nobody's watching, work like you don't need the money and love like you've never been hurt.
-Satchel Paige

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
PulpHustler
Member since Oct 29th 2003
264 posts
Sun Jun-05-05 06:27 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
63. "RE: it ain't my argument, but i can't bite my lip"
In response to Reply # 61


  

          

I don't know that "separate but equal" in any form would ever work...

Kwame Kilpatrick, mayor of Detroit got stuck in the middle of a storm when a group of blacks in Detroit requested tax dollars and city approval for some type of "African-American Town" (similar to Chinatown, Little Italy and the other ethnic communities).... Non-blacks rose up and raised hell about their tax dollars going for any part of that.

In the private sector, which always gets a certain degree of city/state support, you'd face the same type of backlash regardless of the industry...

I think whites would rise up in outrage at the idea of anything that might exclude them in any kind of way.

But if black consumers simply decided to ignore, not boycott, but permanently ignore companies who engage in stereotypical advertising and predatory marketing practices, that would be a good start.

But as a commmunity, we'd have to be willing to support those who do respect us, as opposed to letting a lot of good businesses and balanced imagery/tactics fall upon def ears.

Earlier this year a few black-owned agencies actually formed a "black ad agency club"... It's similar to the AAF--American Advertising Federation and the AAAA--American Association of Advertising Agencies, which are the two biggest professional groups in my industry, but they're very whitebread. Their idea of diversity is blondes, brunettes and redheads and occassionally marching out a black summer intern or two and calling it a day.

But the biggest the black agenies have is that most of the clients are still not black. And when it's the client's money, they do what they want and get what they want. And if they're not comfortable seeing certain things in their advertsing campaigns/marketing efforts, then you won't see them. In short: As the client goes, so goes what the agency can do.

The ad world/marketing world is funny in that for all our years in existence, we've done a great job of keeping the average person in the dark about how it all actually works. Most people have no clue what goes into making a commercial or a getting one on the air... Building brands and advertising can be an ugly game, even when it's played right.

I'll post another excerpt this week.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
cashone_again
Member since Jan 19th 2005
66 posts
Mon Jun-06-05 01:17 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
67. "RE: it ain't my argument, but i can't bite my lip"
In response to Reply # 63


          

>I don't know that "separate but equal" in any form would ever
>work...

true, but i don't think the stereotypical images we see would exist in the black marketplace (at all). you're right about the initial backlash, but the thing that would be the most interesting would be the backlash from the white community if blacks thrived in such an environment (they burnt the "black market" in tulsa to the ground in tulsa. the initial backlash isn't from a fear of blacks doing poorly, and money being wasted - it's from blacks doing well, and profiting off of white taxes.

>But if black consumers simply decided to ignore, not boycott,
>but permanently ignore companies who engage in stereotypical
>advertising and predatory marketing practices, that would be a
>good start.

true. and it goes back to nettrice's conversation. people either don't, or refuse to, recognize predatory marketing practices. and nettrice - if you read this, marlboro was originally marketed as a "woman's" brand. they couldn't get into the market - so they gradually shifted 180 degrees to the marlboro man.
>
>But as a commmunity, we'd have to be willing to support those
>who do respect us
TRUE.

>But the biggest (problem) the black agenies have is that most of the
>clients are still not black. And when it's the client's money,
>they do what they want and get what they want. And if they're
>not comfortable seeing certain things in their advertsing
>campaigns/marketing efforts, then you won't see them.

i hear you. in other words, we have black folks in the boardroom willing to present the images, but we're not filling those critical decision making positions on the other side of the table. from what i've seen with my parents, it usually takes a black hand on the other side of the door in order for us to get in to present a proposal, but once we're in - we're pretty much on our own.

>I'll post another excerpt this week.

thanks.

'don't pray when it's raining if you don't pray when the sun's shining.'
-satchel paige

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Mon Jun-06-05 09:22 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
70. "I'm reading"
In response to Reply # 67
Mon Jun-06-05 09:23 AM by Nettrice

  

          

>true, but i don't think the stereotypical images we see would
>exist in the black marketplace (at all). you're right about
>the initial backlash, but the thing that would be the most
>interesting would be the backlash from the white community if
>blacks thrived in such an environment (they burnt the "black
>market" in tulsa to the ground in tulsa. the initial backlash
>isn't from a fear of blacks doing poorly, and money being
>wasted - it's from blacks doing well, and profiting off of
>white taxes.

Hmmm...

>true. and it goes back to nettrice's conversation. people
>either don't, or refuse to, recognize predatory marketing
>practices. and nettrice - if you read this, marlboro was
>originally marketed as a "woman's" brand. they couldn't get
>into the market - so they gradually shifted 180 degrees to the
>marlboro man.

I did not know this and it does not surprise me in the least.

>i hear you. in other words, we have black folks in the
>boardroom willing to present the images, but we're not filling
>those critical decision making positions on the other side of
>the table. from what i've seen with my parents, it usually
>takes a black hand on the other side of the door in order for
>us to get in to present a proposal, but once we're in - we're
>pretty much on our own.

