Today's guest post is by Peppercommer Jason Green.
Booze, women and cars. Look around. I bet all of the men in sight are thinking about one, if not all three, of those things right now.
Yet, some people, sorry RepMan, are still searching for the reason why companies depict men as one-dimensional, thoughtless goofs. In my humble opinion, IMHO for the millennial readers, brands are not given much of a choice. At Peppercomm, we espouse the gospel of listening, engaging and repeating. From my experience, with men of all ages, that is exactly what brands are currently doing.
When it comes to planning well-rounded family vacations, ensuring that the house/apartment is germ free and spotless, feeding the family and/or pets nutritious food, etc., women have the market cornered and it would be a waste of resources for PR professionals and marketers to attempt to connect with men on these issues. A recent Village Voice piece shines an extremely bright light on the subject (thanks, Laura Bedrossian). The message is clear: men want MEN’s products and don’t want to concern themselves with much else.
What’s more, men don’t seem to care or think it is necessary to stick up for our gender. This is one of the main reasons I think that the “Gay Men Will Marry Your Girlfriends” video spread like wildfire. I’d like to present exhibit A: the straight man’s response to the video. In short, it says, “we know we’re idiots, and we don’t care at all.” It is satire, but as the old saying goes, there is a little truth to every joke.
BuzzFeed recently reported on the “man’s version of Pinterest,” called Manteresting. At least before the existence of Manteresting, there wasn’t an online destination for men to “nail” and “bump” their desires. This was the final straw for me and I hope it was for others. While women are out having a thoughtful debate about what is means to “Lean In” and if that is possible for every woman, men are racing back to the Stone Age.
This isn’t to say that there aren’t thoughtful, organized, less-hedonistic men out there, but I think it is clear at this point that we are not the majority. Based on the chasm between products marketed to women and men, I’d say our industry is onto something. Their message is resonating and it looks like they are planning to repeat it. I can’t blame them.
The days of just bringing home the bacon and being detached from household decisions and responsibilities is long gone, in case you needed to hear it again. It is up to us now. We need to “dig in” and change the way men are perceived. Otherwise, I fully expect to see whiskey flavored Greek yogurt on the shelves to satisfy a man’s desire to further comingle breakfast and drinking.
A little late to the game here, which I’ll blame vacation for and not a lack of interest in this subject. First…for the record…bourbon isn’t (just) the drink of Neanderthals. But…I digress. I think some of you who seem in disagreement are all actually right. Madison Avenue has long appealed to a certain subset of men in advertising that seems to offer decent enough “ROI.” They seem to adhere to the, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mentality. In the process of reaching that “target,” have they considered the “negative ROI” of all the people they turn off with their advertising focus? Consider it the Axe body wash conundrum: you gain a reputation with a subset of men, at the potential risk of turning off many other potential customers.
As I tell my students, be disturbed by the advertising you see that’s targeted at you. Because it gives you a good sense of what “they” think you want and like. If we as a culture don’t like what’s being advertised at us, we should simultaneously blame Madison Avenue AND blame ourselves.
I personally think advertisers go to the well with what they know because it’s easy. Appealing to what they sense as baser instincts is a lot easier than actually getting to know the audiences they seek to reach. But I think we should very much care about these questions. The image advertising reflects of men in our culture is often not a great one…and as a father with two girls growing up faster than I want them to, I care very much what the next generation of men think “being a man” means.
A little late to the game here, which I’ll blame vacation for and not a lack of interest in this subject. First…for the record…bourbon isn’t (just) the drink of Neanderthals. But…I digress. I think some of you who seem in disagreement are all actually right. Madison Avenue has long appealed to a certain subset of men in advertising that seems to offer decent enough “ROI.” They seem to adhere to the, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mentality. In the process of reaching that “target,” have they considered the “negative ROI” of all the people they turn off with their advertising focus? Consider it the Axe body wash conundrum: you gain a reputation with a subset of men, at the potential risk of turning off many other potential customers.
