Article: Black bride brochure racism row

[Paul Hjul]

actually to illustrate a little bit differently

assume a white couple want to get married in a "traditional Xhosa wedding" they have a general expectation when getting a brochure to see black people and somebody organizing "traditional Xhosa weddings" (and judgment as to whether such an exercise automatically defeats authenticity is reserved for the purposes of this exercise) would be well in their right to require that the designers use a black model. However most white South Africans (and for that matter most South Africans of all races) would be a little uncomfortable with it being said "use a black model because the whites just want to eat our cattle and drink the beer".
I expect that black couples considering the venue will simply anticipate seeing a white model on the pamphlet.

The problem is the women's essentializing all black people and applying a negative stereotype but it is banal and a frequent unfortunate occurrence.

In fact the "Indian wedding chapels" in the US use Hispanic models - you probably find an overwhelming number of fat white dudes involved in weddings but an expectation to see a perception exists. Audience targeting is fine.

 

[HideInLight]

One thing about marketing I've learned, people cannot accept the truth.
If targeting and stereotyping gives you a 90% success rate, then why not?

They've run the business for years, they know what kind of people lives in that area.

 

[Paul Hjul]

One thing about marketing I've learned, people cannot accept the truth.
If targeting and stereotyping gives you a 90% success rate, then why not?

They've run the business for years, they know what kind of people lives in that area.

yet again (seems I am speaking to a brick wall here) the legitimate concerns did not arise from the marketing material it arose from the email:
"The designer reportedly told the newspaper she was appalled by the comment" - because black couples "marry differently, want to party outside resort rules and at best come here to take photos at the dam".

changing the brochure is perfectly sensible - in fact if I was the staffer for the ATKV (writing amusingly in English) I would have replied in the following vain: "it is a simple marketing reality that the use of a 23-29 year old white model bride will more aptly cater to our target audience and subsequently we require that you make the necessary changes"

To repeat slightly differently:

There is no racism in designing an ad to appeal to a specific target market.

Correct
and

The staffer refers to the group as "black people" there's the race factor, and then there's the painting them as a people who will refuse to follow rules - hence a negative connotation.

Correct

So there kicks in the problem. Also btw they haven't "run the business for years" particularly successfully compared to the pure private sector in hospitality. I haven't seen a single person in this thread or on this article elsewhere suggest that the redesign itself is wrong. In fact where we should be moving towards as a society is putting before marketing, design and art students the rejected brochure and the accepted brochure as an illustration of things - especially when paired with the literature on cultural adoption and expectations.

 

[Dean]

Paul unfortunately due to hypersensitivity or otherwise, some folks in here just can't seem to understand what we're saying. No matter how much we tell them that no one is arguing target markets, they still seem hell-bent on painting this as a marketing issue.

If you're keen to continue repeating yourself, by all means, but I'm going to reserve all further finger energy for another group who actually read what I type and (re)shape their rebuttal accordingly

 

[diabolus]

I also don't quite see the racism. Yes, the comment about blacks breaking the rules and partying is stereotype/racist because whites do that too . However the part of not wanting a black bride on a piece of marketing for an AFRIKAANS (ATKV) group/company is certainly not racist, it's marketing.

How about people demand having white people on marketing for a black group/company in the middle of Soweto? Is that racist if the company says no, they want black people on it because the target market is [obviously] black? I think not.

This over sensitivity to be "political correct" is just a load of BS. I think most people, especially whites will see right through an advert where there is intentionally a black/coloured person thrown into the mix for "rainbow nation harmony" BS . I mean i know ATKV resorts, i know Klein Kariba, it's as white and "boer central" as things can get, why would they want a black couple on their advertising? Seriously.

 

[House]

I do not see any racism here at all. Even if this was indeed a request from the client to remove a black person's image and replace it with white.

Why should any person or company be forced to use a black person in marketing material? This is just utterly ridiculous!

If the company has a specific venue or event or product that they wish to market to a specific audience, why force them to use something not relevant to their audience. As example, if Lifeboy wants to target a specific campaign to a specific part of this country, let's say the Northern part of the country and 18 -40 year old black people, is it fair to force them to use Japanese people in their ad?

The only problem I see here is that the graphic designer probably could not do her job. After being confronted she ran to the media with a BS story.

If a company wants to spend millions of Rands on promotions or marketing why are they forced into specific ads, why is it such a crime to create an ad with only white people?

F**k this!