This is what people fail to acknowledge. I am reading Nelson George's article in "And It Don't Stop" about Russell Simmons, a guy from a middle-class Queens neighborhood who promoted (pimped) rap music to white companies. George admits that, being from Brownsville, he knew the ghetto was "nothing to romanticize" but there were people like Simmons who "grew up in their own houses, with access to cars, furnished basements, both parents, and more cash than my friends ever knew", who packaged and sold the street image to white folks. It worked, eventually, and Russell lost his hair in the process.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                
cashone_again
Member since Jan 19th 2005
66 posts
Tue Jun-07-05 12:47 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
72. "RE: I'm reading"
In response to Reply # 70


          

> and Russell lost his hair in the process.
>
at least we know he has a conscience. he and his brother seem like dialectical opposites.

i've got a question for you though. i've seen your work on your website, your background in art, and your link to style wars. i figure that you have some interest in graffiti and i was going to post this to see what people think, but i was more interested in what you have to say because it goes along the lines of this post and your background.
during this past semester i did an intense study of graffiti. i originally set out to study graffiti's use in marketing and the effects, but got so caught up in the history of graff, and its use as a communication tool (synthesized in this: http://www.graffiti.org/faq/artistic_constr_esposito.html, and this: http://www.graffiti.org/faq/esposito.html - please read when you have a few minutes - it'll give you an idea of where i'm coming from with all of this) and i realized that my original goal requires another semester of study.
As you probably know, Sprite, Nike, Reebok, ESPN, ABC, and many other MNC's use graff or graff-inspired imagery in their ads and they make tons of money off of images that continue to be considered illegal works of art. I believe that they owe the graff community something, and they can help to bridge the two sides of the graff argument - those who believe it should be considered legal, and those who fight to keep it illegal. it doesn't have to be a large promotional act, but it could be. something like building legal walls that are available to large amounts of artists, which can go a long way in the graff community. they could go as far as having a tour of legendary graff artists that paint at select sites. such a project could benefit MNC's too. it's a logical and ethical step in the right direction that would go under the heading of community relations, becoming a valuable non-taxable donation write-off. they've milked the graff community and left it dry - using social cues created by graffiti to sell their product - and when people get sick of their products, intrinsic ties have the potential to damage graff as well.
i guess i'm wondering if you think this is viable, and if you'd be willing to mindstorm with me for a second to think of other ways that MNC's can give back to such a non-nuclear community without further damaging its value-system.

Ra - the sovereign god of the Egyptians, the sun god, typically represented as
a hawk-headed man bearing on his head the solar disk and the royal
sacred asp, or cobra, as represented upon the headdress of divinities
and royal personages of ancient Egypt, usually over the third eye as an
emblem of supreme power.

"let your children, name themselves. claim themselves..."
-saul williams

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                    
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Tue Jun-07-05 09:19 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
74. "RE: I'm reading"
In response to Reply # 72
Tue Jun-07-05 09:21 AM by Nettrice

  

          

>> and Russell lost his hair in the process.
>>
>at least we know he has a conscience. he and his brother seem
>like dialectical opposites.

Who has a conscience? Russell or Joe? Or even Danny? I am sure, at the end of the day, all these guys do have a conscience.

>i've got a question for you though. i've seen your work on
>your website, your background in art, and your link to style
>wars. i figure that you have some interest in graffiti and i
>was going to post this to see what people think, but i was
>more interested in what you have to say because it goes along
>the lines of this post and your background.

Okay...but first I need to set up my answer.

I skimmed both of your articles but it needs a slower read. My connection to graffiti is pretty much the same as my connection to hip-hop: both personal as an observer and hands-on as an artist. When I was a high school freshman, Futura 2000 came to my school. We had an afterschool graffiti session and the class made a mural about transportation. I was in awe of Futura. I had already discovered hip-hop/rap and here was this guy from New York, with his Kangol hat and "fresh" gear. He gave me the ultimate compliment. He said I was pretty good and I had "potential". It did not occur to me that he might be considered by some to be a sell-out.

"Back then I don't think anyone ever thought much about the future of the movement and where it was going. Surely I didn't. It was a passing fancy, a fad, a sign of the times. Social unrest and war were at the forefront of our culture. There were gangs and there were causes, there was indecision and there was pressure. There was a feeling of helplessness and there were messages to be delivered. Modern day graffiti was that movement." - from http://www.graffiti.org/futura/futura.html

As you may know, Futura went on to become a hot commodity in the 80s, in the commercial art world that wanted to exploit graffiti. He was part of the East Village art scene along with Lee, Fab 5 Freddy and others, as well as becoming popular in Europe.

"Futura credits Europeans with embracing graffiti as an artform way before the American art establishment recognized it as valid folk art and fine art. Futura is known throughout the world as an abstract artist and has exhibited in cities such as Moscow, Seoul, Rome, Tokyo, Nairobi, Barcelona, Sydney, Berlin, London, Amsterdam, and Paris, just to name a few. In 1982, he put out a record with himself rhyming called "Futura 2000 and His Escapades" with music done by punk rock icons the Clash."

