Racism as a face cream?
by Carmen Van Kerckhove
It’s not clear to me who the client is, but I saw this ad campaign mentioned on Adrants, produced by the ad agency Saatchi & Saatchi.
I guess the concept is that racism is like a face cream: the more you “apply” it, the uglier you become. You can see another version here and here.
Hmm… A for effort I guess, but aren’t they really trading in one set of prejudices for another? And pushing the same old beauty standard that’s shoved down our throats all day long? I mean, are these people really that ugly? Or just not up to model standards?
What do you think of the ad?
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
S wrote:
Yeah, A for effort. Maybe the should have made her face green, or something abnormal like an aliens face, then it may not be as questionable as far as what the beauty standard is. I bet there is a woman out there who looks exactly like this lady in the picture, and I would not want her to feel bad if she saw it. I won’t knock it much since the message isn’t too bad and they ARE making an attempt to address racism. I understand that we should stand up when things aren’t right, but at the same time, if you keep knocking people’s efforts, they will give up.
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 12:54 pm ¶
Julie E wrote:
Obviously, in my opinion, there was a lot of makeup and digital touching up applied. Personally, I would have had the pic of the “beautiful” person with a overlay of the ugly within (almost as if it was trying to break out of her skin, but transparent.) Racism isn’t always as apparent as the picture tends to suggest.
Second, OK – I’m caucasion – so maybe I’m missing a point here – to me this says only whites are racist. But I wholeheartedly disagree with that. People of any color can be racist against any other color – so why just the ads with white people – unless this is a statement regarding the white majority. Every one of these people are made up to look like poor backwoods hillbillies from the outer reaches of society.
Or was it just easier to show ugliness on what may appear to the artistic eye as a blank canvass?
Racism is ugly no matter where it comes from.
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 12:57 pm ¶
P.Moore wrote:
^Julie E
That’s actually a really good point…
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 1:10 pm ¶
s wrote:
Good point, Julie. Racism isn’t always obvious, infact I’d say it has advanced to be more subtle (you can get away with it more if it’s subtle).
Good point about any race being able to be racist, though in our country, it seems as if white people have the most racist history, and even today, seem to dish it out the most (whites are the majority race here, so we’re more than likely to have more white racists than anything else.)
Plus, you have to remember, most ads, commercials, magazines, TV Shows, etc feature white people. Period.
But I think you’re right. If you have more than one ad and they ALL feature white people, it can send the message that it’s a “white people” problem/disease.
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 1:29 pm ¶
S wrote:
: (whites are the majority race here, so we’re more than likely to have more white racists than anything else.)
Sorry, I meant to say ANYBODY else, not anyTHING.
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 1:30 pm ¶
Julie E wrote:
Just one other point – a little humor to go along with this.
All they need is a banjo playing in the background, and the look is complete. Regarding how they look, I always thought this is what happens when brothers and sisters married.
And if butt ugly is what determines racism… I don’t dare look in the mirror again. Yikes!
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 1:55 pm ¶
MizuWari wrote:
And since beauty is an objective, abstract concept varied from individual to individual…that means there are people who will find the person in the ad “attractive,” yes?
Then you could say, “racism” is/will/can be attractive or pretty to some?
Her face may be suffering but her body sure doesn’t seem to be. Some people don’t give a whit about facial features. All these tangents of beauty concepts that this little ditty can segue into, directly and indirectly, depending on who is looking at it…perhaps the concept should’ve been thought out further before putting it out.
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 2:10 pm ¶
MizuWari wrote:
oops – I meant to write that beauty is a SUBJECTIVE, abstract concept…dagnabbit, where’s the edit button when you really need it!
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 2:13 pm ¶
kim wrote:
“Or was it just easier to show ugliness on what may appear to the artistic eye as a blank canvass?”
I’m sorry, clarification please. What aspect of a white person would be a blank canvas – the pale, presumably unblemished skin? a blank mind? blank what?
