ILoveGay.NET

By Alfred Verhoeven

In the past you had “hecklers”, people who loudly commented on the performing artist during a stage performance or comedy program. This was pretty much followed by letters to the editor, where readers, citizens or concertgoers could vomit (because it was more often negative than positive). But putting your thoughts on paper – yes, real paper – is a different discipline than making yourself heard on social media.

For my PhD research “Marketing the Rainbow” I look at the way in which and the reasons why a company, brand or organization focuses on the LGBT consumer. That is – sometimes still – a sensitive subject that ruffles the feathers of whole groups of people. If you like something, click on those thumbs that cheerfully stick up. But if there’s anything you don’t like, the anonymity of social media and the sleight of hand of the users leads to a cascade of inaccuracies and ‘opinions’. I grouped them together to see what’s happening here.

1. The Haters

Dissatisfied citizens, frustrated youth, conservatives for whom the world is black and white. They need something to resist and “IRL” no one listens to them anymore. Online, they can just go wild. And they often reinforce each other in the superlative and through the bubbles they live in. Or rather: circles that have an overlap with others (that doesn’t work with bubbles, because they burst) and then you occasionally end up in an environment that you don’t like – but you can express your hatred there, so that’s an advantage. Or worse, they look for reasons to hate.

I say “Conservative” because my research is about progress and a Conservative doesn’t like that. Diversity, inclusiveness, new gender roles and identities, alternative families, tolerance (or rather, respect) for people you didn’t know existed because there was no punk, goth or gay in your village. That’s scary, so you have to hate it, and everyone should be aware of that – often anonymous – hatred. I envision dim garrets and damp man caves where people like this hang out. But let’s not think too much in boxes or caverns.

I previously wrote about the contradiction between Cadbury and Doritos “From hate to endearment” – because every now and then positive feelings also emerge – where entire tribes were disgusted by the many ways in which the sugary sweet, syrupy Cadbury Egg was consumed, but especially how two swaying men did it. So it resulted in a good portion of hate, including the solemn promise to NEVER buy that brand again…

2. Religion

Few religions are not conservative: makes sense, because our society has changed so rapidly at an ever-increasing rate, that sense giving (which religion often is) takes place in other ways, and the role—and thus power—of religion decreases. Sometimes advertising touches religion, for example Doritos’ Pixar-esque commercial for All Saints’ Day in Mexico in which Uncle Albert has his post-mortem coming out. Then the commentators cry that Pepsico should stay away from such an important national holiday and such a lament then quickly degenerates into the encroachment of “ancient Aztec cultural heritage” – which it is not at all (read Cultural Sensitivities and Social Engagement in Marketing).

Complaints do not only come from Christians, but also from Jews (Doritos in Israel) and Muslims (Samsung in Singapore), and not always about a religious holiday. Haram, sin and the violation of ‘religious values’.

3. Nationalism

Cultural heritage has already been mentioned above (and foolishly abused). But there are also other norms and values ​​that are used all too often to kick others. This is mainly xenophobia, the same core value that put Trump and friends in the spotlight in recent years. Fear of the unknown, seeking a scapegoat for your own mistakes or misery.

So shout out loud that it’s a shame that Coca-Cola is singing the well-known tune “America The Beautiful” under a Superbowl advertisement in English, Spanish, Tagalog, Mandarin, Hindi, Hebrew, Keres, Senegalese-French and Arabic – and on top of that showing two fathers with their child opened all the floodgates of American troll nationalism.

THE ANTHEM IN NON-ENGLISH! disgrace! Unpatriotic! “Screwed up a beautiful song. No more Coke for my family.” After the ad aired, the hashtag #SpeakAmerican appeared on Twitter. Well, then I laugh diagonally. First of all – er “Speak American”? Furthermore, this is not the national anthem but just folklore, and as a bonus it was written by the lesbian Katharine Lee Bates. Back to you, trolls.

4. Agenda

Apparently, there are quite a few gay agendas being pushed down throats. I tried to visualize that for a moment and indeed, that is quite suffocating. But the gay agenda that I know, next to the lavishly decorated one from my high school days, is probably not the one that is meant.