>As you probably know, Sprite, Nike, Reebok, ESPN, ABC, and
>many other MNC's use graff or graff-inspired imagery in their
>ads and they make tons of money off of images that continue to
>be considered illegal works of art. I believe that they owe
>the graff community something, and they can help to bridge the
>two sides of the graff argument - those who believe it should
>be considered legal, and those who fight to keep it illegal.

Futura 2000 is a great example in this regard. He still "paints canvases and does shows and hits a billboard or a wall here and there around the world". Futura was one of the first to leave the subway and enter the commercial art world. It was inevitable. About his entry into the fine art world he says:

"It was the platform I needed to showcase my talents. not just painting canvases but actually creating artistic compositions. I never went to ART school, and wasn't even sure who Warhol was, but I knew I had something. I had always known that. Right place right time, that's me...... I always go against popular opinions, like to blaze my own trails."

Sprite, Nike, Reebok, ESPN, ABC and more have all attempted to commodify the urban/street image because it gives an edge to their products or programs, not necessarily for people of color and definately not for the artists. However, artists like Futura have profited from exhibiting their work. Absolut Vodka comes to mind (Absolut Generations). Make some graffiti featuring their bottle and make some $$$, get some promotion. I see the commercial art world and these other companies part of the same system. Some of te graff artists have a relationship with these companies, as well, and it's all about capitalism, not community building or sustaining the culture.

The intro to Absolut Generation's site is a quote "I love the packaging, I love the feel of it...I want to do something." by Andy Warhol. You may or may not find graffiti on the site but it constantly changes. I guess what I am saying is that, in a way, companies like Absolut are promoting the artists via the Web. It's not promoting graffiti, not building walls to showcase the artists. These companies stay on the safe side, with the packaging, so to speak. Promote the packaging.

>they could go as far as having a tour of legendary
>graff artists that paint at select sites. such a project could
>benefit MNC's too. it's a logical and ethical step in the
>right direction that would go under the heading of community
>relations, becoming a valuable non-taxable donation write-off.

Perhaps Absolut would be willing to sponsor such a project, as long as it promotes their brand and product. I think many graff artists would take serious issue with that, just as some took issue with Futura. IMO I think the responsibility lies with artists like Futura who make an effort to give back and promote the next generation, minus the product or branding we see in commercials.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                        
cashone_again
Member since Jan 19th 2005
66 posts
Fri Jun-10-05 12:22 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
75. "RE: I'm reading"
In response to Reply # 74


          

I can't believe that you met futura. i read his book, studied his influences.
i hear where you're coming from with your response (also, thanx for the reply). i'm not a part of the graff community anymore - but i understand what you're saying when you talk about futura being considered a sell-out. that was just the talk of his day - criticism to acceptance of graffiti by mainstream art collectors. as an observer of graff artists (without going into what graff means to the art community) it seems like the most dedicated love art. getting up in the right spot is secondary or tertiary to their artform. like the sociological study i cited says - they spend a majority of their time sketching and developing their abilities. there are a lot of people who move in and out of graff, but you don't become a king unless you love to be on the streets at night with the city to yourself, creating something that you originally laid down on paper. with all the criticism that those who love graff (whether its foundation of its history, the styles that have evolved within the community, etc.) have endured, it seems like graff artists deserve something in return. the politics that exist within the community of who's selling out to the system, who deserves to be a king and so on, are all trivial. personally, graffiti showed me that i had artistic skills i didn't even know existed, and if i have kids i want to build them a wall in the back yard. members of the graff community embraced me, showed me how to blend, bomb, blaze, helped me pick out tips - we ran sketches by each other, the whole nine. so i know i want to give back, but i see what large corporations are doing, and i believe that they have to give back. true - i may be saying, 'here's my desire - where's your money," with such a presentation. economically, these companies don't benefit. i don't blame the artists that work for the companies. they've found their niche, and a lot of the graff artists i ran with wouldn't have a career if graphic design didn't exist. its wonderful to see them happy and doing what they love. and maybe they're the ones who have to say, "i did this for you, now you've got to give back to the community that got me here." thanks nettrice...still can't believe you met futura.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                            
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Fri Jun-10-05 05:17 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
76. "RE: I'm reading"
In response to Reply # 75
Fri Jun-10-05 05:19 AM by Nettrice

  

          

>I can't believe that you met futura. i read his book, studied
>his influences.

Looking back it was weird. I was in this country city (Louisville) and he was "on tour", going from city to city doing some community/school projects with kids like me. I do remember I was very excited. I was starting to listen to rap music, breaking was almost out of style (for a minute) and out of nowhere came Futura, wearing the fresh hip-hop gear. He took off his fuzzy coat, rolled up his sleeves and showed us how to apply the spray paint (using different sized caps).

>it seems like graff artists deserve something in
>return. the politics that exist within the community of who's
>selling out to the system, who deserves to be a king and so
>on, are all trivial.