As I tell my students, be disturbed by the advertising you see that’s targeted at you. Because it gives you a good sense of what “they” think you want and like. If we as a culture don’t like what’s being advertised at us, we should simultaneously blame Madison Avenue AND blame ourselves.
I personally think advertisers go to the well with what they know because it’s easy. Appealing to what they sense as baser instincts is a lot easier than actually getting to know the audiences they seek to reach. But I think we should very much care about these questions. The image advertising reflects of men in our culture is often not a great one…and as a father with two girls growing up faster than I want them to, I care very much what the next generation of men think “being a man” means.
Talk about a left-handed compliment! But, I’ll take it, SJWR. Too many men are too concerned they’ll be perceived as politically incorrect if they speak out against male bashing. The PC police are the Gestapo of modern-day society.
Since I’m busy paying a lot more attention to my next step on some big climb in Red Rocks and not on the nuances of Jason’s guest blog, I may have missed something. But, I know I haven’t missed the overt agendas of Madison Avenue and Hollywood, respectively, to absolutely bash males of all types (straight, gay, height challenged, etc.). Men are routinely portrayed as helpless, befuddled fools who would never solve any problem if the distaff side wasn’t there to save the day. Gender stereotyping of all kinds is bogus. Tack on political correctness, and you have the perfect ingredients necessary for guys to continually take a bullet.
It’s clearly open season on men which, may or may not be deserved. What we DON’T need is advertising, TV shows and movies that tell impressionable boys and male adolescents that they’re inferior to their female peers. That’s the type of incendiary messaging that just might be the last straw needed to set off some insecure, introverted dude. Just saying.
Jason, I love the conversation you had going on this. I stumbled across this blog post (An Open Letter to Women from Men – http://www.youbeauty.com/mind/columns/cloud-nine/letter-to-women-from-men?utm_source=disqus&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Disqus%2B-%2BCPC%2BCampaign) this morning. Look at the comments bashing this guy. I don’t agree 100% either way, but I have to admit there is some validity to the idea that men are not doing enough to stop the stereotypes. If only there were more like you…and Will…and Lewis… and Carl. And I’ll admit, even RepMan has his days.
Dandy hit the nail on the head: “I don’t think it’s so much male bashing, as it is marketing to one huge group of men.”
For women, the blanket marketing strategy is: “Shrink it and pink it.”
Whether we like it or not, both of these strategies (if you can call a cookie cutter marketing approach a strategy) must be effective as they used in big budget marketing campaigns. It’s a free market and this is what is effective in the market, sad though that may be.
For brands willing to take the time to listen and engage, they will find a more thoughtful, loyal and lucrative male audience, like our very own Jason Green.
Thanks for the explanation, Will. I think you just described the stereotypical gay man in the US.
I agree Lewis. We Brits don’t smash or bash walls.
Larking is like japing. Japing is lads (men) teasing each other and having light hearted boyish fun.
WKD is a a bright blue alcoholic drink that bears no resemblance to anything natural. It’s marketed by men who play practical jokes on each other.
Is larking around = creeping? No clue what WKD is…
Lewis: please give examples of “larking around” and what is WKD?
Will – I think little male orientated advertising in the UK would ever involve smashing or bashing. Most of it just involves men larking around (e.g. WKD).
Social stereotypes of men are different across the pond, so it stands to reason their approach to malecentric advertising will be different too.
Do you think there is a difference between the US and the UK? I remember thinking that your sports ads were very macho and largely without irony (a football player ploughing though a brick wall to get a bottle of Gatorade from an iceberg, that kind of thing). I like ads that are either tongue in cheek or are poking fun at established stereotypes. Anyway, great discussion you’ve got going here!
Couldn’t agree more Jason. There is more than enough data and unique touch-points to create campaigns that are truly tailored to individuals based on their lifestyle and tastes, rather than assumptions made on gender, sexuality, location etc etc.
