To the extent that an ad is 'effective', it is a window or a gauge of what viewers find not only 'acceptable', but what they find engaging.
To the extent that viewers act out, imitate or otherwise internalize what they see in advertising, the ads contribute to the collective psyche.
Sex sells brands.
It captures the attention of the audience in a subtle, or not so subtle way...
What do we do when an advertiser has chosen to be careless or even reckless with their usage of certain images and archetypes?
Remember the Calvin Klein ads?
The status quo is to do nothing...assimilate, desensitize if you're offended, or change the channel.
Fine.
I personally feel that this approach only contributes to the furthering of the agenda of those who would exploit children in the media.
I've noticed 2 ads that fall into this exploitative category, imo.
There seems to be a theme of 'incestuous sexuality is as sweet and innocent as a country drive to the strawberry stand' in both ads, which I find extremely disquieting.
The use of the color RED is tactical and present in both cases.
The first ad shows a little girl saying 'goodbye' to her 'daddy' who's departing on a business trip. The Mother is absent from the scene, which in itself is not suggestive.
However, in the context of the ad, her absence may be more meaningful.
As daddy is leaving, the child pines, "Promise you'll call me...?", to which daddy replies affirmatively.
Then, we see the child riding her bike, gazing to the sky, as if to watch daddy's plane fly away.
In the background, we hear a Woman singing, "No matter where you go, I will be with you."
This sounds so sweet, however, there are obvious overtones of extraordinary intimacy...more like the intimacy that the girl's mother would express...imo.
On the phone with daddy, for instance, the child actually puts her fingers in her mouth in a way that you'd have to see to appreciate fully.
At the end of the ad, when daddy returns, we are left with the image of the girl leaping forward into the air, arms open and outstretched to greet him, though we never actually see 'daddy' again.
The message of father/daughter companionship is wholesome in itself...the message is worthy of promoting, but it's the execution of these particular ads, the images artfully presented, that I see as worthy of examination.
The next ad I want to discuss is more direct and graphic in it's insinuation of a 'sexualized' daughter/father relationship...making my point much clearer.
I think it's a cheap way to peoples 'hearts'.
It needs to be seen for what it is, rather than excused.
|