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 2:45 pm ¶
onebrownwoman wrote:
I don’t know how I feel about the ads, quite honestly. On one hand, I realize it’s a genuine attempt at putting the issue of racism “out there” in a way that is easier to digest for people who are resistant to the reality of it. But I feel a little agitated about the concept of equating racism with the deterioration of physical beauty…
I also think that while people of color can be racist towards other people of color, whites benefit from institutional racism regardless of whether they are individually racist. These advertisements still sell this idea of not being individually racist – which is of course, important, and applicable in day to day life – but undoing white privilege in our society involves educating everyone, particularly those who benefit from whiteness, about institutional racism. I think the ads still bring up this reaction of “well, I’m not racist, so there isn’t anything I can do – I’m not the problem”. And that..is a problem.
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 3:13 pm ¶
al wrote:
you know, it’s pretty much understood, at least in the US, that ‘racism is wrong’. the real problem is that there is so much racism that people refuse to recognize as such. which these ads don’t address at all.
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 4:11 pm ¶
Ailurophile wrote:
I think that’s a very good point, Onebrownwoman. While individual acts of racism are still a problem (see Michael Richards) it is the society-wide edifice of white privilege that really needs attention here.
I can see where ads like this might really be counter-productive in that sense. It gives the impression that “racism” is something individuals are or do – and evil individuals at that. Nothing about how whites, no matter how good or kind or non-racist they are on a personal level, benefit from white privilege. If we look at racism as strictly something bad people do then there are two negative results: Whites get all defensive when the question of white privilege is brought up, because said whites feel as if they are being accused of being racist Bad Evil People. And white people feel as if just not being racist on an individual level is enough.
Finally (okay, three results!) when white people (like Michael Richards) do or say racist things, they act as if the Racist Fairy, as Jenn from Reappropriate terms it, has bopped them on the head.
I really would like to see ads aimed at the concept of *white privilege* and stress that it’s not about “bad people” or “good people.” I don’t think I’m a bad or evil person at all but I do benefit from white privilege, being white and all. It’s about society and accidents of birth. Enough with the Manichaeanism and the dichotomy of good and evil (sorry, Ragetti!).
About the ad – she looks like a model wearing a Wicked Witch mask. They should have given her zits on her boobs or something.
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 4:11 pm ¶
kim wrote:
Institutions and the mores therein, are forged and maintained by individuals. It is the implicit as well as explicit transmission of acceptable practices and encoded language that the individuals are responsible for contributing, on a daily level, on a very fundamental basis.
While I am not going to balk that a practice of giving one’s self a pass is more like to happen as long as the argument only places the onus for racism on the individual, it must be said that in every moment of every day, it is the individual who must remain aware of and in opposition to the very nuanced ways in which racism plays a part in both their own lives as well as others.
If the individual is awakened to consciousness, is not the institution brimming with agents of change?
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 4:16 pm ¶
warrant wrote:
I personally don’t think the ads are really affective
It’s ironic that the ads equate racism with the loss physical beauty, because the premise, like the ads overall message is really superficial
I’m not really feeling the liberal individualist/consumerist approach personally, I’d like to see more ads focus on confronting white privilege/white supremacy and less ads that focus on “racism” as a means of assuaging white guilt for reasons onebrownwoman and Ailurophile describe
I don’t think that the need for individual consciousness and recognizing systemic racism/ white supremacy as an institutionalized system of domination have to be mutually exclusive which is why I think this ad fails…
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 6:28 pm ¶
Jay wrote:
Agree with al. “Racism is bad” is a message that most US people understand. That doesn’t prevent people from redefining racism out of the things they do (like “it was cast colorblind” when a show ends up with a white cast, or “it’s not all that offensive, they’re just too sensitive.”)
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 6:49 pm ¶
S wrote:
Yeah, it would be great if the privilege were exposed, but then, people would have to consider giving up there privs for the cause. How often does an exec gave up his hefty benefits to save the jobs of entry-level workers? Same applies for race.
Call me skeptical, but I just can’t see a majority of white people giving up the privs. Maybe the minimizing of racism might come from another approach. I don’t know what kind.
