Sony's racist Advertisement?

[B_horribleperson]

you know why i didnt buy one when they first came out cuz it was black and i hate black people so i didnt buy one cuz if you buy something that is black then that is supporting black people. i also dont have anything that is brown or yellow or red cuz if its not white then im not buying it.


ANYONE WHO PLAYS THE RACE CARD SHOULD BE SHOT ON THE SPOT

 

[jeremyA]

The whole point of any advert is to get people talking about it,and they have achieved that aim.If it upsets some people then thats all for the better as far as they are concerned.

 

[Matthew]

You might as well hang it up NIC. People are always screaming about how abused they are around here.

If you suggest maybe they're being a little too sensitive it just proves how racist/misogynistic/homophobic you are as far as they're concerned.

​

Totally!

When will they realize it's just all in their heads?

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

Totally!

When will they realize it's just all in their heads?

Maybe when they stop making condescending sarcastic remarks implying that there's no room for discussion?

HorriblePerson.. got a good laugh out of your post. Though the vast majority of my home electronics are black... I guess I've got a secret fetish.

 

[AlteredEgo]

There are plenty of people of African descent living in the Netherlands today. Amsterdam is easily among the most ethnically diverse cities I have ever been to, up there with London, New York and the greater Washington area.

Choosing not to see this ad as "racial in a negative way" does not stem in any way from naivety. Of course the particulars of the photo shoot were very deliberate, but there is no negativity and no racism inherent in it. What exactly are you implying? That in any photo where there are two people, one white and one black, it is automatically racist because... why? The white person is clearly superior in some way without there being anything to indicate that they are?? Are you sure you want to make that assertion? Or that somehow when a model's skin color is used to create artistic contrast that's somehow exploitative? (that's going to put a lot of darker-skinned models out of work if ture) In the several different poses here the two models seem to be willingly exchanging power. To me, asserting that this advertisement is racist seems more racist than the advertisement itself. and a big flipping waste of energy.

Did you look at the photos? Do you see how very light, and how very dark the couture models are? Did you see that they are having a catfight? Do you know who actually made the ads? Did you know that firm specialized in campaigns designed to agitate?

Nothing clearly indicates the white woman is superior? Give me a break. Of course the one representing the newer white model is superior. Why else should you buy the new model? Further, if a person, any person touches me the way the white model is touching the black one, I'll break his or her nose for him. And I don't have very good aim so I'm likely to take out an eye instead. Don't you think it looks aggressive?

By the way, the ads don't offend me. I just know what time it is.

 

[Jessica]

Did you look at the photos? Do you see how very light, and how very dark the couture models are? Did you see that they are having a catfight? Do you know who actually made the ads? Did you know that firm specialized in campaigns designed to agitate?

Nothing clearly indicates the white woman is superior? Give me a break. Of course the one representing the newer white model is superior. Why else should you buy the new model? Further, if a person, any person touches me the way the white model is touching the black one, I'll break his or her nose for him. And I don't have very good aim so I'm likely to take out an eye instead. Don't you think it looks aggressive?

By the way, the ads don't offend me. I just know what time it is.

To all those that see race and racial issues in this piece of advertisement.

I think you are reading between the lines and you are imagining too much.
Take a deep breath, and, let reality set in.
Following your statements, then, the white woman on the floor, while the black woman is on top, should make all white people offended.
It is a cat fight, not a racial fight. That is the way an ex I had, thought about black male white female ads. He got so mad, he would scream BS.
It is easy to understand what he felt, he thought the media was promoting black males to white females, to enrage white males.
I did not know what to say, because, we never see the juxtaposed picture. Is he right? we do not know. My advise to him, and to you, is to, stop focusing on negatives, and look forward. You are losing energy that you could use on other things

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

Did you look at the photos? Do you see how very light, and how very dark the couture models are? Did you see that they are having a catfight? Do you know who actually made the ads? Did you know that firm specialized in campaigns designed to agitate?

Nothing clearly indicates the white woman is superior? Give me a break. Of course the one representing the newer white model is superior. Why else should you buy the new model? Further, if a person, any person touches me the way the white model is touching the black one, I'll break his or her nose for him. And I don't have very good aim so I'm likely to take out an eye instead. Don't you think it looks aggressive?

By the way, the ads don't offend me. I just know what time it is.

Yes I looked at the photos. Since we're playing "let's ask rhetorical questions" now, did you read my posts? There were several pictures posted, some with the "white" model in a superior position, some with the "black" model in a superior position. Of course I noticed how dark and how light the models were. I'm guessing both are in makeup and were photoshopped afterward. Whatever is your point? It's not as if the "white" model appears normal and the "black" model is a super-dark chariacature. Where is the disparity? Both are stylized representations. Yes, the white model PSP is the newer one and the one you're supposed to get excited about buying, so they're going to play up the contrast as much as they can to try and convince you it's actually something you should notice when most people in the real world wouldn't give a crap about a portable gaming device being released in a new color plastic. They're trying to make it seem like a big deal, but I see only artistic contrast in the ad, not implied superiority. Are they going to stop selling the black ones? Does the advertising firm really suspect that people are going to get excited about buying a Playstation that they feel connotes white power? These should be rhetorical questions, as well. What time do you think it is, exactly? My watch has 2006...

 

[Snozzle]

Honestly, I do not see the racial content of this advertisement.

I wonder how many of the people who can't see the racial content are non-white.