I guess it just depends on where you stand as far as a position. Some of these older folks (and some of the younger ones) were/are very political. In NYC it was the artist against Koch (Mayor) and the city authorities. There is a rebellious, anti-authority theme in many of the earlier works that would be out of place in some public areas. Keith Haring was probably the one who first brought graffiti into the commercial art spotlight. I remember passing by his "Crack is Whack" mural all the time when I worked in East Harlem. In a way that was a community piece. There were walls like that all over Harlem at some point.

>i don't blame the artists that
>work for the companies.

Yeah but I am talking about the Absoluts, the companies that bring in a stable of artists, even promote these artists' work via print or web site...as long as their product is featured prominently. It's not really about graphic design. These companies as well as the galleries throughout Europe and the rest of the world paid graff artists well over the years...and many of them got good/free promotion.

>and maybe they're the ones who have
>to say, "i did this for you, now you've got to give back to
>the community that got me here." thanks nettrice...still can't
>believe you met futura.

No problem. This got me reminiscing...Futura and other artists really made an effort to give back in those days (to kids like me). Maybe this is a chance for the younger generation.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
suave_bro
Member since Nov 19th 2002
9433 posts
Sun Jun-05-05 06:35 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
64. "you should have just bit that lip."
In response to Reply # 61


          

>you may be playing devil's advocate, but in all seriousness.
>in 1919, oklahoma (tulsa) was known around the states for
>having a separate but equal black market that thrived (there
>was a ton of shit that went down that year, riots in chicago,
>mass lynchings, the list goes on..).

- as many times ive referenced this period in time for african americans in my posts over the past 3 years, this was truly unecessary.


>hypothetically, if the
>black (target) market were to split from the white (general)
>market - on a separate but equal status reminiscent of malcolm
>and marcus' call for a separate state, and blacks maintained
>business by keeping money in the community. all things being
>equal (in terms of access to mass mediums and technology) do
>you think that these sale points, that you stand behind in the
>above quote, would exist? would an autonomic black sales force
>present these images to the black community and expect to
>thrive?

- okay first of all you are jumping topics - this post has shit to do with black folks keeping money in their own community or economic empowerment. secondly, have you not been paying attention to a thing ive said? black folks LOVE these images. PERIOD. end of discussion. my black political thought proffessor scoffed @ the "blaxploitation" film era of the 70's arguing that when we finally got creative control over our own images, we throw pimps, gangsters, hustlers, and promiscuous women up there as our role models and heroes. my argument is that none of this is about white people or the "machine" or whatever u want to call it, it is about US accepting and LOVING the images that these folks are pushing on us...with that being said, the question is WHO WOULD THRIVE "NOT" PUSHING THESE IMAGES!?!? not very many my friend. u have to give the people what they want...

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
cashone_again
Member since Jan 19th 2005
66 posts
Mon Jun-06-05 03:36 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
68. "you're right....i should have"
In response to Reply # 64


          

> as many times ive referenced this period in time for african
>americans in my posts over the past 3 years.
had no idea. but you've shown me how necessary that reference truly was.

Let's Play Jeopardy:

cashone_again: "economics for 1000 alex..."
alex trebeck: "this has
>shit to do with black folks keeping money in their own
>community or economic empowerment."
*Boop* *Boop*
alex trebeck: "cashone_again..."
cashone_again: "what is marketing, alex."
** crowd cheers **
**camera pans to mother, smiling in audience...father nods in approval.**

do you...

>LOVE these images.

?? (rhetorical question, but if they didn't exist, would you have been the one to come up with them or present them to an all-black audience)

have i read any of your comments? yes.
you believe that marketing is a reflection of a pre-existing reality - where consumers sell the product and marketers serve as a medium to mass communication, letting folks in oregon know that the latest styles in new york are mid-high kicks with the jumpman label.

>PERIOD. end of discussion.
"here, pop this in there..that way we can keep talking"
**hands suave_bro a tampax**

>my black political thought
>proffessor scoffed @ the "blaxploitation" film era of the 70's
>arguing that when we finally got creative control over our own
>images, we throw pimps, gangsters, hustlers, and promiscuous
>women up there as our role models and heroes.

don't hold your professor in such high regard - granted, she's intelligent, but she's human. note that we're discussing media - not marketing, but the lines blur sometimes - so i'll take the bait.
i wasn't around in the 70's, so i can't speak to shaft and foxy brown, but shift the gaze for a second. italian-americans began to gain ACCESS (not control) to media around the same time. the godfather came out (a mix of crime/drama, with elements of italian culture - the characters were loving to each other and ruthless at the same time -great drama) it had enough italian culture in it that every italian person was suddenly tied to the mob (stereotype). only in the last decade have producers breached from the blueprinted plot. italians don't like that shit. they won't even watch the sopranos. it doesn't sell to them. it sells to whites, blacks, browns, yellows, reds...but not the olive-skinned.
did we throw pimps, gangsters, hustlers and promiscuous women into our films? yeah, and it's the "hollywood shuffle" (robert townsend) that got a lot of black folks in through the back door.
were they our role models and heroes? i can only speak for myself - i loved arnold horshack as much as i loved freddie washington, and looking back - i liked mr. kotter too. did nike give me dreams, goals and ambitions neatly packaged in a massai warrior-looking black male that could defy gravity? HELL YEAH, and there wouldn't be a bald N.B.A. player today without nike. everybody bought into it. not because we're black and we love those images, i'll let you in on a secret (it was 'cause white folks thoughts have special powers : ) it's because these images are powerful. and here's the most important argument that you can present to me - i'm calling for control of these images...in other words i'm calling for censorship, like the far-right wing conservatives of the republican party, i want to control what you see, what you hear, and what leads you to your final purchase. from my perspective it's control for a good cause. more realistic images of blacks will lead to a more critical viewing audience, and ultimately reflect reality. but, if the marketplace can be controlled for my desires, it can be controlled by those who oppose my views as well. oh...but you missed that.
see - this entire discussion is about the lack of control. nobody believes that "whitey" is controlling our images. it's the fact that they're out of control (and it's near impossible to control them in a capitalist society - i'll give you that). the question i posed when i refused to bite my lip was essentially, would black people create these images on their own? but i'm really starting to believe that k'orr was right, and you think pimps, hustlers, pushers...are reflections of reality and that's why they sell - so there's no point in the question 'cause there is no common ground.