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 6:49 pm ¶
HighJive wrote:
Don’t have much to add here. All the criticisms above are right on. The problem with these ads goes beyond the literal executions. They don’t make an original or provocative statement. Racism is ugly. Duh. Even a hardcore racist would agree. These ads don’t motivate anyone to do anything. Or even feel anything different.
The creators are probably as clueless about racism as Michael Richards. I’m not kidding.
Posted 27 Nov 2006 at 11:07 pm ¶
Nadia wrote:
another aspect of this ad, which may have been implied by “trading in one set of prejudices for another,” is that these ads create a “type” of people who are racist. this “type” of person is not of color, which, apart from making some white people feel sad and victimized =*( , does communities of color a disservice by not confronting racism within our communities. i think it’s safe to say that, while some of us are engaged in cross-cultural group struggles and consider concerns outside those of our own particular group, many are struggling for power, for what white people have, using “the slavemaster’s tools” so to speak (and in ways that end up benefitting their shared oppressive forces), and are not concerned with equality but with getting a piece of the pie for themselves. knowing this, i wonder why people constantly need to be reminded that, yes, people of color can be racist too.
these ads succeed in absolving the guilt of white people who don’t use “ugly” words or commit “ugly” actions while skirting the issues of white privilege, white supremacist culture, public policy and other things that are less overt than referencing lynching and shouting the N-word over and over. it makes the issue of racism all about white people, with no discussion of how it actually affects people of color. it seems that they also aim to pacify people of color just by the fact that this is such a weak anti-racist ad campaign.
apologies if anything doesn’t make sense, i have been writing a term paper all day and my brain is fried!
Posted 28 Nov 2006 at 12:08 am ¶
Kai wrote:
Personally I think the ad, though well-meaning, misses the mark.
The problem with racism isn’t that it makes racists less attractive. The problem is that it fragments humanity and actively dehumanizes and oppresses the targeted racial groups. And I’m not talking aesthetically, I’m talking culturally, economically, physically. I mean, see my post on white supremacy below; the problem in those photos isn’t that the white folks are unattractive; the problem is that there are black folks dangling from trees.
People who continually insist that “whites aren’t the only racists” need to show me the thousands of historical pictures of rich blacks folks standing around smiling under swinging white corpses. Sure, anyone can be racist, but this is America so let’s be real. Discussions of racism are discussions of probabilities of power and oppression: it’s like talking about the weather, in that there are macro-patterns with micro-variations, but the macro-patterns are the point. When we say that “it’s raining in New York”, it might not be raining on every square foot of every block, because weather patterns are infinitely complex with tremendous micro-variation; but we accept the statement that “it’s raining in New York” without having to always add “though it’s not raining on certain patches”. Same with racism.
Obviously and happily, lynching isn’t as common these days, but white supremacist violence persists. For example, Hai Vo and Sean Bell. And racists who don’t personally go around shooting or assualting people of color nevertheless passively support or condone the perpetuation of a set of thoughts, attitudes, and institutions that lead to such incidents, as well as a slew of other problems.
Ultimately the problem of racism runs far too deep for such one-dimensional gimmicks. I understand the propaganda objective of the skin cream ad: instead of “this is your brain on drugs”, it’s “this is your face on racism”. And we all know how well the former ad worked.
Posted 28 Nov 2006 at 12:21 am ¶
SolShine7 wrote:
I applaud the effort. At least the creators are trying to make a difference. But it seems like the subtle message might be “ugly people” need to take off their clothes to get any real attention. It kind of fuels the “sex sells” campaign and that’s not what young people need to see. I’m probably reading too much into the ad. Again, good job on the effort!!!
Posted 28 Nov 2006 at 12:59 am ¶
warrant wrote:
Kai, thanks for excellent and thoughtful formulation of the dynamics of racism
“People who continually insist that ‘whites aren’t the only racists’ need to show me the thousands of historical pictures of rich blacks folks standing around smiling under swinging white corpses. Sure, anyone can be racist, but this is America so let’s be real.”
word.
