- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: New Gillette commerical invokes #MeToo, blames men for everything.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 10:02 am to AbuTheMonkey
Posted on 1/15/19 at 10:02 am to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
Here's what happened.
Context:
- Gillette is getting killed by the 18 - 35 demographic and has been losing market share YoY for almost a decade straight - frankly, P&G has largely done a terrible job with the acquisition in general
- Launched a big women's support initiative last year as part of the marketing campaign to both corral more of that market and stem the bleeding on their younger male market (or so they thought)
- P&G cut back big time on digital spend last year and is trying to re-arrange the ad spending market almost all on their own right now, and they're taking some risks; that includes both giving business managers (Tide, Gillette, what have you) a lot more leeway and working with some pretty out-there digital targeting types to get away from traditional marketing
What Probably Happened:
- Some late 30's or early 40's VP of marketing in Cincinnati with an MBA from Harvard or Northwestern and steeped in SJW religion has been pushing an idea like this for several years in order to "think outside the box" and "re-position our brand"
- The losses in their men's shaving business have continued unabated
- SJW VP of marketing continues with the internal campaign
- They bring in these new micro-targeting people who don't have the marketing experience or the common sense to tell them how stupid this was
- Some pushover division head in Cincinnati gave it the go ahead, as did their CMO and CEO, and patted themselves on the back about how forward-thinking they are
- They decide to throw the ad as a hail mary in the 18 - 35 demographic
- Ad back-fires spectactularly
Contrast with the Nike Kaepernick campaign (which was very well done, IMO):
- Preachy, lots of negative images, chastising, grouping a huge demographic into stereotyping buckets (P&G) vs. inspiring, lots of positive images, physically beautiful, talking to the customer as an individual (Nike Kaep ad)
- A fairly radical departure against the company's historical branding (P&G) vs. yet another step very much in line with the company's historical branding (Nike)
- Using a hot button political and cultural flash-point as the in-your-face theme of the campaign (P&G) vs. using the hot button political and cultural flash-point as the more subtle narrator of the campaign (Nike)
TL/DR: Old, clumsy company tries to reverse course on 100 years of branding and fails spectacularly for a lot of reasons.
I’d bet a lot of money this is exactly what happened.
3
Posted on 1/15/19 at 10:39 am to FairhopeTider
Ana Kasparian is uglier than dog shite
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:09 pm to Jrv2damac
491k dislikes....
Think that is easily the most I’ve ever seen.
Hopefully Gillette is looking for a new head of marketing.
Think that is easily the most I’ve ever seen.
Hopefully Gillette is looking for a new head of marketing.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:13 pm to Lsut81
They’ve been ddeleting dislikes as well.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:17 pm to brian_wilson
quote:
it ends with a positive message - men can do better.
How the frick is that positive?
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:21 pm to St Augustine
quote:
They’ve been ddeleting dislikes as well.
And comments out the wazoo. They had comments Gillette had liked and replied with then later deleted when they realized the comment was trolling them
Like the ones in the screenshot on page one have been deleted lmao
This post was edited on 1/15/19 at 7:22 pm
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:23 pm to goofball
quote:
How the frick is that positive?
How is it negative?
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:27 pm to goofball
Brianetta is a 9th wave feminist. Took his husband's last name and hyphenated his own with it.
Brianetta Wilson-Sanchez
Brianetta Wilson-Sanchez
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:44 pm to FairhopeTider
quote:
I’d bet a lot of money this is exactly what happened.
Actually this surprised me. I spent most of my career working on the creative side of ad agencies and the other part of my career working at a large CPG company (well known for their Ketchup) and P&G is considered the gold standard for brand management and strategy.
That they would make this type of play is very surprising; but the premise you posted, having been on both sides of campaigns like this, sounds very plausible.
A lot of well educated, out-of-touch (most likely female) brand managers thinking they’ve locked on to winning strategy was the cause. They get locked in on making a brand something that it’s not or shouldn’t be, because they end up with a huge marketing budget laid at their feet.
Also CPGs don’t recruit Harvard and Northwestern much. Texas, Penn, UVA, Duke, Carnegie Mellon and Cornell’s MBA programs are the typical main targets for recruiting. If you’re lucky you get to work with folks that that get that went to West Point or Annapolis, they were the best brand mangers to work with.
This post was edited on 1/15/19 at 7:50 pm
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:46 pm to Powerman
quote:
How is it negative?
Let's see, imagine if the message was:
"Blacks can do better"
Would you consider this a "positive" message?