We now know that companies no longer just talk about the product: I always cite Coca-Cola as an example, I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing from 1971, but brands such as Diesel and certainly Benetton have also used it. Certainly the ‘agendas’ of the latter were very diverse: gender and racial inequality, domestic violence, hunger, natural disasters, war, refugees, religious prejudice and child marriages and pregnancies. OK, there was a lot of discussion about that too (especially about that photo of the AIDS patient on his deathbed, which has been seen an estimated 1 billion times), but I didn’t hear anyone about ‘agendas’.

Get Woke, Go Broke is also common here, because the complainants are convinced that a company that is socially committed will go bankrupt. If only because THEY and their ENTIRE family will never buy anything from that brand again!

5. Kids

My kids see this! What these people are actually saying is “I have no problem with <fill in>, BUT …” and such conditional flexibility is of course no flexibility at all. The various advertising authorities make rules about what may and may not be broadcast around children’s programs. The complaint of the parents would (perhaps) be justified when it comes to violence, strong language, unhealthy products or sex. In the case of Marketing the Rainbow, offense is taken very quickly. And the children are really not allowed to see anything that indicates anything other than man-woman-son-daughter (in that order) in a house with a white picket fence…

This 2008 British commercial by Heinz in which two men shared a kiss was meant to be comical: mother prepares packed lunches like a true New York-Italian chef. Kiss.

After the ad regulator received about 200 complaints that it was offensive and inappropriate, Heinz withdrew this TV ad and apologized to viewers. A closer look at the complaints showed that most were from the US, organized by the circles around the certified hate group American Family Association as “a coordinated homophobic campaign” — after the notoriously reactionary Fox News host Bill O’Reilly taunted about it on his program.

The video was never shown in the US. Complaints centered on it being “unfit to be seen by children” and that this raised the difficult problem of parents discussing the issue of same-sex relationships with the young ones. However, the ad had an ‘ex-kids’ restriction meaning it was not shown on or around children’s programs, as Heinz Deli Mayo does not adhere to watchdog Ofcom’s TV ad restrictions on products high in fat, salt and sugar. There was no mention of that kiss. Except by the haters, of course.

Incidentally, the concept of protecting kids in its most extreme form has led to Russia’s anti-LGBT law, which criminalizes the distribution of materials to minors “in support of non-traditional sexual relations” – amending an existing child protection law.

In Poland we know the  “LGBT not allowed” cities and regions (what does that remind us of?), although they soon found out that Europe wanted nothing to do with that and money taps closed. That is a kind of reverse Destination Marketing, but more or less unconsciously and without thinking about the other consequences.

But the US also knows how to do protect the kids: Florida recently passed a law that was nicknamed the “Don’t Say Gay Bill”. This will limit discussions about sexual orientation and gender identity in schools – read ‘prohibit’ on the penalty of hefty fines. That house with a white picket fence, remember.

6. Burgers

In 2018, cartoonist StoneToss created a four-panel comic in which a man presents an ad for a hamburger company depicting a kiss between people of different races. The manager wonders if the ad will help sell burgers. The closing image says “Burgers?” and that has subsequently gone viral in memes where users highlight something that deviates from its original purpose.

There are over 1,700 videos on the YouTube channel that illustrates my research. Some appear to meet a need, because the original brand withdrew the video, or it was in a language other than English without subtitles. That then leads to a flood of visitors and a cascade of commentary that are ‘below par’. StoneToss is quoted and paraphrased dozens, if not hundreds, of times, and every commentator beams with delight in the delusion of being original. But no – and also not relevant. The cartoon was enjoyable for a moment, but when it comes to advertising, different rules apply. Because it is no longer about the product alone.

Conclusion

Everyone knows that you really shouldn’t pay attention to comments on social media. And certainly don’t react to them. But because I wanted to study all sides of the subject in the context of my research, I did. Painful, time-consuming, shocking: at some point I put a cork in it (excuse the pun). But the broad traits are recognizable, and I’ll just go with that.

Alfred Verhoeven is a marketer and is in the final phase of his PhD research Marketing the Rainbow. He previously wrote for ILOVEGAY about 5 Bizarre LGBT Videos, TRANSparency, Transgender persons as a target group, Matchmaking, 5 videos that went viral, From Representation To Respect, Cultural sensitivities and social involvement in marketing, 4 reasons to practice diversity and The Rules of Market Segmentation.