>WHO WOULD THRIVE "NOT"PUSHING THESE IMAGES!?!?

anyone trying to reach a black consumer base. only those trying to reach the general "white" market would thrive, and they'd thrive because of sheer numbers. they're not trying to reach the black consumer - at least not realistically. i know people born into upper-middle class families who follow marketers whims like they're bloodhounds trailing dred scott..."ooh, nelly...ooh, jay-z...oooh, T.I....ooh, fitty cent." they walk around their neighborhoods with untrained pitbulls, they answer their doors with machete in hand, and their home is filled with sawed off shot-guns. living in fear and creating fear amongst their neighbors. do marketers want their money? they'll take it, but that's not their target market, they're nothing but icing on the cake - reinforcing the images that marketers have created.

http://www.graffiti.org/faq/esposito.html

quit playing the scarecrow and paste this.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
Nettrice
Charter member
61747 posts
Mon Jun-06-05 09:09 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
69. "Good one"
In response to Reply # 68


  

          

>you believe that marketing is a reflection of a pre-existing
>reality - where consumers sell the product and marketers serve
>as a medium to mass communication, letting folks in oregon
>know that the latest styles in new york are mid-high kicks
>with the jumpman label.

Also...

>i wasn't around in the 70's, so i can't speak to shaft and
>foxy brown, but shift the gaze for a second. italian-americans
>began to gain ACCESS (not control) to media around the same
>time.

I'd recommend Baadasssss Cinema because the first ten minutes sets the political climate of the time and explains Hollywood's role. Because of the success of Sweet, Sweetback...only one door was open for Black filmmakers and actors.

>did we throw pimps, gangsters, hustlers and promiscuous women
>into our films? yeah, and it's the "hollywood shuffle" (robert
>townsend) that got a lot of black folks in through the back
>door.

I love Hollywood Shuffle and what it spoofs. Aaaafros!!!

>i'll let you in on a secret
>(it was 'cause white folks thoughts have special powers : )
>it's because these images are powerful. and here's the most
>important argument that you can present to me - i'm calling
>for control of these images...in other words i'm calling for
>censorship, like the far-right wing conservatives of the
>republican party, i want to control what you see, what you
>hear, and what leads you to your final purchase. from my
>perspective it's control for a good cause. more realistic
>images of blacks will lead to a more critical viewing
>audience, and ultimately reflect reality.

Interesting.

>see - this entire discussion is about the lack of control.
>nobody believes that "whitey" is controlling our images.

B.S.

>but i'm really starting to believe that k'orr was right,
>and you think pimps, hustlers, pushers...are reflections of
>reality and that's why they sell - so there's no point in the
>question 'cause there is no common ground.
>
>>WHO WOULD THRIVE "NOT"PUSHING THESE IMAGES!?!?
>
>anyone trying to reach a black consumer base. only those
>trying to reach the general "white" market would thrive, and
>they'd thrive because of sheer numbers.

Russell Simmons knew this.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                
cashone_again
Member since Jan 19th 2005
66 posts
Mon Jun-06-05 11:43 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
71. "hopeless rant..."
In response to Reply # 69


          

but that's what i get. definitely bite my lip next time.

>>B.S.

thank you.

--"you're my best friend in the whole world...right rashaun......right."
-- i searched the five year-old's eyes, looking for the right answer...."no."

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
suave_bro
Member since Nov 19th 2002
9433 posts
Tue Jun-07-05 08:21 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
73. "RE: you're right....i should have"
In response to Reply # 68


          

>Let's Play Jeopardy:
>
>cashone_again: "economics for 1000 alex..."
>alex trebeck: "this has
>>shit to do with black folks keeping money in their own
>>community or economic empowerment."
>*Boop* *Boop*
>alex trebeck: "cashone_again..."
>cashone_again: "what is marketing, alex."
>** crowd cheers **
>**camera pans to mother, smiling in audience...father nods in
>approval.**

- oh wow! a real life tapdancing online coon! thanks for that little theatrical sketch, i needed that. but the last time i checked this post has NOTHING to do with bronzville or the black wall street and you have done a shitty job with explaining how marketing has anything to do with the black communities economic empowerment. outside of this little "sketch"...OOH!! if we all do little sketches l ike this, can we have an awards show on here @ the end of the year!? i'd give u the nod for best visual effects, those sound effects seem like they came straight from lucasarts...


