November 29, 2009
Login | Register Now

Advertising Age: Your Online Source for Marketing and Media News


More from Ad Age:
Creativity
Ad Age China
Bookstore
Jobs
Ad Age On Campus
Sign up for E-mail Newsletters

Stay on top of the news, sign up for our free newsletters


General Motors' Decision: (Overnight) Urban Legend or Business as Usual?

The Shot Heard Around the Multicultural World

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Submit to Digg Add to Google Share on StumbleUpon Submit to LinkedIn Add to Newsvine Bookmark on Del.icio.us Submit to Reddit

Pepper Miller Pepper Miller
Urban Legend: A second hand story that is told as true, plausible enough to be believed and likely to be framed as a cautionary tale.

Three weeks ago, General Motors announced shifts in multicultural agency assignments which included a significant piece of business that is being reassigned from Carol H Williams, an independent Black-owned-and-operated agency, to a general-market agency. When the announcement was first released, the message reported and heard was "GM reassigns ALL Black agency business to general-market agencies."

Within days following the release of the story, Black marketing professionals and consumers used technology-accelerated word-of-mouth to spread the word with personal messages that included "dissed again by White America" and "Don't buy GM." The Black community's emotional response is partly fueled by echoes from Katrina, Imus, and Jena 6 and for Black marketers, years of struggling to keep Black consumer marketing in the race.

In an effort to defuse some of this activity GM North America VP Mark LeNeve first responded to MulitCultClassics commentary to the original story (Advertising Age pulled its original due to errors in reporting). Ken Smikle, CEO of Target Market News, who was quoted in original articles from Automotive News and Black Enterprise.com, also appeared with Gene Morris, fellow blogger and CEO of E. Morris Communications, on Al Sharpton's syndicated radio show to discuss GM's decision. Smikle later interviewed LeNeve in an exclusive two-part interview for Target Market News.

Click here for Part 1: GM's Mark LeNeve Explains Re-structuring, Review of Black Ad Agencies. Click here for Part 2: GM's LeNeve Weighs Talent Against Ownership in Black Ad Agency Review.

However, while general-market marketing professionals have moved on, the Black community has not. BET carried the story on its blog (which was a pick up from BlackEnterprise.com). And last week, AOL Black Voices' cover story on subscribers' home page was "GM Kicks Black-Owned Ad Agencies to the Curb!" OUCH!!

MultiCultClassics has the best accounting of and commentary about the GM scenario. They reprimanded GM in their initial post and, after the second Ad Age story, attempted to clarify any misunderstandings in a follow-up post. However, they didn't let GM off the hook. MultiCultClassics' insightful commentary addresses the issues fueling the uproar and appropriately scolds GM and corporate advertisers for their unjust ad agency assignment practices:

". . . when minority shops want general market prizes, the door is shut. On the flipside, when general market agencies long for the slivers of the budgetary pies reserved for minorities, it's no problem. Don't worry, you won't even have to pitch for it.... Let's also remember that the GM spokeswoman proclaimed, 'We will not have one-size-fits all.' But they will have one agency with all the pie."
Additionally, GM's announcement, intentional or not, has at the very least, planted the seed of a dangerous precedent for others to follow. Notably, GM's decision openly and unfairly questions Black agencies' value and has illuminated their bleak future.

"Black-owned agencies not under a general-market holding company umbrella may not be able to survive and thrive," says Herb Kemp, my co-author of "What's Black About It? Insights to Increase Your Share of a Changing African-American Market."He adds, "The budget allocation for minority markets may now be redirected and controlled by the general-market holding company, thus preempting black-owned ad agencies from competing, growing beyond a certain size, and participating only as a subcontractor."

And the story heats up . . .

Last week the National Alliance of Market Developers told Target Market News that it is "appalled" at General Motors' decision and publicly challenged GM to reconsider its restructuring plans for black agencies. This week, Jesse Jackson announced that he has addressed the issue in a letter to GM Chairman-CEO Rich Wagoner.

Conversely, some general marketers are starting to bite back. Ludlow & Grand -- a blog focused on "cultural entrepreneurship" -- posted a message suggesting that multicultural agencies are the New Segregationists. MultiCultClassics bit back, taking the words from my mouth:

"It's a bit insane to refer to multicultural shops as the new segregationists. Most of these agencies have been relegated to these segregated oppressed states by an industry whose failure to embrace diversity inspired minorities to launch the separate ventures"
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and sounds like a duck, it's business as usual.
14 Comments
Subscribe to comments on: General Motors' Decision: (Overnight) Urban Legend or Business as Usual?
  By DAVID | SAN FRANCISCO, CA December 11, 2007 09:45:51 pm:
I don't know a whole lot about multicultural marketing, so I apologize in advance if this comes across as totally out-of-touch. But is it that crazy to think that maybe black people and white people might respond to the same car commercials? Are we that separate? Of course there are differences, there are difference between the tastes of 30 olds and 50 year olds too, between rich and poor. They are still handled by the same agency.

I also question headlines like "GM Kicks Black-owned Ad Agencies to the Curb," which imply that the agencies were dumped because of their black owners.