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:47 pm to Smeg
quote:
Let's see, imagine if the message was:
"Blacks can do better"
Would you consider this a "positive" message?
And after 30 seconds of pushing black stereotypes.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:49 pm to goofball
quote:
And after 30 seconds of pushing black stereotypes.
EXACTLY
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:55 pm to FairhopeTider
I agree, while the Kap ad was full of shite (he didn't sacrifice anything, he just sucked) it was done 10000% better than the Gillette ad. It's hard to hate on a purely positive ad even though its still slinging mud around.
Gillette's ad basically said its common for fathers to watch their boys fight, blood sport style, in the back yards and tap their beers together and say "Boys will be boys". Had they taken a more positive position, just showing great role models, saying this is the best men can do, it would have been taken a lot differently.
Gillette's ad basically said its common for fathers to watch their boys fight, blood sport style, in the back yards and tap their beers together and say "Boys will be boys". Had they taken a more positive position, just showing great role models, saying this is the best men can do, it would have been taken a lot differently.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:59 pm to Smeg
quote:
Let's see, imagine if the message was: "Blacks can do better" Would you consider this a "positive" message?
Exactly. Read their description...
"Bullying. Harassment. Is this the best a man can get?"
Change it to...
"Rampant murders. Fatherless homes Is this the best blacks can get?"
And have a commercial shot the same way this was but be about that instead.
That would be political suicide. No doubt.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 8:14 pm to Cs
Awaiting,
Tampax: PMS, is this the best women can do?
Tampax: PMS, is this the best women can do?
Posted on 1/15/19 at 8:16 pm to flyAU
Or Maybelline making an add about false rape allegations.
"Maybe its make believe?"
"Maybe its make believe?"
Posted on 1/15/19 at 8:20 pm to RolltidePA
quote:
Also CPGs don’t recruit Harvard and Northwestern much
Agree with all your post except this. Know a ton of both HBS and Kellogg in it, especially at P&G.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 8:31 pm to Smeg
quote:
How is it negative?
quote:
Let's see, imagine if the message was:
"Blacks can do better"
Would you consider this a "positive" message?
Powerman, you were asked a simple question here. Answer it.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 8:43 pm to kingbob
worth a re-post!
quote:
Women bond by making fun of OTHER women behind their backs.
Men bond by making fun of EACH OTHER to their face.
Men fight because fighting is fun. Seriously, how many of you as kids pretended to be professional wrestlers and tried to suplex each other on a trampoline? I know my friends and I did. The intent was never to harm, and the fun was over as soon as someone got hurt. Boys don't usually fight to harm their fellow boys. They're not doing it to assert dominance, destroy others' self-esteem, or any of that other girl-fight bull shite. That's how boys play. They play by rough-housing.
Women simply "play" in different ways. The problem is that women in schools assume that boys and girls fight for the same reasons or at least with the same intentions. Women never fight physically unless they are trying to straight up murder another person. All their fighting is done through teasing or passive aggression. This is because women can never be direct about ANYTHING!
The real problem is toxic femininity. Women need to learn how to express themselves directly and honestly to each other. They need to learn that the success of others isn't a personal failing of themselves. They need to learn that the best way to get what you want isn't by tearing someone down, but by learning from that other person you envy. They need to learn to collaborate to compete rather than snipe to destroy. They need to learn that their social value isn't defined by what girls who are mean to them say it should be. Their worth isn't defined by possessing what others covet. They should never fall for the lie that talking = intimacy and emotional openness. Unless that talking contains substance, it is nothing but useless jibber-jabber. Women need to learn to build each other up instead of shame and torment each other. Women need to learn that the appearance of perfection isn't nearly as important as the lessons learned from failure. They need to learn from imperfection as opposed to simply covering it up.
When boys fight, if the loser defends himself and stands his ground, even knowing he's going to take a beating, he earns respect, even in defeat. I can tell you first hand that I gained a lot of friends losing fights growing up because I was easily the scrawniest, tiniest kid in the class, but I refused to back down from a challenge. Women need to learn to deal with rejection, learn how to lose with honor. The only dishonor is in giving up and hiding, which is what damn near all women do when fighting about EVERYTHING.
Basically, women need to learn from boys how to tolerate one-another, because they're sure as shite not learning that stuff from destroying each other.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 9:22 pm to PEPE
quote:
Seems like Gillette is betting hard on actual men being almost completely replaced by sissy soyboys in the next generation or two.
That’s the problem. The soy-boys grow metro beards
Page 17 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News