>do you...
>
>>LOVE these images.
>
>?? (rhetorical question, but if they didn't exist, would you
>have been the one to come up with them or present them to an
>all-black audience)

- absolutely I would. If it brings money and ratings. you people wear your hearts on your sleeves too much which is why most of you will wind up being managers @ quick-n-go before by the time you are 40.


>have i read any of your comments? yes.
>you believe that marketing is a reflection of a pre-existing
>reality - where consumers sell the product and marketers serve
>as a medium to mass communication, letting folks in oregon
>know that the latest styles in new york are mid-high kicks
>with the jumpman label.

- hold up? thats what I "believe"!? last time i checked that is how marketing works!! but lets take a pause - how would YOU market your product to urban teenage blacks? ive seen candy, bubble gum, soda's, damn near every product that's been targeted to "US" is laced with hip hop and stereotypes...shit i just saw a commercial for comcast cable where this seemingly intelligent middle class black woman just yelled out "WORD" at the end for no reason at all. the shit makes $$$ and moves products.


>>PERIOD. end of discussion.
>"here, pop this in there..that way we can keep talking"
>**hands suave_bro a tampax**

- *applauses* man u are truly a genious with this online theatrics shit.


>>my black political thought
>>proffessor scoffed @ the "blaxploitation" film era of the
>70's
>>arguing that when we finally got creative control over our
>own
>>images, we throw pimps, gangsters, hustlers, and promiscuous
>>women up there as our role models and heroes.


>don't hold your professor in such high regard - granted, she's
>intelligent, but she's human. note that we're discussing media
> - not marketing, but the lines blur sometimes - so i'll take
>the bait.

- oh, so basically what u are telling me is that I shouldnt listen to an older qualified black person who has the credentials to teach at a college university, instead, I should listen to a muthafucka talking shit on a message board for a hip hop group. riiiiiiiight.


>i wasn't around in the 70's, so i can't speak to shaft and
>foxy brown, but shift the gaze for a second. italian-americans
>began to gain ACCESS (not control) to media around the same
>time. the godfather came out (a mix of crime/drama, with
>elements of italian culture - the characters were loving to
>each other and ruthless at the same time -great drama) it had
>enough italian culture in it that every italian person was
>suddenly tied to the mob (stereotype). only in the last decade
>have producers breached from the blueprinted plot. italians
>don't like that shit.

- okay man 2 things 1) you should have your head examined for comparing the Godfather to dolemite, 2) how do u know what italians like and dont like? there are ALOT of italian americans that love the godfather and LOVE the sopranos. Ive eaten in pizzarias where posters of all the famous italian hollywood mobsters are hanging up. u limpies always kill me trying to speak for "the little guy" all the time even when you dont even know what the hell you're talking about...

>they won't even watch the sopranos. it
>doesn't sell to them. it sells to whites, blacks, browns,
>yellows, reds...but not the olive-skinned.

- LMAO!!! man u are on that blow 4real. show me some proof of this...i know that the program was being protested by some italian americans which is understood, but show me where a vast majority of italians dont watch that show...no, hold up...im suppose to listen to YOU when u make these stupid assed statements, and disregard a college proffessor..riiiiiiiiiiiight.

>did we throw pimps, gangsters, hustlers and promiscuous women
>into our films? yeah, and it's the "hollywood shuffle" (robert
>townsend) that got a lot of black folks in through the back
>door.

- negro please. this wasnt the early 20th century, nobody HAD to do those parts.

>did
>nike give me dreams, goals and ambitions neatly packaged in a
>massai warrior-looking black male that could defy gravity?
>HELL YEAH, and there wouldn't be a bald N.B.A. player today
>without nike. everybody bought into it. not because we're
>black and we love those images, i'll let you in on a secret
>(it was 'cause white folks thoughts have special powers : )
>it's because these images are powerful.

- here you go again with another dumbass comparison - so what u are saying is that by using michael jordan to boost sales of your shoe, that is the same as using, lets say...50 cent? so the kids can look up to him!? (reebok) that is the same as having a bunch of old people in your commercial saying "holla back?" no it is not.


>and here's the most
>important argument that you can present to me - i'm calling
>for control of these images...in other words i'm calling for
>censorship, like the far-right wing conservatives of the
>republican party, i want to control what you see, what you
>hear, and what leads you to your final purchase. from my
>perspective it's control for a good cause.

- and you are doing nothing but blowing hot air. when YOU can generate billions upon billions of dollars that these images u want to protest and censor do, then you might have a viable answer. in fact, what in the hell do u want to REPLACE what it is u dont like?

>more realistic
>images of blacks will lead to a more critical viewing
>audience, and ultimately reflect reality.

