Article taken from: The Straits Times, Page 46, May 31st 2008
If you're lazy to read the article, it's about how Dunkin' Donuts was slammed for their ad which showed celebrity chef Rachel Ray in a fringed black-and-white scarf, similar to a keffiyeh, which "offered symbolic support for Muslim extremisn and terrorism". I think this is an example of how perception is a powerful tool which can cause some to see terrorist threats in the form of a beverage advertisement.
How one views the advertisement depends on how they first select the information. If I had not read the article, I would have omitted the resemblance of the scarf to a keffiyeh, seeing it as an ordinary accessory. For those who raised complaints, however, did they do so due to distortion in their selection or is there really a reason to be worked up?
What made the audience so angry is their perception of what the keffiyeh represents, and we know that perception is shaped by many things, some of which are the media or our cultural background. Those who are ignorant about what the keffiyeh represents would wonder what all the fuss is, while there are those who would stop to wonder about the intentions of the advertisement: Is it subtly promoting terrorism or simply unaware of the insinuations of the scarf?
If you're one who follows the news on terrorism closely and it's something that hits close to your heart, you might perceive the scarf inappropriate. If you're into fashion, you would see the scarf as a mere accessory (and they are; keffiyehs have been a fashion trend and Topshop even sells them with skull prints!) and find the complaints ridiculous. When I first came across the article, my first reaction was that there should not have been such a big fuss created over the scarf. After giving the issue some thought, however, I see why it might not have been such a good choice, honest mistake or not. What do you think?
The controversy surrounding this ad also makes me think about how we judge people. Would the issue be more serious if say, a Muslim had been in the advertisement instead?
After all the terrorist attacks, it is okay for people to be afraid, but is it okay for people to judge? We hear the announcement in train stations all the time, about being wary of people carrying suspicious items. Would you be more suspicious of a well-dressed, clean-shaven, person with a huge box or an Osama-lookalike? In all honesty, I would be more wary of the latter, because it better represents the prototype of a terrorist. I think that as much as people insist that they do not judge or at least try not to, it is something that cannot be helped sometimes, thanks to the cognitive schemata in us.
The question is, do we continue to let our perceptions rule our mind or do we fight to free ourselves from these misconceptions?
6 comments:
this is a very good example of how cultural difference will affect perception. i believe if this ad was first printed in China or Japan, their people will not quickly or easily relate the scarf with it's negative symbol.
with that said, this also shows the importance of doing research about where the message will be heard, and who the audience will be. something seemingly harmless to the writer may have a different meaning to the reader.
sure enough, one of the main determinants of our selection is our cultural differences. having kept clear our target audience in mind, could we then effectively portray our product in the correct(socially, politically) light in an advertisement.
Interesting how a scarf can cause conflicts nowadays. Yes on one side the evil terrorists and on the other the anxious overzealous citizens.
I guess on this case it boils down to the cultural differences, as you said someone who is oblivious the meaning of the scarf would be wondering what this fuss is all about.
The sad thing is perception is subjective, it unfortunately varies from one society to another..So placing an advertisement for public consumption is tricky. But thats what the marketing people in the company are for - Pleasing all or most of public..
:)
thanks zed, i like how you brought about the point that the ad would have been seen differently in another country!
like tburn says, advertising is really tricky cause of how subjective perception is, but yes lucas, we should always bear in mind not only cultural backgrounds but the context as well!
the keffiyeh seems to be a fashion staple of many 'hipsters' nowadays who do not seem to be aware of the socio-political connotations brought about by wearing it, and it's sad to see the 'sheep' mentality of people. it would be fallacious to assume that "because many people wear it, it's okay if i do too" - and i guess this case leaves a deeper impact as it illustrates a somewhat careless side of advertising, where audience as well as context play such an important role in determining the success, or in this case downfall, of an advertising campaign.
in my personal opinion, while it's important for advertisers to do their homework and ensure that whatever they do doesn't cause any conflict with the masses; it's also important for the latter to be tolerant to a certain extent and to try not to jump to conclusions, for it might have simply been an oversight by the former.
Post a Comment