 

[House]

My last point of view is that I hope that this company and the graphic designer who ran to the media never gets used by any other company ever again. Hope they close their doors and all end up unemployed. Can't wait for their names to appear somewhere in the media to be blacklisted by companies making use of graphic designers!

 

[crackersa]

i find it funny that people are trying to separate the marketing aspect and the racist comments from the employee. unfortunately, the employee made racist comments which make the marketing argument pointless.

why is it ok for the AWB not to have Africans on their brochures?

 

[diabolus]

i find it funny that people are trying to separate the marketing aspect and the racist comments from the employee. unfortunately, the employee made racist comments which make the marketing argument pointless.

why is it ok for the AWB not to have Africans on their brochures?

Oh and you mean the EFF will have whites on theirs?

 

[Dean]

I also don't quite see the racism. Yes, the comment about blacks breaking the rules and partying is stereotype/racist

I'm glad we're in agreement. Though writing "I also don't quite see the racism" before "the comment ... is stereotypical/racist" was an interesting way of saying so

 

[STS]

I do not see any racism here at all. Even if this was indeed a request from the client to remove a black person's image and replace it with white.

Why should any person or company be forced to use a black person in marketing material? This is just utterly ridiculous!

If the company has a specific venue or event or product that they wish to market to a specific audience, why force them to use something not relevant to their audience. As example, if Lifeboy wants to target a specific campaign to a specific part of this country, let's say the Northern part of the country and 18 -40 year old black people, is it fair to force them to use Japanese people in their ad?

The only problem I see here is that the graphic designer probably could not do her job. After being confronted she ran to the media with a BS story.

If a company wants to spend millions of Rands on promotions or marketing why are they forced into specific ads, why is it such a crime to create an ad with only white people?

F**k this!

The issue here isn't the ad itself. The issue isn't the fact that people seldom use this venue. I don't know how often people need to hammer this point in this thread. Throw away the venue, throw away the ad, throw away the graphic designer, and you end up a person sending out a stereotypical racist email about black people.

It is a mountain out of a molehill, if that is her beliefs then she is entitled to them. Why is this everyone else's problem tho and they don't deserve jobs now? You're equally blowing this out of proportion

 

[Dean]

I do not see any racism here at all. Even if this was indeed a request from the client to remove a black person's image and replace it with white.

Why should any person or company be forced to use a black person in marketing material? This is just utterly ridiculous!
F**k this!

F**k this indeed! F**k everyone who still, after clarifying it over and over again, still can't see that no one with a semi-coherent argument here said that there was anything wrong with changing the image.

The only racist aspect is where the client was quoted as saying that black people won't follow the rules, etc.

Now please, again, write another thesis about why the client isn't racist for wanting to change the image. You'll make our day!

 

[diabolus]

I'm glad we're in agreement. Though writing "I also don't quite see the racism" before "the comment ... is stereotypical/racist" was an interesting way of saying so

As a previous poster pointed out. The comment is racist, the marketing requirement is not. The article is insinuating the racism stems from not wanting a black person on the marketing material, NOT from the additional comments made (look at the article's headline for a clue). So again, i don't see the racism with the marketing material. If they got a problem with the racist remarks made, then this article is not focusing on the right angle.

To put it another way, if the client made no comments and just stated they want a white couple on the marketing material (after being presented by a black bride initially) , would this have been seen as racist?

 

[STS]

Hey, maybe her email was taken out of context maybe she meant "black" people, as in the struggle

 

[Dean]

As a previous poster pointed out. The comment is racist, the marketing requirement is not. The article is insinuating the racism stems from not wanting a black person on the marketing material, NOT from the additional comments made (look at the article's headline for a clue). So again, i don't see the racism with the marketing material. If they got a problem with the racist remarks made, then this article is not focusing on the right angle.

To put it another way, if the client made no comments and just stated they want a white couple on the marketing material (after being presented by a black bride initially) , would this have been seen as racist?

No, it wouldn't have - at least not by the forumites arguing the racial aspect of it.

I can't comment on any ulterior motives of the publication/author because that would be pure speculation on either side.

Thank you for clarifying/repeating what we've been saying all along.

 

[House]

The issue here isn't the ad itself. The issue isn't the fact that people seldom use this venue. I don't know how often people need to hammer this point in this thread. Throw away the venue, throw away the ad, throw away the graphic designer, and you end up a person sending out a stereotypical racist email about black people.

