Since I have been indirectly labeled an extremist, I feel this qualifies me to be in the position to reach out to others who may be the same.
This is how I felt after reading Jonah Bloom’s article at Glenn Sack’s blog. Jonah is Executive Editor and writer for Advertising Age, a weekly marketing and media publication. Mr. Bloom wrote a column titled, “When It Comes to Whining About Ads, Father Knows Best” with the sub-title “Extremist Group’s Rants Shouldn’t Detract Ways advertising Must Be Held Accountable”
Well, beginning an article that labels men and fathers - who are conscious about how the media and advertising agencies portray them - as “extremist” is a little extreme itself, isn’t it? In this day and age, when someone labels a class of people as an “extremist group”, it has the tendency to imply radicals who fly loaded passenger jets into skyscrapers. Obviously Mr. Bloom is skilled in extremist hyperbole himself.
But it gets worse.
Mr. Bloom’s article centers on the number of men and fathers who voiced complaints and opinions about the recent Superbowl commercials and the consistent double-standard they’ve felt in the media for some time. Advertisers are very conscious not to use visuals or language that might appear derogatory, degrading, or insensitive to certain groups of people in our society. However, there is one group that is always the exception - men.
Males as a whole are still the largest class of people that can be openly discriminated against without fear of serious reprisal. Portraying men as dumb, insensitive, childish, or on the receiving end of “humorous” violence, usually of the genital kind, can be seen in many forms of media. The particular commercial used as an example in Mr. Bloom’s article was the one produced by Pepsi which showed Justin Timberlake being mysteriously dragged towards a young woman drinking a Pepsi product. The whole commercial consisted of him enduring a brutal, endless stream of violent acts upon his person, including the proverbial “crotch crushing” present in so many forms of media.
The protesters were questioning this apathy towards males in the media, including advertising, when compared to women or other groups. I assume Mr. Bloom would be offended by a commercial that shows women enduring numerous episodes of genital and bodily violence in the name of humor. I say “assuming” because ironically, even though Mr. Bloom opened up his article with an e-mail received about this double-standard, he fails to seriously address it. Strangely, he avoids the whole argument concerning the disparity in violence directed at males and females in the name of humor even though it is the opening topic. He dismisses the commercial’s violence as simply “Justin Timberlake bumping into stuff”, and labels the men and fathers who voiced their concern as “unhinged individuals with too much time on their hands.”
While he chose a road of indolence when trying to comprehend and analyse the argument presented to him, he sure was tenacious and laborious in itemizing and analysing those who dared voice their opinion. Here is a sample of the words he chose to describe the men, fathers, and environment they create by protesting the negative images portrayed by the media and advertisers:
extremist, lunatic, assault, gaggle of men, loose coalition, attacked, tortured, trumped-up charges, acolytes, cheap, backlash, endlessly parsing, unhinged individuals with too much time on their hands
Let me just tell you Mr. Bloom, as a card carrying member of the extremist groups you mention, I am very upset by your choice of words. I am seriously dismayed that your extremist language is much more experienced than mine or my cohorts. Your choice of words makes me and my cohorts look like “extremists lite”.
He continues his harangue, and towards the end of the article he really shows his skills in the hypocrisy department. Invoking a pious guilt trip, Mr. Bloom thinks that there are more important issues within the advertising industry other than worrying about the negative images of men and fathers. He says the most pressing issues in the industry right now are: financial institutions with aggressive campaigns pushing credit to consumers whose debt loads are already crushing; advertisers spending billions to support an Olympics in a country with an abysmal human-rights record; companies with shocking environmental records making claims to environmental friendliness; the merits and pitfalls of advertising drugs directly to consumers; and that presidential primaries could come down to who spent the most on ads.
So I took a look at some of his recent articles to gauge his concern on these issues, the information he offers, and what he is doing to challenge this dark side of the advertising world. Here is what I found:
“A-List Agencies Are More Than Just New-Biz Machines”
“Agencies Will Have to Steer Marketers Toward the Big Ideal”
“A Brief Guide to the Ins and Outs of the Ad World in Summer”
“Attract Better Marketing Talent with Better Marketing”
“The Awards Shows Need to Tear Down Silos, but It Won’t Happen”
Well, I guess he’s really busy right now. He’ll get back to those serious advertising issues as soon as he can.
I’ll admit there are probably serious issues facing advertising today, but of course in the scope of ALL things, of course one can find many “other” issues such as, too many children starving, tragic acts of genocide, unbridled terrorism, famine, disease, and drought just to name a few. But the audacity of Mr. Bloom to use this tactic to challenge and de-value the sincerity of men and fathers who protest their negative image in various forms of media is a cop-out. It is even more offensive considering he chooses to invest the majority of his time in advertising - an industry whose sole purpose is to find ways to manipulate an individual’s psyche into believing he or she needs to purchase something they may really not need.
But I’m going to call a truce. If Mr. Bloom is willing to minimize his thoughts about men and fathers who voice their concern about their negative image in advertising and media, I’m willing to minimize my opinion about how hypocritical, self-absorbing, and narrow-minded his article is about this subject.
Who knows, maybe it will be the beginning of a beautiful friendship in which Mr. Bloom converts to the cause, and speaks out about the negative images of men and fathers in advertising.
No. I take that back. With his sharp tongue and pen, he’s too much of a risk. With him in the group, we would run the possibility of looking like a bunch of extremist.
On the opposite side of the spectrum…
Last Thursday night I was a guest on the B-Dub At Night Radio Program. I was asked by B-Dub to talk about one of my recent columns -”I Want Success… And Exploit Myself“- and also discuss men’s issues in general. B-Dub gave myself and the discussion of men’s issues a generous amount of time on his show. A download of the complete show and my interview is available at his website.
To show my appreciation, I’ve included a link to his website on the sidebar of this blog. I would ask others who are advocates of men’s issues to check out his work and display our appreciation by listening to his show. He has shown he is friendly towards men’s issues and it would be beneficial for us to help him succeed.
His show is on daily at 10pm eastern, except on Friday, when it starts at 12am eastern.
Contact:
Photo courtesy of : Free Photographs Network
Rate this post:
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Stumble It!
metalman said,
You realize, of course, that because Bloom works in an industry run by feminized men and second generation feminists, he’s either completely indoctrinated or just protecting his job. How long do you think he’d last in his industry if he leaned toward our views?
February 27, 2008 at 10:25 am