The Gillette controversy could be good for sales – if it holds its nerve
While the Gillette ad certainly created column inches, will it actually translate into cold, hard cash? Pure Public Relations’ Phoebe Netto attempts to cut through the noise.
Gillette’s ad has cut deep and touched a nerve. That is what the brand wanted. In a more crowded market that is diluting its market share, Gillette needed to cut through the noise with a razor blade.
And cut it did.
Huge brand exposure, talkability, media coverage, and influence. Never before have feelings about a shaving brand been so strong.
I hope Gillette does stick to its guns. Then, when it goes broke, it will be an object lesson to any other marketer that endorsing toxic feminist stereotypes of men comes at a price.
Hear hear.
And this after so many year of Gilette and others charging a sizeable premium for the feminised (ie. pink and rounded) equivalent of common items like razors. Utter humbug.
I can’t help but think you are one of those that live in a ideological fairy land, this isn’t opposing an executive order that proactively attacked people, it’s an advert that actively attacks the character of a majority of men for the misdeeds of a few!
I agree with Chris lets hope the car crash happens in full view, we’re tired of this toxic cultural movement.
Was the Holden campaign really that bad? Watching it without specifically looking for gender stereotyping, nothing stood out to me. Yes, perhaps they could have featured a couple of more ‘power shots’ of women. However, form a commercial point of view the ad is product centric, catchy and funny – it does what it is supposed to do, which is to sell cars.
P&G ad says “To say the right thing. To act the right way. Some already are, in ways big and small. But some is not enough.” but it should have said “To say the right thing. To act the right way. Most men already are, in ways big and small. Now help the rest to get the best”<- a far better slogan and nobody would have felt offended. We all agree on the fact that the meaning of “some” is closer to the meaning of “few” than to the meaning of “many” or even to “most”. So how come that the defenders of this ad say “the ad doesn’t say all guys or most guys are bad”? All defenders of this ad show us another ad where with “some” the advertiser meant “most” or “many”. P&G is toxic to the world and splits humane society to make more profit. #toxicpg
It would be nice if they made a ad about toxic femininity, there is much more of that these days. Privileged women who weaponize there sexuality for social status, control, and personal gain. Also, this author and all the women who thinks it’s there place to point at men and cry foul, as if your some God like entities.
Attacking your customer base in an ad makes sense?
LOL
What’s next for P&G ? Always ad attacking women?
I don’t care if Gillette “holds its nerve”, they lost me as a customer, among most of my friends, for good. How dare they judge me, a customer of 25 years.
I don’t think this ad will ever run on mainstream TV. As far as I’m aware it’s only ever been released on social media. If we don’t see it on mainstream TV then your question about Gillette holding it’s nerve will be answered Phoebe.
It’s obviously made for the US.
Personally I think it will go down like a lead balloon in middle America (Trumps rust belt).
This is a good point. If Gillette had any nerve whatsoever, if they had a real commitment to this position, a belief that it would drive sales, then we would be seeing this ad during the Superbowl.
But then the P&G execs are not quite that stupid.
Regardless of gender everyone needs to stand on their own character, values and morals, treat all people with respect and appreciate the productivity that diversity brings. Phoebe brings valid focus that Gillette would do well to own this now and build on it.
Problem is Kerry-Ann that Gillette can’t ‘own it’ because they don’t treat everyone with respect themselves. They blatantly disrespect all women by charging them more than men for almost identical products, the so called pink tax. It is estimated to be an average of over 20% in the UK with the razor category showing the most alarming mark ups (34% in some cases). They are doing nothing in areas where men are struggling – suicide, homelessness. They have glibly tried to piggy back an issue without getting their own house in order first.
At the outset the ad is deplorable to begin with, but purely from a marketing point of view, the timing is the determining factor of its failure.
This ad in 2016 or the beginning of 2017 would have had a completely different reception, unfortunately for Gillette (and most other brands), who don’t care one way or another on any issue as long as there is a boost in sales and brand value, they failed to see toxic femininity was reaching critical mass and the pushback was inevitable. It fell upon Gillette to provide the fulcrumatic point of the pushback.
It’s definitely had an impact on me, I’ll never buy another Gillette product for the rest of my life.
I’ve used Gillette for 25 years. No more, nor any other P&G products in future.
The commercial itself isn’t the point. It’s this stuff that will really do the damage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj8VpuLSkHY
Great intentions, average strategy and really poor execution
And the other thing is that it only showed white males behaving ‘badly’, not any other colour. It was other colours telling them to behave better. Even more gutless.
gillette…
Bought their products for years.
I foundthe you tube adv so “toxic” and biased- Gillette actually gave me a reason never to buy any of their products again.
Never trust a company that takes the moral high ground.
Good riddance forever Gillette !