It is a mountain out of a molehill, if that is her beliefs then she is entitled to them. Why is this everyone else's problem tho and they don't deserve jobs now? You're equally blowing this out of proportion

You cannot take away the venue, the ad and the graphic designer, you need to look at everything in context here.

If you developed a hair product aimed at black people with short hair specifically, why would you include a white female with blonde long hair in your promotion material?

On the other hand, why must any other company be forced to include black people in ads when they decide to launch a specific marketing campaign for just white people?

The company is not denying black people access to their facilities, but they decided to target a specific cultural group for their wedding facilities. They have statistics on how black people uses their wedding facilities and how white people is using it. So, obviously they wanted to run a campaign to make more money from a specific group.

Why are they not allowed to do this?

Just because a person or company decides to target a specific racial group does not necessarily make them racist. It could be a business decision.

The problem in SA is the fact that if a company does not target the black community they are classified as racists and this is BS!

 

[STS]

You cannot take away the venue, the ad and the graphic designer, you need to look at everything in context here.

If you developed a hair product aimed at black people with short hair specifically, why would you include a white female with blonde long hair in your promotion material?

On the other hand, why must any other company be forced to include black people in ads when they decide to launch a specific marketing campaign for just white people?

The company is not denying black people access to their facilities, but they decided to target a specific cultural group for their wedding facilities. They have statistics on how black people uses their wedding facilities and how white people is using it. So, obviously they wanted to run a campaign to make more money from a specific group.

Why are they not allowed to do this?

Just because a person or company decides to target a specific racial group does not necessarily make them racist. It could be a business decision.

The problem in SA is the fact that if a company does not target the black community they are classified as racists and this is BS!

You are seeing what you want to see

The designer, who did not want to be named because she did not want to create trouble for her former employer, spoke to the newspaper and forwarded it an e-mail to back up her claims.

In the e-mail the ATKV staffer reportedly asked that a black bride shown on the brochure for the Klein-Kariba holiday resort in Waterberg be removed because black couples "marry differently, want to party outside resort rules and at best come here to take photos at the dam".

The staff member who was quoted in the resort manager's e-mail to the design company recommended that "if you must/want to use photos of colour, then rather a coloured couple".

The headline implies that the brochure is the problem, as the media normally posts crap headlines to grab attention. If you read the contents, as quoted above, you will see that she forwarded the email as the issue.

She has judged a group of people before they've even registered there. Now she hasn't turned them away, turned them down or said "no, you cannot marry here." which is why this is being blown out of proportion. but to excuse her comments, if true, is also just as silly.

i am equally irritated by people who tell people what they can do and say with their own private advertisements and only the extremely ignorant would complain about the ad itself. this news article suggests differently though

 

[House]

You are seeing what you want to see



The headline implies that the brochure is the problem, as the media normally posts crap headlines to grab attention. If you read the contents, as quoted above, you will see that she forwarded the email as the issue.

She has judged a group of people before they've even registered there. Now she hasn't turned them away, turned them down or said "no, you cannot marry here." which is why this is being blown out of proportion. but to excuse her comments, if true, is also just as silly.

i am equally irritated by people who tell people what they can do and say with their own private advertisements and only the extremely ignorant would complain about the ad itself. this news article suggests differently though

First of all, they have not turned any group away. They just requested a specific image to be replaced with another to target a specific racial group for their campaign. Never had the client said anywhere they do not allow black people.

In fact, I have a black colleague who actually went to the resort for a weekend last month. He was not denied access. The same colleague was referred there by a black couple who married there some time ago.

So again, the client never said black people can't marry there. They just wanted to target a white audience for their campaign. They gave valid reasons based on actual reasons why and how black people used their facilities before and that the reason why they only wanted to target white people in this specific campaign.

What is wrong with that?

 

[grok]

We replaced it with a white bridal image, but it's outrageous.

The only thing outrageous here is the designer thinking she knows better that the client. I would not have paid her had she given me something different than I wanted for my brochure.

Simple as that.

 

[House]

The only thing outrageous here is the designer thinking she knows better that the client. I would not have paid her had she given me something different than I wanted for my brochure.

Simple as that.

Totally agree, but I personally think there is more to this than meets the eye. I still think the designer did not do her job and when confronted ran to the media turning the whole incident to some racist BS.

Until there is laws prohibiting companies from making use of white people alone in advertising material, there is nothing wrong with any company asking to have white people in their marketing material.

Any person claiming racism is just simply blind to the facts here.