Slate's Bizbox
moneybox: Daily commentary about business and finance.

Ad Report Card: Is Gay Funny?

Rob Walker
Posted Monday, Oct. 30, 2000, at 12:51 PM ET

How do advertisers think of gays and lesbians? As valued consumers? Or do they just see homosexuality as a punch line? Or both? This installment of "Ad Report Card" deals with two spots that are informed by, or at least allude to, homosexuality: One is a spot, which you can watch here via Adcritic, for an online car-buying service called Giggo.com. The other ad, for Visa, is viewable here. (Adcritic requires QuickTime.)

But these are by no means the only examples out there. A "Moneybox" correspondent, who first told me about both these commercials, also brought to my attention over the summer a couple of "trend" articles about gay- and lesbian-targeted marketing. In each article, the theme was vagueness: ads that deliver a subtle message that many straight consumers miss. A Washington Post story pointed to Suburu posters with the slogan, "It's Not A Choice. It's the Way We're Built." The New York Times referred to billboards for a trashcan that "Swings Both Ways" and to a Heineken TV spot in which two male sports fans briefly hold hands while handling beer bottles (more on this spot below). Before we draw any conclusions about whether any of this means that advertisers, or their audiences, are generally more enlightened than they used to be, let's consider the Giggo and Visa spots.

The ads: In the Giggo spot, a young man approaches his father, a Joe Six-pack type who seems to be painting war toys in the basement. "Dad, there's something I want to tell you," the kid begins. "Yeah, what?" Dad practically spits. "I'm gay," the kid says. Dad's eyes pop, the frame freezes, and a computer window opens. It's one of those little level adjusters, the kind of thing that comes up on your computer when you want to adjust the volume. It's labeled "Adjust Dad's Attitude," and while it is currently set off to one side at "Hostile," an arrow clicks and moves it the other way to "Supportive" before closing the window. The ad resumes, and instead of unleashing rage or disgust, Dad Six-pack mildly notes there's a guy at the plant with a gay son and maybe they would like each other. Punch line delivered, a voiceover bursts in to say, "Wow, that was painless. Like Giggo.com, where you take control of buying a car ... "

The Visa ad takes place in a tattoo parlor. An unconvincing young tough is asked by his knockout girlfriend, Donna, if he's sure about the tattoo he's getting. "I want everyone to know who I love," he says sweetly. But the tattoo costs $50, and he only has $41. Next thing you know Donna is stomping away mad, and the guy is promising, "I'll get it fixed!" Turns out he ended up getting "I Love Don" burned into his arm. If only he'd been carrying the Visa Check Card!

Offended? Let's start with the Visa spot. Like the aforementioned Heineken ad, this one bothers at least some viewers because the humor wouldn't work if it didn't assume homophobia--that is, if it didn't depend on the notion that it's a disaster for a straight to be mistaken for gay. These critics have a valid point. But there are at least two counter-points. One is that motivation matters, and I don't think you can make a convincing case that Visa is out to court bigots with this ad. Two is that I think you can make a reasonable case that it's homophobia that really gets mocked here, not homosexuality, and that the same is true in the Heineken ad. All of that said, I don't think the Visa spot is exactly gay-friendly or worthy of applause, either. It's kind of sophomoric. The Giggo.com ad is more intriguing and arguably more ground-breaking because a) the kid is actually gay, and b) it's Dad's bigotry that's out of step with the norm and needs to be brought into line.

The grades: Sexual orientation issues aside, do the spots work? The Giggo ad is in keeping with a campaign that emphasizes, through various situations in which an expected negative outcome is transformed to a positive, the general idea of control: Just as these characters control whatever pickle they're in, so can you control the process of buying a car. This is a weak gimmick, so despite its progressive worldview, the ad gets a C. The Visa spot I find slightly less funny and more ideologically suspect but more effective in making a point about the underlying product. So I give it a B.

Now, what does all of this say about the relationship between gays and big advertisers? Obviously the days of simply ignoring gay and lesbian consumers have faded fast, and we'll continue to see advertisers stumble around the issue, sometimes more successfully, sometimes less so. To the extent that ad culture is a barometer of culture in general, this seems like a net plus: It's better than pretending homosexuality doesn't exist or is somehow too embarrassing or controversial to mention. Why has this change happened? Well, this isn't really the right place to take up the argument about whether the popular notion of the affluent gay is true or a myth, but earlier this year a friend of mine forwarded to me an interesting letter she'd gotten from a public relations person: The pitch was for a story about the effectiveness of advertising on demographically targeted portal sites, such as one site frequented by gays and lesbian consumers--who, the letter noted in passing, are "known for loyalty and excessive spending." Ah well, so much for the notion of a new enlightenment in the marketing community.

Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Rob Walker writes the Ad Report Card for Slate.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Reader Comments from The Fray:


[Notes from the Fray Editor: Two thousand posts on this one as of right now, no doubt more to come, and how many do you think had something new, interesting, amusing, original to say? We will leave it to you to guess. "Boy, this really brought the bitter tongue out" as one poster remarked. It was particularly hard to find any good posts attacking the ads or the article, though we did like this one, Joshua Crane's splendidly succinct "It's a sad day in America when we are grading the effectiveness of immorality". And Gretz' try-it-the-other-way-round point, below, is a good one. And Dave gets a gold star for reasonableness, thoughtfulness and good sense.

Oh, and attention Vanessa: the Moneybox Fray is not the place for the poem given to you personally by God called "A Message for all Men" (here, if you must). Poetry Fray.]


Nice little utopian scene there--Dad can be "fixed" with a little slider by someone who knows better. Be nice if Dad could make up his own mind. I don't think the media would be praising the work if the slider was on the son's psyche, now would they? I think the activist crowd would be up in arms. Nice little bit of mind control. "You're not allowed an opinion", is the message to Dad, or "you're broken, let us fix you".

It's two-faced to criticize a culture that would suggest that the son is out of the norm, yet to force that on the dad is somehow OK?

--Gretz

(To reply, click here.)

On the "Gay Son" ad, surely the concept is "making a difficult situation easier"? The "Gay Son" scenario is just a very well stereotyped (probably accurate) scenario which everyone has come to understand. People [in The Fray] have mentioned other possible scenarios (being caught coming home late or something); these are not equivalent because the concept here is that the son hasn't done anything wrong. Also, I'd suggest that the father's attitude is not adjusted. We are not told that he now condones, accepts or likes that his son is gay. He is just supportive rather than aggressive.

The Visa ad I see nothing to get worked up about. The comedy is that rather than getting his girlfriend's name he has got someone else's. The fact that it is a man's name makes it obvious that it's not her name. (If it was Mandy not Sandy or something, it would only be noticeable if everyone knew her name). The article quickly brings up the concept of homophobia as being a theme. I don't see this. Just because you don't want to be called gay doesn't make you homophobic. It is often very offensive for a man to be mistaken as a woman and vice versa. This is not because it's bad to be the opposite gender, but because you're not. You can't relate properly to people if they hold a wildly inaccurate opinion. Personally if you wanted to believe I was in love with a guy called Don that wouldn't bother me overmuch, but it would bother me because you might think that I don't love my girlfriend, and that is a very important part of who I am.

I would like to say I found the article interesting and it is good that you are watchful for intolerance; but also try to give people the benefit of the doubt when you can.

--Dave

(To reply, click here.)


Gays are seen as either market to exploit or a minority to bash, depending on what is convenient. Best of all to have it both ways--those "excessive spending" gays are well-taxed, the government uses the money any way it likes, without granting any of those "special rights" that they're always whining about.

--Bob

(To reply, click here.)


The ads in question (particularly the beer ad and the Visa ad) are based on incongruency and perception. The beer ad, for those who have seen it, clearly is making fun of the hetero male macho image. The Visa ad seems to be a little more negative to me. The guy looks at the camera and acts like someone has said something to him about the "Don" tattoo causing him to reply with "Funny". The implication of someone verbally saying something negative vs. the beer comercial having two roughnecks touch hands accidentally is a fine line but a line nonetheless. With all this being said and looking above the obvious hurtful things that go along with homophobia, are we ever going to be able to laugh at ourselves again without someone yelling "Foul!"

--Real

(To reply, click here.)


This is one of those damned if you do and damned if you don't issues that we all get so tired of. You know that if there were no gay ads on TV we would now all be here writing about why there weren't any gay ads on TV. That said, let marketing determine their markets. What better way to say that you approve or disapprove of anything about a company than to buy or fail to buy their product. I just get tired of the whimpering

--Charles Bohlman

(To reply, click here.)


While these ads may not be in good taste, they are well within the bounds of normal satire and railing against them only makes one look petulant. Also, I am an advocate of the position that any visibility, as long as it is not blatantly homophobic, will in the long run help our assimilation into society

--Miguel Fuentes

(To reply, click here.)

(10/31)

Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Assessing Sarah Palin
| Newt Gingrich, Grover Norquist, John Podesta and others weigh in.
Colbert King: She's No HillaryEditorial: Is She Ready for This?
PLUS » PostPartisan: Quick Takes from Opinions