 

[AlteredEgo]

No. The advertising firm suspects people will argue about it. They are good at getting this result. They know just who to get involved to get this result too. And like I said in my original post to this thread, none of it is arbitrary.

 

[Matthew]

Maybe when they stop making condescending sarcastic remarks implying that there's no room for discussion?

Ha. There is an abundance of condescension coming from all sides, yours not least of all.

 

[D_Elijah_MorganWood]

Regardless of racism or not, good taste or otherwise...it got plenty of attention and people remember what was advertised and who made it. Is it offensive? Of course it is. Was it a saavy marketing move? You bet.

 

[b.c.]

The issue (I think) is not so much whether any of the ads are racists or not, or whether they depict a "cat fight" in which the two models are in alternating positions of dominance.

The issue to me is that the ads are deliberately designed to play upon people's feelings regarding race, racism, and race relations, and therefore fall into the category of what I call a "cheap shot" kind of advertising ploy.

We ought to be weary by now of corporate (and political) entities that play upon those baser emotions. Show your disapproval of their crassness by ignoring the ad and the product.

 

[dreamer20]

The add shows the conflict of a white figure wearing a christian symbol and a dark figure. (The cross is clearly displayed in the first image.)
Her disdain for the dark character is palpable and the juxtaposition of the two in a negative manner was deliberately used to avoid the "Like A Prayer" type controversy. Madonna's sensational video (shown below at the link) featured a Black Messiah, interracial intimacy and an interracial kiss. Sadly Pepsi caved in to the bigots' complaints in that case and cancelled its Like a Prayer ad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icrUkBaSefs&search=like%20a%20prayer

Sony avoided a display of affection betwixt these women and has put them in a role similar to that of Darth Vader's and Luke Skywalker's or the main characters in many a Kung Fu flick where the opponents are identified by different solid colors.

That's all I have to say for now.

 

[Lex]

Well, Madonna had a black Jesus and white woman being seduced by him so you knew people were gonna go apeshit about that!

As Bronx said--this ad does not offend me, but I DO know what time it is.

B.C.'s points are also very much on target:

...The issue to me is that the ads are deliberately designed to play upon people's feelings regarding race, racism, and race relations, and therefore fall into the category of what I call a "cheap shot" kind of advertising ploy...

 

[dong20]

Regardless of racism or not, good taste or otherwise...it got plenty of attention and people remember what was advertised and who made it. Is it offensive? Of course it is. Was it a saavy marketing move? You bet.

I don't find it offensive per se, just OTT, and savvy? without doubt. I agree with dreamer20 that it seeks to incite such feelings and that is where any offense should lie; the cynical manipulation of ingrained predjuduce.

I don't think I'm naive but I didn't see inherent racism there though I can see how some might see it that way; to me though that says more about them that it does about the advertisement.

I see nothing wrong in rattling our collective cages from time to time, making us re-evaluate our preconceptions lest we drown in an ocean of PC inspired blandness. Rightly or wrongly Sony took a concept and went with it, better that than being spineless; where the mere suggestion of colour, difference or sterotyping is taboo, to be swept under the carpet lest someone be upset by the sharp reminder that yes, we do live in a diverse world; something to be celebrated not denied.

I worked in marketing for (thankfully) a short time and this campaign will have been carefully honed and lawyered for its intended audience, which was not the US for what appear valid reasons. It's not that Europeans condone racism, real or imagined; far from it, but I do think we're less inclined to 'see' racism where none exists.

By any definition of racism, and this is the UN one :

"...any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, color, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.. "

Put in context I don't really see, objectively, how one can infer that either party is truly being treated in such a manner, or, if one is then they both are; yet the balance of any perceived discrimination appears decidedly one way, which again says more about selective judgement than objective analysis.

 

[Captain Elephant]

"Klan endorses Pepsi after announcement of Coke Blak"

 

[Lex]

Images of light and dark have been used since the dawn of time in a variety of ways.

It would have been, to me, more provocative to have the dark-skinned model in the white outfit and the caucasian model in the black outfit.

As is, this just comes across as old and tired. Yawn.

 

[B_Hickboy]

Images of light and dark have been used since the dawn of time in a variety of ways.

It would have been, to me, more provocative to have the dark-skinned model in the white outfit and the caucasian model in the black outfit.

As is, this just comes across as old and tired. Yawn.

I would have liked it better if they'd been naked, with the black girl fisting the white girl. Would have made a real statement.

Just my preference, you see.

 

[AlteredEgo]

The issue (I think) is not so much whether any of the ads are racists or not, or whether they depict a "cat fight" in which the two models are in alternating positions of dominance.

The issue to me is that the ads are deliberately designed to play upon people's feelings regarding race, racism, and race relations, and therefore fall into the category of what I call a "cheap shot" kind of advertising ploy.

We ought to be weary by now of corporate (and political) entities that play upon those baser emotions. Show your disapproval of their crassness by ignoring the ad and the product.

You have expressed my exact feelings on this.

 

[naughty]

Yes,
and the word for that is Chiaroscuro, dear.

That explains so much to me about your personal aesthetic. I do think the suggestion you made about switching costumes is great one. Your inner artist is having his say....

Images of light and dark have been used since the dawn of time in a variety of ways.

It would have been, to me, more provocative to have the dark-skinned model in the white outfit and the caucasian model in the black outfit.

As is, this just comes across as old and tired. Yawn.