Racism is about racial prejudice maintained and supported by institutional power and authority this is a political system of domination built on a social construct of whiteness
It’s not surprising when an ad like this can only address racism as being the cause and the result of negative interpersonal behaviours and hostility (I guess racism is just a social faux pas now) but I’m sure this is just all in the well-meaning pursuit of a colour blind nirvana…
Posted 28 Nov 2006 at 1:16 am ¶
S wrote:
Kai, you are sooo on point! I was just discussing the whole “white people are not/were never hanging from trees, last to get hired, 1st to get fired, etc” with someone who thinks black people are “just as racist as whites”.
IMO, some, SOME black people really are racist, others simply dislike or hate the people who hate them, and that is NOT racist. Once people can distinguish the two, we might be able to move on to some real racial progress.
Anyway, the ad was a nice try. I haven’t seen anything like it. What’s next, an ad advertising the racial “healing” powers of biracial & mixed kids or IR’s?
Posted 28 Nov 2006 at 3:58 pm ¶
Koko wrote:
Of course we know that white people aren’t the only racist ones. But you have to realize, most models in advertising are white, not including ads directed to blacks. What do you expect??? Secondly you have to use outward appearance because inner ugliness cannot be put in imagery.
Posted 02 Dec 2006 at 4:58 pm ¶
mark wrote:
TO the person who said people of color can be racist:
Actually racism is power + predjudice, making it very rare if not impossible for a person of color to be racist. People of color can be predjudice sure, but not racist.
Posted 12 Dec 2006 at 7:06 pm ¶
Lyonside wrote:
Mark:
This dovetails with a current post at RachelsTavern – I agree that prejudice and power make institutional racism. But “power” can be defined on an individual personal level as well, and in that context, one does not have to look at a societal level to identify racism. Case in point: a peer situtation in which one minority group singles out an individual or another minority for harassment. In the context of that group at that time, the group has power: to verbally or physically assault, what have you. I’m thinking in a school or neighborhood environment, where the group has “power” over the individual. If a minority individual has a gun, and targets members of another minority group, that gun gives power, and the action is racist. And racist graffitti, vandalism, etc. could easily target one minority group while a member of another minority is the perp.
Posted 12 Dec 2006 at 7:55 pm ¶
Donna wrote:
Well- Whites are not the only racists. I worked on an native reserve as a teacher- I did this because I felt I was working somewhere where I could really be of some help. The native people of the reserve were awfully racist toward the one black man who came to work as a teacher too. The horrible things that came out of their mouths rivaled any sick racism I’ve only heard in a movie on racism elsewhere. They were also extremelly racist against native people of other tribes. My conclusion was ALL people can be racist- being black, native, etc. is not a magical exemption from a common horrible HUMAN trait. It’s all pecking order. I also have wondered why often men who are very vocal against racism, will often be outrageously sexist. Belief in the equality of ALL people? Or just your own people?
Posted 12 Jan 2007 at 10:08 pm ¶
Donna Darko wrote:
Yes, Carmen et al are right all people can be racist.
I also have wondered why often men who are very vocal against racism, will often be outrageously sexist. Belief in the equality of ALL people? Or just your own people?
Heh.
Posted 12 Jan 2007 at 11:20 pm ¶
Donna Darko wrote:
It’s core belief three:
We go beyond the concerns of the specific community to which we belong and recognize that when one group is discriminated against, it is an affront to us all.
Posted 12 Jan 2007 at 11:27 pm ¶
Donna Darko wrote:
(back to lurking)
Posted 12 Jan 2007 at 11:27 pm ¶
Yvonne wrote:
It looks like red herring to me, they place an ad to show you what you think it should look like and one you can ready accept. However, racism is inequality in America, can any of us do anything about that.
Posted 16 Mar 2007 at 11:23 am ¶
Yvonne wrote:
correction readily
Posted 16 Mar 2007 at 11:25 am ¶