November 22, 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

Garfield's Ad Review

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


Dove's New 'Onslaught' Ad a Triumph

Exquisitely Combines Social Responsibility and Brand Marketing

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

Well, for starters, it's not just a commercial. It is a great film.

"Onslaught," the sequel to Dove's Cannes Grand Prix-winning viral "Evolution," should get an Oscar. In one brief minute, it indicts the culture's obsession with Barbie-doll exteriors, raises the consciousness of girls and women and exposes the inner ugliness of the so-called beauty industry. And you can't take your eyes off of it for a second.
Title: Onslaught
Marketer: Unilever/Dove
image
Agency: Ogilvy & Mather, Toronto
Image
In one brief minute, Dove's new 'Onslaught' exposes the inner ugliness of the so-called beauty industry. | ALSO: Comment on this review in the 'Your Opinion' box below.


Is there an Academy Award category for really, really short subject?

The video opens with a close-up of a sweet-faced, redheaded little girl. She could grow up to be Nicole Kidman or Peppermint Patty. The rest of the spot documents which way she'll be pressured to go. It's a fusillade of images shooting right in your face, of ultra-skinny, ultra-curvaceous, ultra-sexualized women. That onslaught is followed by a second one: (deftly faked) ad images promising women they can look "younger, taller, lighter, firmer, tighter, thinner, softer." Then scenes of women shrinking and expanding via fad diets, some graphic cosmetic surgery shots and a glimpse of bulimic purging.

Finally, the message: "Talk to your daughter before the beauty industry does."

Standing ovation here.

Apart from its raw impact, the video from Ogilvy & Mather, Toronto, also produces the exquisitely rare dovetailing (as it were) of social responsibility and brand marketing. While nominally calling attention to the Dove Self-Esteem Fund, which aims to inculcate girls with a sense of confidence and worth, the whole campaign also neatly positions Dove as the product line of choice for natural -- vs. aftermarket -- beauty.

Such seamless convergences are not easy to come by, even among the most sincere marketers. One can't help but recall the Worst Commercial Ever Made, back in the '80s by the progressive proprietors of ForEyes Optical, who were troubled by the scourge of homelessness. Their ad showed gritty docu-footage of society's human refuse beneath the superimposed message: "If you've grown used to this, you need glasses." Next came the product shot and a second proposition: "Two pair for $79."

That campaign didn't last very long. Dove's deserves to. A worthy cause, a brilliant strategy, a flawless video. It all amounts to something very close to perfection. So, yes, absolutely, four stars.

Damn, if it just weren't for the nagging hypocrisy of it all.

Viewed close up, the "Campaign for Real Beauty" is precisely the unassailable defense of human values it purports to be. But to pull back is to reveal. Dove is a brand from Unilever, which isn't so enlightened when it comes to Axe/Lynx -- whose ads portray women as slinky sex toys -- and Slim-Fast, which encourages exactly the kind of yo-yo dieting so vividly dramatized in "Onslaught."

As for Ogilvy, well -- in a bit of horrifying/delicious irony -- it is actually the U.S. agency for the Barbie doll.

Oops.

We harbor no doubts about the sincerity of all concerned. In fact, we suppose many of those involved relish the opportunity not only, for once in their careers, to promulgate a positive, genuinely humane message but to also expiate their past sins. In that sense, at least for now, the exercise is not at all cynical. On the contrary, it is the path to redemption.

The hard part will be staying on the path. What happens when Dove sales begin to flag and market share begins to slide? That will be the test of true righteousness. Does the "Campaign for Real Beauty" then get disposed of, like last year's fashions, or dubiously "enhanced," like a pair of fake breasts?

We'd like to believe that the values embraced here are invulnerable to the onslaught of market forces. But we don't.
25 Comments
Subscribe to comments on: Dove's New 'Onslaught' Ad a Triumph
  By OLIVIA | PLANO, TX October 8, 2007 09:20:42 am:
wow. what an incredible video. it is truly mesmerizing and just speaks to me on some many levels - as a woman, as a mother, as a consumer.
  By Denise | Lake Mary, FL October 8, 2007 10:03:32 am:
The moral quandary in which Dove finds itself raises an important question that needs to be addressed: Can an individual brand create an identity apart from its corporate parent when that corporation has other brands which run counter to the philosophy behind that identity?


In other words, can Dove claim moral high ground when Unilever also produces Slim-Fast and Axe? And when the ad agency that helps to shape and deliver this identity also does likewise for the ultimate icon of unattainable female perfection?