Consumers are becoming proactive in ‘opting in’ to the types of marketing communications they want to receive – they see these brands and their comms slotting into their everyday life. Therefore brands need to be responsible and not reduce their audiences to just he or she – but take the time understand their lifestyle – how their product fits into it – and capitalise on this information to ingrain themselves further.
Mate (Will), Agreed that targeted marketing is useful and effective. My point is that targeted to men is not really targeted anymore. EVERYTHING has to be over-the-top macho to resonate and as a result, we are not being taken seriously (read: targeted) by markets/PR professionals for serious, responsible products. This is left to women and their brand is only getting stronger. The lads you speak of should drop the lager and be a bit more vocal about their other interests. The male brand needs some rebuilding…
Rusty, I’m saying that the beer sluggers are more prevalent and vocal, thus creating a huge opportunity for marketers/PR professionals. They are there for the taking, so give ’em what they want!
Caitlyn, Exactly my point. Sex sells, and always has, but it seems to be getting even worse and more one-sided (meaning everything marketed to men has to be positioned this way). In terms of the yogurt, we can make it here at Pcomm every morning, can’t we?
Great post Jason, the opening sentence was quite the hook! I agree with you, the advertising world seems to only target extreme ends of the specturm, there is no middle-ground anymore. It’s very similar in my mind to the “sex sells” concept that is everywhere in ads, movies and TV shows. I agree that those of us that are somewhere in the middle need to speak up to see a change, but I’m not sure how much it will help! However, I will take some of that whiskey flavored Chobani, if you’re offering!
I agree with this point. Men can be stereotypical men (just as women can be stereotypical women) whilst at the same time being very nuanced and individual. The same man might think of himself as, what we in the UK call, a lad as well as be ‘interested’ in household products, male grooming or cookery products. In the same way women can sometimes be effectively lumped together (pictures of little babies, the Diet Coke man or rabbits on tricycles do seem to resonate with this audience) but below that there are infinite divisions one can make to this audience. I think that TV marketing tends to be the most broad brush. During football (soccer) matches here all the ads are for gambling sites (we can do that here), razors and tepid lager. Lads like football and lads like beer. Easy! If only.
Very well put sir but I feel as you are implying the two types of men are mutually exclusive (and maybe that’s where RepMan’s comment is coming from as well). In fact you are just trying to say we are not one-dimensional cavemen and brands need to realize there are men that enjoy slugging beers while watching football yet willingly take on the homemaking chores formally associated to women.
First, thanks for the comments, Steve and Dandy.
Steve, I actually think we are in agreement that this type of marketing is causing a lot of damage. There are definitely exceptions to the rule, but as I said in the post, those exceptions are the minority. They get over-shadowed by the beer can crushing, rabid sports fanatics out there that demand products that play into the current male stereotypes. Why wouldn’t you keep marketing/communicating in this way if you know there is a large audience and strong demand? I want to see a change, but we have to call out who is causing the problem to get it fixed.
Dandy, thanks for the backup.
Woah, Rep, you are applying your own stereotypes. Gay men don’t like beer and cars? Widowers are so lost in love with their dearly departed spouse that they have no interest in women? And single dads are only interested in going to the playground with their kiddies? There is no one man, just as there is no one woman. I don’t think it’s so much male bashing, as it is marketing to one huge group of men with cash in the pockets and bourbon on their breath.
I couldn’t disagree more, Jason. Madison Avenue is not only reinforcing false stereotypes with its male-bashing, it’s completely alienating single dads, widowers and, of course, gay men. Then, there’s the untold damage such trash is wreaking on boys and male adolescents. Madison Avenue should be taken to task for its male trashing but, sadly, that would be politically incorrect. So, let the male-bashing continue.
BTW, Jason, I guarantee your POV (as we Boomers like to say) will change when Jason, Jr. arrives on the scene.
Spot on, Mr. Green!