Let me preface this posting by explaining a little bit of my current position and perhaps bias nature. We live in an age over sensitivity that frequently boils over into over-sensitivity. While it is great that society can check itself to prevent racism, sexism, violence, and other ills, there are times when we look so deeply into transgressions to find something offensive that we aren't simply being anal, but we are oppressing ourselves and restricting expression. We have gotten to the point of turning subtle slights into grand offenses, and we often perform such evaluations selectively. If someone is extremely well liked publicly, society will be more understanding of even the most grievous of actions; at the same time, someone or something largely despised (such as a phone or cable company), will be pounced on without mercy and the smallest of transgressions. We must find a balance.
I agree selectively with the deconstruction, but to a lesser degree. I think that the narrator in the video uses the video to apply sweeping generalized statements to AllTel, which I do not agree with. While repeated offenses could represent something more, I always struggle to believe that commercials represent a companies own biases.
To explain this, think of what a commercial is designed to do. Companies create commercials and strategically place them to reach select target audiences and deliver a select message to those people. In many situations, commercials for different demographics are not made exactly the same because different demographics are often seeking different things in the products they choose. This is not an excuse for a company to use racism or sexism in its ads, but it does explain much of the setting the text of the ad. My guess is that this ad was scheduled to run on tv at times when middle class white Americans were most likely to see it.
In terms of the racism, I can see the narrators point. The commercial does portray the renters as somewhat primitive and very non-American. There are three men living in one room with a chicken, they are loud, and they still cling to their culture. To the commercials credit, the men do seem to be of indistinct origin, however, and seem a combination of stereotypes. To this affect, the commercial seems to understand that they are using stereotypes for humor. For it to be less offense, they could have downplayed the stereotypes a bit, or perhaps more it more easily recognizable that the stereotypes do not represent a certain type of people.
I think we have to ask a question of offense instead of viewing something and assuming who is offended, and why? Is there a specific population that is offended here? Why? Because the commercial is targeting white middle class Americans? What if that is their main source of income? Do the ethnic men represent a specific culture or people enough to be offensive? The video isn't exactly funny, so the joke failed, and it is a bit tasteless, but I really don't think it is offensive...rather, it is directed at a certain group. If the overall message of the video was "Save money on your phone plan so that ethnic men don't get your room," then it would be offensive. The point is, that is not the overall message. The ethnic men are used blatantly as comic relief, and the overall message is "money is tight, phones are expensive, people are desperate, and we can save you money." In my opinion, that is.
To reiterate my initial point, I don't believe it is correct to use a commercial and its comedic relief to apply general statements about a companies prejudices and beliefs. Many might disagree with me, and that is okay.
No comments:
Post a Comment