You're looking at this ad.
Yes, and as you look closer, your eyes start to widen at the context of this photo.
But, AS HARD AS IT IS TO BELIEVE, this was a real advertisement shown in Thailand for Dunkin' Donuts. *unimpressed face emoji*
(I think we can all relate to how the Queen is feeling with this ad)
In this article, a description of the article was written as follows: (PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE BOLDED WORDS)
"The advertisement opens with a fair-skinned teenager wearing a white dress standing in a white room. A close shot of the girl’s face reveals a flash of defiance in her doleful eyes before she bites into a chocolate doughnut. Then the camera cuts to a splash of chocolate, the girl takes another bite -- and suddenly her white face turns black.
After that, the camera pulls back to show the girl now painted in chocolate all over, including her hair, done up in a 1950’s beehive. Her lips are bright pink. Finally a tag line flashes across the screen: 'Charcoal Donut: Break every rule of deliciousness.'"
(The video)I really wish I could say that I was kidding but that would be LYING. Obviously, many people had a problem with this advertisement. However, the director of Dunkin' Donuts Thailand, whose daughter was in the campaign, had a very different opinion on the whole topic.
While many thought the ad was, hmm...let's see
RIDICULOUS,
SHOCKING
and
UN-NECESSARY,
she commented on the backlash, saying, "It's absolutely ridiculous." Nadim Salhani continued with, "We're not allowed to use black to promote our doughnuts? I don't get it. What's the big fuss? What if the product was white and I painted someone white, would that be racist?"
In the article, it has quotes from others who support the director's side which just goes to show the many different outlooks presented.
Every story has two sides to it and every debate will always have two opinions argued.
Whether they used this advertisement for the shock and controversy to bring more attention to it or not, THEY GOT IT.
The fact that the girl changes her skin colour after eating a donut was such an odd concept that many Americans, specifically, felt offended and were left confused.
And that is how I felt after seeing this ad for the first time.
It just felt weird until I clearly saw the other side where a Thai cultural commentator and writer made an interesting point that this ad wasn't focusing on racism of people of a darker skin, but it was more about the unattainable beauty of the white people.
In Asia, the obsession for fair and light skin that is continually promoted by SKIN LIGHTENING organizations has become a symbol for "wealth and glamour."
As the cultural commentator has said, she believes that instead of focusing on how this ad looks like it's being racist to black people, more focus should be put onto the obsessive preference with white skin. Since it is said in the article that most Thai people are not light skinned, this is something they all aspire to.
So, really, after hearing two sides, it's weird to try to pick one.
This ad could be seen as racist to the Americans, who seemed to have the most to say about it, but it was not seen as racism towards the black people from those in Thailand.
The commentator mentions how black people are not the target of this campaign and uses Thailand's love for Tiger Woods as the evidence to the point.
Whether he is the most convincing person for this argument or not, it is said that the true racism is against themselves. With light skin being the ideal beauty standard, dark skin is supposed to represent a lower social class and an unsophisticated Thai society. So no, apparently they are not targetting black people at all and it is focused more on the Thai society as a whole.
Dang, and I thought it was all
just about eating a chocolate donut.
But it goes to show that advertisements are often interpreted in many different ways based on the culture and views of a society. Americans seeing this ad were offended versus the people of Thailand who felt nothing out of the ordinary to this ad. Just when you think you know exactly what an advertiser was trying to do and you're excited you have it all figured out, it gets twisted on you.
With something like this, it really is up to your own interpretation and many of our opinions will come as a result of the way we were raised and our existing understandings of what is right and wrong in our society.
Whether they used this advertisement for the shock and controversy to bring more attention to it or not, THEY GOT IT.
The fact that the girl changes her skin colour after eating a donut was such an odd concept that many Americans, specifically, felt offended and were left confused.
And that is how I felt after seeing this ad for the first time.
It just felt weird until I clearly saw the other side where a Thai cultural commentator and writer made an interesting point that this ad wasn't focusing on racism of people of a darker skin, but it was more about the unattainable beauty of the white people.
In Asia, the obsession for fair and light skin that is continually promoted by SKIN LIGHTENING organizations has become a symbol for "wealth and glamour."
As the cultural commentator has said, she believes that instead of focusing on how this ad looks like it's being racist to black people, more focus should be put onto the obsessive preference with white skin. Since it is said in the article that most Thai people are not light skinned, this is something they all aspire to.
So, really, after hearing two sides, it's weird to try to pick one.
This ad could be seen as racist to the Americans, who seemed to have the most to say about it, but it was not seen as racism towards the black people from those in Thailand.
The commentator mentions how black people are not the target of this campaign and uses Thailand's love for Tiger Woods as the evidence to the point.
Whether he is the most convincing person for this argument or not, it is said that the true racism is against themselves. With light skin being the ideal beauty standard, dark skin is supposed to represent a lower social class and an unsophisticated Thai society. So no, apparently they are not targetting black people at all and it is focused more on the Thai society as a whole.
Dang, and I thought it was all
just about eating a chocolate donut.
But it goes to show that advertisements are often interpreted in many different ways based on the culture and views of a society. Americans seeing this ad were offended versus the people of Thailand who felt nothing out of the ordinary to this ad. Just when you think you know exactly what an advertiser was trying to do and you're excited you have it all figured out, it gets twisted on you.
With something like this, it really is up to your own interpretation and many of our opinions will come as a result of the way we were raised and our existing understandings of what is right and wrong in our society.
No comments:
Post a Comment