- that is a very vague statement - what are more "realistic" images of blacks? there are ALOT of black people that will argue that girlfriends, 50 cent, and the ghetto is about as "realistic" as you can get. also, how will these "realistic" images generate big ratings for tv companies and big $$$$ for corporations that advertise 2 our communities? "WORD!!"

>but, if the
>marketplace can be controlled for my desires, it can be
>controlled by those who oppose my views as well. oh...but you
>missed that.

- said the man who is simply complaining and not offering up alternatives...

>see - this entire discussion is about the lack of control.
>nobody believes that "whitey" is controlling our images. it's
>the fact that they're out of control (and it's near impossible
>to control them in a capitalist society - i'll give you that).
>the question i posed when i refused to bite my lip was
>essentially, would black people create these images on their
>own?

- we already do. do u live under a ROCK!? do u think these BLACK video directors get their orders from "massa" to do these videos!? do u think movies like SOUL PLANE came from the brain of a WHITE man!? gimme a break negro, and didn't I give u the example of the blaxploitation film era?

>but i'm really starting to believe that k'orr was right,
>and you think pimps, hustlers, pushers...are reflections of
>reality and that's why they sell - so there's no point in the
>question 'cause there is no common ground.

- you keep saying "you" as if im the one in control. why do u continue to do this? see your main problem is that u are a clown. no, seriously you are like a real life circus clown that walks amongst the people instead of a tent. in YOUR brain, you think that there is a group of old white men sitting around in a room saying "give them these images!! keep them down!!" this is how your little brain works. however, this isnt how REAL LIFE works. and deep down u know that isnt how it works, but as a clown, your job is to shuck and jive...2 entertain. but instead of entertaining for kids in a tent, u are shucking for these "activist" types that are also clowns....

>>WHO WOULD THRIVE "NOT"PUSHING THESE IMAGES!?!?
>
>anyone trying to reach a black consumer base. only those
>trying to reach the general "white" market would thrive, and
>they'd thrive because of sheer numbers. they're not trying to
>reach the black consumer - at least not realistically. i know
>people born into upper-middle class families who follow
>marketers whims like they're bloodhounds trailing dred
>scott..."ooh, nelly...ooh, jay-z...oooh, T.I....ooh, fitty
>cent." they walk around their neighborhoods with untrained
>pitbulls, they answer their doors with machete in hand, and
>their home is filled with sawed off shot-guns. living in fear
>and creating fear amongst their neighbors. do marketers want
>their money? they'll take it, but that's not their target
>market, they're nothing but icing on the cake - reinforcing
>the images that marketers have created.
>
>http://www.graffiti.org/faq/esposito.html
>
>quit playing the scarecrow and paste this.

- well I cant help you man. in your world, black people are walking around sad and depressed, and ALL we do is complain about our oppressions and the images that we see on television...in your world black people are REALLY saddened that we see rims, hoes, gold teeth, tatoos, guns and brains all on our television sets...*sigh*...i guess we have no choice but to walk around with braids, golds in our mouths, rims and have a bunch of hoes too...oh woe is us. in YOUR world, black people truly desire to wear khakis and suits everyday and everytime we blaze up a blunt or go to pull our pants down below our asses we cry a river....help us...oh please help us "activists"...your people are lost...please fight the evil media from controlling us for another decade...

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

SEROTONIN
Member since Jan 14th 2004
48 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 10:04 AM

Click to send email to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
33. "RE: more on how marketers co-opt black culture..."
In response to Reply # 0
Thu Jun-02-05 10:05 AM by SEROTONIN

          

Very poignant essay here. A lot of it makes sense. In one camp you have your capitalists in their "all well and good for the dollar" attitude and then you have the anit- "if it's not for the public good, it's not good" attitude. Personally I don't want to take money out of anybody's pockets however I don't like to see marketing victims. Madison Ave. is indeed a machine and they pump out images to the masses to encourage consumption, which is fine for those that are educated, but for those who are not it causes a problem.

When you have a segment of the population that due to lack of family structure, does not have a balanced view of what is and what is not valuable, the problem begin there. Whether it is white girls emulating Paris Hilton or black boys with t-shirts to their knees and a fitted hat, if there is no parent to set an alternative value, then marketing will win.

This is not only a black problem, this is global culture issue as we are encouraged to get the latest and greatest item we focus on attaining that, then there is the "Tipping Point" and it is a "15 minutes" phenomenon (see UGZ Boots) the manufacturers quickly print their money and retire in San Tropez. So when everyone is waiting in front of Bloomingdale's to be the first to have, they are quickly just another face things get to mass markets very quickly now and because of that need to be popular, loved, etc. once again marketing wins.

Marketing is no longer about identifying with an image, in my opinon, it is about creating an image, which you know, but now so more than ever, it is about manufacturing a life that people want to have, this is why people spend time watching reality shows starring celebrities or wanna be stars, it is vicarious living. So now this manufactured reality is being sold to those of us who want to be loved and popular and rich and those who are not and have no education or foundation to save them, get lost in the shuffle.

