Your Thoughts On Levi’s, Race & Advertising

The piece I posted last week in reaction to Levi’s Go Forth ad campaign generated a lot of commentary. Beyond whether people agreed with my thoughts on advertising or not, the post created a heated discussion about race in advertising. Here are some of the comments made:

Christine Huang thanked us for striking up the conversation and said:

As you aptly put it – the campaign just fails to reflect the America – country of “pioneers” and fearless individualists – it’s claiming to represent. It just fails to connect. Perhaps WK was going for timelessness, but all I see is irrelevance. Today’s “Pioneers of America” aren’t shirtless waifs walking into the sunset, and this ‘new world’ is a lot more interesting, and built on much more heritage, than these empty images communicate.

It’s interesting to see how some people are reducing the issue to one of race-blindness vs multiculturalism. I don’t think anybody is saying all ads needs to have a multicultural message – but one that purporting to celebrate the American spirit – in this day and age – arguably should.

Greg Rollet shrugged:

Honestly, the ads aren’t terrible and they will get some attention. I do agree that they missed the boat on culture and the “new America,” but hey, its just to sell some jeans.

Kenzonian made a point about immigration:

except for groups who were brought here forcibly, most large migrations came to this country because of the promise of a better life. Many of those groups — Chinese, Mexican, Filipino, Irish, Italian — have walked off the boat into virtual enslavement. These people have provided the bulk of the muscle which has built this country. In fact, in all of history, the only great monument that was built by people who were working on their one free will, is the Acropolis.

I actually think [the Levi's advertising] suffers from trying to be more then A&F. A&F makes no bones about what kind of people it is trying to attract. It doesnt seem like a good strategy in today’s market, but that’s them.

GW said it’s not Levi’s issue to get involved with race politics:

In my opinion this post is blowing things way out of proportion. I don’t believe advertisers have an obligation to “connect with the great things that are happening in this country, the radiant mix of cultures evolving within it”. Doing so could possibly increase their sales, as it would make their brand more relevant to more people, but I don’t think that it is their duty to do so. They exist to sell a product, not to provide sociology lessons.

J sided with Christine:

I agree with Christine. Levi’s was a great brand. And quite sadly it seems to have missed the boat. And I’m not just talking about America. In Europe, Asia etc. youths don’t go for Levi’s like we used to. As for the campaign, while it looks rather modern, the idea and messages is shockingly backward. Feels like a 40 year old gatecrashing into a rave/indie party.

ABarber gets too the point:

I bet all of you who don’t see what the big deal is about these ads being so White are, well White. Which is exactly the problem with the today’s advertising industry as well as corporate America. The fact that in this day in age any brand, or ad agency, who is attempting to sell products to US citizens at large, would not think to include a single person of color is ridiculous and completely offensive.

If you’d like to add your opinion, please add a comment to the original post here.

(Photo is of a promotion outside Abercrombie & Fitch’s new Hollister Store in NYC’s SoHo which mentally prompted me to look at the comments again)

PSFK: Levi’s Does An Abercrombie & Fitch