Again, I have no idea whether this was sound business, but why are people saying this was motivated by racism?
  By Calle | VILLA PARK, CA December 12, 2007 01:12:10 am:
I usually don't weigh in on the side of GM, but I can tell you the good side about their sincere interest in multicultural marketing and ethnic leadership. I met two exceptional African American Managers while working for GM and the Buick Motor Division - my client. The first was one Paula Travenia, an exceptional woman of exceptional talent and insight who was also Buick's communications research manager. The other was one Marina Shoemaker, a strategy manager with GM corporate who had a penchant to let me know before every executive summary presentation of new insight findings that "I had a lot of friends in the room, but that no one was going to save GM single-handedly." My respect for these two women grew when they hired my firm and its CULTURALLY INFLUENTIAL CONSUMER GROUPS - cultures within cultures such as Millenials, Thrivals or African Americans - to get at potential purchaser's true thoughts and motivations. McCann-Ericson shotgunned most of the work, but top-two box intent to purchase scores remain high water benchmarks to this date. I have lost touch with Paula and Marina - however, should anyone know of their whereabouts, I should gladly like to make the reacquaintance. GM dealt itself a blow if and in their departures.


Martin Calle
Chief Marketing Officer
Calle & Company
www.CalleCompany.com
MADISON AVENUE Blog
http://advertising-age.blogspot.com

  By Hans | Columbia, SC December 12, 2007 09:49:57 am:
I think the time has almost passed for African-American Agencies. I predict that mainstream America will embrace Hispanics as the new minority and will gradually push "Black" and "White" Americans into a more general populous. The music is now breaching color lines, as well as actors, and other things. Though saving minority businesses should be a priority, would this even be an issue if the larger advertising agencies/corporations didn't have such horrible minority hiring practices.

We have HBCU's because African-Americans couldn't get a decent education back in the day. We have minority ad firms because the Ogilvy's of the world didn't have enough "Soul" to sell our products. If this change is happening, maybe as African-Americans we need to fight not only for African-American firms, but also for better hiring practices to off-shot this downplay of heritage in the marketplace.

Food for thought: How many African-Americans run mainstream corporate ad agencies? Simmer on that... - Hans Mayo, New York, NY

  By amarquez | Fort Lauderdale, FL December 12, 2007 09:55:02 am:
Dear Dave,

Why does British ads do not work in the US? Besides goverment regulations, one reason may be that British sense of humor is not well received or understood in the US. Most British ads are humor centric. Same reasoning applies among Multicultural segments in the US.

African Americans, Hispanics, Asians and White/Caucasians show (regardless of language) unique attitudes and behaviors regarding purchasing a new vehicle. Advertising communications, in order to be effective, should speak to their unique needs and desires.

The issue with GM is budget allocation, it seems that's what they are fighting for.
  By AL | ATLANTA, GA December 12, 2007 11:13:26 am:
Having spent the past 38 years trying to help companies understand that there is indeed a need to target African Americans and having to constantly repeat the phrase "Blacks are not dark-skinned whites, it is appaling to me that we still have to fight to legitimize the importance of using the right approach and resources to market to our audience. History has continued to demonstrate that almost every successful marketing program that has been successful reaching African Americans has been developed by an African American firm.

There seems to be no issue with having green marketing, gay & lesbian, social marketing and other specialized agencies but we still have to argue about whether it makes sense to use us as resources to market to us.

While I tend to be an optimist, it is very distressing that we have to spend our energy justifying our value instead of using it to figure out how to gain our dollars for brands.
Finally I believe in the basic economic principal that if a brand does not adequately pursue every opportunity for growth, it never reaches its full potential. It's a shame that GM and many other Fortune 500 companies don't recognize this basic econmoic reality.
  By rukallstar2 | Minneapolis, MN December 12, 2007 11:38:21 am:
I've worked for both an African-American agency and a Hispanic agency. I have worked with some absolutely wonderfully people in both ethnic sides. I'm currently in GM, so it gives me a perspective on both sides of the fence.

First off GM and other advertisers need insights from minorities, they don't get that from their GM counterparts, it's just a white guy thinking he knows black people. I've heard horror stories of the white creative director thinking he knows better, when he clearly doesn't.

Now the power relationship marginalizes minority agencies, they don't get a seat at the brand strategy table. I don't see that changing. People don't give up power that easily.

I do see more integrated GM shops, especially on the African-American side. The reason that minority agencies' prospects are bleak is that they can't grow enough truly senior talent. People who are just entering that VP stage of their career, bolt and go to GM or go to another country where what they are working on is the majority consumer. They want a seat at the brand strategy table, minority agencies don't offer that.

Eventually minority agencies will not be stand alone entities, they'll return to the GM tent. It's just that the definition of GM will change from just implying white.

Progress is eventually making minority agencies obsolete.
  By mtlb | NJ, US December 12, 2007 01:41:47 pm:
I see a few calling for the agencies to have better hiring practices as if doing that one thing will solve much of the problem.