It's an ill domino effect.
---------------------------------------
The man who views the world at 50 the same as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.
- Muhammad Ali

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Kozmikblak
Member since Sep 10th 2002
1154 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 11:06 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
35. "And there you have it."
In response to Reply # 33


  

          

>Marketing is no longer about identifying with an image, in my
>opinon, it is about creating an image, which you know, but now
>so more than ever, it is about manufacturing a life that
>people want to have, this is why people spend time watching
>reality shows starring celebrities or wanna be stars, it is
>vicarious living. So now this manufactured reality is being
>sold to those of us who want to be loved and popular and rich
>and those who are not and have no education or foundation to
>save them, get lost in the shuffle.
>
>It's an ill domino effect.

In a nutshell.
>---------------------------------------

"Designated not to make hits but hit home. Out of proportion hitmakers get blown." Common

"...you cats are undercover like GAY rappers dealing with MYSTERY." -Talib Kweli This means you, from Reflection Eternal

"I don't blame Tiger Woods, but I overstand the mental poison that's even worse than drugs" -nas poison

"For trees to grow in Br

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
PulpHustler
Member since Oct 29th 2003
264 posts
Thu Jun-02-05 05:10 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
46. "My Two Cents..."
In response to Reply # 35


  

          

Another part of the chapter, which i may post later, actually discusses the role of black consumers and audiences in being accepting of a lot of the crap that the marketing world (and admittedly myself at times) have put out.

I use an old quote from Tony Brown which says, "The greatest boycott ever waged against black businesses has been done by black consumers."

One of the huge problems, which i propose is at least partially the result of institutionalized brainwashing that affects everyone of every hue is the idea that black businesses are inferior and when multidimensional images of people of color are presented, people of color don't always support them.

I get into all that stuff and i offer solutions. I'm not one of those folks who says: "They (white people) broke it and we is so weak dat we can't do nuthin' with out they (white people's) help/approval/permission." I simply believe in being honest about problems and saying, "look we can fix this provided that we're honest about how it got broken in the first place."

As for personal responsibility...

The one thing that i learned in my years in the marketing world is that as far as marketers are concerned, "personal responsibility" is for consumers only. Marketers take the approach of "we can do whatever it takes to convince you to buy something and put money in our pockets. We can lie, manipulate, withold facts, make dangerous products, engage in race-baiting, scare tactics, stereotypes, etc. All's fair in Love of money... But if you, the consumer buy into any of what we do, IT'S YOUR FAULT."

I've never been able to figure out how personal responsibility only applies to consumers and not marketers and manufacturers... but that's how it works.



  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Kozmikblak
Member since Sep 10th 2002
1154 posts
Fri Jun-03-05 08:21 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
53. "Co-sign all of this....."
In response to Reply # 46


  

          


>
>One of the huge problems, which i propose is at least
>partially the result of institutionalized brainwashing that
>affects everyone of every hue is the idea that black
>businesses are inferior and when multidimensional images of
>people of color are presented, people of color don't always
>support them.
>
>I get into all that stuff and i offer solutions. I'm not one
>of those folks who says: "They (white people) broke it and we
>is so weak dat we can't do nuthin' with out they (white
>people's) help/approval/permission." I simply believe in being
>honest about problems and saying, "look we can fix this
>provided that we're honest about how it got broken in the
>first place."
>
>As for personal responsibility...
>
>The one thing that i learned in my years in the marketing
>world is that as far as marketers are concerned, "personal
>responsibility" is for consumers only. Marketers take the
>approach of "we can do whatever it takes to convince you to
>buy something and put money in our pockets. We can lie,
>manipulate, withold facts, make dangerous products, engage in
>race-baiting, scare tactics, stereotypes, etc. All's fair in
>Love of money... But if you, the consumer buy into any of what
>we do, IT'S YOUR FAULT."
>
>I've never been able to figure out how personal responsibility
>only applies to consumers and not marketers and
>manufacturers... but that's how it works.
>
>
Just look at the recent rulings on Gillette and Tropicana.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050602/ap_on_bi_ge/blade_wars_3

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050602/ap_on_bi_ge/tropicana_ftc_5
>
>
---------------------------------------

"Designated not to make hits but hit home. Out of proportion hitmakers get blown." -Common

"...you cats are undercover like GAY rappers dealing with MYSTERY." -Talib Kweli This means you, from Reflection Eternal

"I don't blame Tiger Woods, but I overstand the mental poison that's even worse than drugs" -nas poison

"For trees to grow in Br

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
cashone_again
Member since Jan 19th 2005
66 posts
Sun Jun-05-05 01:46 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
62. "RE: My Two Cents..."
In response to Reply # 46


          

>Another part of the chapter, which i may post later,

gimme some more

- - Cash Rules Everything Around Me - - MOVE!
- Mighty Mos (from the East to the Left Coast)

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
brokenchains79
Member since Nov 22nd 2003
6561 posts
Sun Jun-05-05 07:14 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
65. "Co-sign on the delegation of personal responsibility!"
In response to Reply # 46


  

          


*****
Gina is out of control
I'm out of control
the whole--damn--party
--is--out--of control!
(c) White Bob
*****

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Lobby OkayActivist Okay Activist Archives topic #32999 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.25
Copyright © DCScripts.com