We can agree, it's a factor, but at some point, don't brands also have a major responsibility to address the issue? GM had a perfect opportunity here to walk their talk, and didn't.


After seeing that, how else is a multicultural agency supposed to feel? If brands continue to behave that way, all you'll end up with are five white copywriters at the agency trying to come up with a rap viral for KFC, then fistbumping each other after the client signs off on it.


Highjive at Multicult made another worthwhile point: how can a brand sing about this being 'our country' in a spot and all you see are white farmers without one minority? (Even a mega brand like GM usually does the stereotypical client move of including one person from every ethnic background.) Hard to believe GM practices what they preach when you see something like that.


I'd propose something for them: why not give their national work–all of it–to the best multicultural shop out there and see what they can do. What have you got to lose? General shops have had it all this time and look at the GM stock price. How much worse could it get? What, another suicidal robot?

  By hotmail | insider December 12, 2007 02:49:15 pm:
How can a industry be so rascist yet want to be so urban and hip it doesnt make sense?

Where are the black creatives(art directors, writers, designers) at these general market agencies?

Whats the point of forums,job fairs, diversity task forces if no one is being hired at mid level postions or upper postions in the ad industry? Entry level is almost a waste, moving up is impossible.

Basically what GM is saying in a nutshell is Black agencies are not creative enough and not capable of handling the work.-- bottum line
  By Derek Walker | Grand Prairie, TX December 12, 2007 03:53:36 pm:
KJH,

No, it isn't what General Motors is saying, it is what the general market agencies have been whispering in the their ears for years. General Motors just finally listened and believed them.

Many of us who work at general market agencies have heard worse than that. The hiring practices, casting choices, media selection and about every other decision most general market agencies have made have been screaming this message for years. They say one thing while doing the opposite.
  By hotmail | insider December 12, 2007 05:02:59 pm:
What a bunch of hypocrites they can use a ton of black actors and entertainers but at the same time they kick the black agencies to the curb. --wow

They can use mary J and jeezy to sell cars, but not black agencies to create the ads their in.
  By whatfor2007 | ny, NY December 13, 2007 01:46:18 am:
Ms Pepper - duck duck goose... sounds like the STATUS QUO all around. Everyone just wants a piece of the pie. But how has multicultural agencies INNOVATED to address the changing cultural landscape... it takes more than saying Black for Black, Asian for Asian, Hispanic for Hispanic. If not then it's racist or just ANTEBELLUM.
  By whatfor2007 | ny, NY December 13, 2007 02:50:18 am:
Miss Pepper - I'm back. Quick question. You seem to praise MultiCultClassics as a good reference... I went on your advice and checked out that blog. I was shocked and dismayed by its tone and divisiveness.

Do you endorse his RACISM & PREJUDICE against non-blacks? MultiCultClassic has a double standard. While that blog rails against any negative stereotypes against black Americans, he aggressively stereotypes non-whites who have different viewpoints than his own as Uncle Toms and whites as some kind of slaveowner.

Now that's healthy for an open discussion about race that should be about inclusion of multiple viewpoints and a celebration of diversity?!

It's dangerous to advocate the breaking down of stereotypes for only one's own personal group and then to create bigoted, hostile stereotypes against other groups making anyone who is not in your group the "enemy." So yes its my opinion that MultiCultClassics can be dangerous.

But I'm sure Miss Pepper youre not endorsing such hostility... this is Big Tent where mature, thinking adults can see beyond knee-jerk reactions in the blogosphere and aim for progress for all people
  By mtlb | NJ, US December 13, 2007 05:17:06 pm:
@–what for, ny, NY - Only thing I see Multicult predujiced against are really bad layouts, no matter who did them. They bring up articles that others write which may have differing opinions, but racist against all non-whites? Sorry, just not seein it because they I've seen differing opinions voiced there. But then, I'm a non-white white.


As for tone and divisiveness, well it's clear just letting the staus quo rule hasn't done much for the industry. Divisive is not a bad thing as it tends to get people thinking about that status quo. Call it polarizing, call it whatever, but maybe a loud voice is what's needed at this point to draw attention to things like this.

  By whatfor2007 | ny, NY December 14, 2007 12:16:11 am:
bill green. thank you for that thought. its change my mind and a day later also helps. emotional and reactionary is never good. its too bad blogs reinforce that. it makes it feel more hostile than not. plus i sound way too crazy. i guess being white no ones likes feeling generalized as bad and against minorities.

loud voices are important and when historically one feels sidelined being loud is good. yes.

but instead of creating an enemy of this or that is that really helpful? i just think we can rise above it all.

one size does not fit all but lets think about innovation about what race means and not just one group for their our group and how one group can influence other groups.

in my opinion, instead of saying say black agencies for black people, i think its more powerful and realistic to say black agencies for all people... aka beyonce, jay-z, stoute... i think thats why global hue launched their own general agency.

so when i status quo is bad it is... and the global hue thing is NOT status quo. that's the real progress... not saying an advertiser must stick with the same oh, same on.



Stay on top of the news and stay ahead of the game—sign up for e-mail newsletters now!



Advertising Age: Your Online Source for Marketing and Media News