  By mooread1 | Oxford, OH October 8, 2007 10:09:33 am:
Definitely something you want to share with daughters and friends who have daughters.
  By JOHN | SAN DIEGO, CA October 8, 2007 11:26:26 am:
Bob, I appreciate your passion about the issue, but don't let that cloud your judgment over a flashy ad will make zero difference to its intended audience. Worse, I believe many young girls who see these visuals will get a message that is exactly opposite of the one intended. Bottom line, ineffective and possibly counterproductive--because a Mom who lauds it is already a Believer.
  By Denise | Lake Mary, FL October 8, 2007 11:51:36 am:
I agree with John. Tween girls take their cues about beauty and style from their peers, who in turn are influenced by pop culture. If you were a 13 year-old girl, who would you want to look like - your mom pants-wearing mom, or Gwen Stefani?
  By Robert A. B. | New York, NY October 8, 2007 11:52:31 am:
In my opinion a silly video built on a flawed premised. Unlike the anti-drugs and smoking campaigns, which inspired it, beauty may be the one universal concept. From Cleopatra to Jackie O to Kate Moss, men and women respond to beauty without the need for instruction. Yes, all these women are also social construct, but the thing they have all have, from Marilyn to Naomi, in common is a certain glamour that's proves irresistible. Fashion may change from Couture to Prep to Punk, but somehow the beautiful woman arises from the mass to our acclaim and yes, in a way, worship.

Video like these work only among the self-congratulatory circle that conceived, executed and produced it. In the end, however beauty is defined, from the story of Goldilocks to Philip Roth's Shiksa Goddesses, there will be beauties and those who aspired to it...and will do what it takes to achieve a semblance of it.
  By CRISTIAN | SANTIAGO October 8, 2007 12:48:05 pm:
I think we're losing all perspective when it comes to this ad. Yes, its an ad. And a damm good one at that. A great message perfectly executed. Mixing the review of this piece with the moral question of whether Unilever is saving the world or not is taking it a bit too far. Lets keep our eyes on the ball, shall we? Cristian.
  By nessajennings | Pittsburgh, PA October 8, 2007 02:17:42 pm:
Perhaps because the majority of the people reading feedback on this ad are advertising and media people, this whole thing is a bit skewed.
Regardless of the question of brand consistency, or the hint of irony, I took this ad in the sense Buddha considered himself: "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." Does Buddha teach? Yes. But his teachings, he realized, are a suggestion to personal evolution, not the answer in themselves. Now I do not put the beauty industry or a corporation in this philosophic or religious realm, but, as a young woman in media, I took it as: Dove is in beauty so it's easy to say they have an authority in it, but they don't actually; they know it has to do with our perceptions as a whole. They are not claiming moral high ground, they're saying if you want to see change you better do it because the beauty industry can't!
That's my interpretation, as someone who has physical insecurities yet still manages to feel beautiful and it has nothing to do with any product. Actually, I gauge myself on women I know, the fact i know what's realistic, not magazines or movies. And Dove seems to realize the same thing, this whole mentality STARTS AT HOME, not on TV.
  By R | CHAPEL HILL, NC October 8, 2007 02:46:20 pm:
I wonder what the specific, measurable objective of this campaign is. Is it to keep current Dove customers loyal? Has the brand been losing customers? Will about-to-depart customers suddenly say, "Whoa, I so much want to reward Dove for taking this stand that I'll resist buying the store brand at a third of the price?" Or is it to win new customers? Will mothers of daughters suddenly say, "OK, this message is so in tune with my values that I'm only going to buy Dove brand products from now on?" Maybe. I hope Ad Age will revisit this campaign six months from now and report what's happened and why.
  By obamagirl | New York, NY October 8, 2007 03:47:58 pm:
This ad will get mothers to talk to their daughters and both will think fondly of the brand the more they see the ad.

I know the importance of measurement in advertising. But you get very little measurement until the brand is engrained in the imaginations of the target audience. This effectively does just that.
  By TGOULD | Manhattan, KS October 8, 2007 04:18:17 pm:
Fun to hear everyone use "video" without the obvious fact that it is the "video" that is being watched over the "audio" (I guess). Seems someone a while back suggested consumers watch more they listen (i.e: Willie Horton, circa 1988). So it the audio can be Paradiso as long as the video is Inferno. -- Tom Gould
  By ajkaplan | San Francisco, CA October 8, 2007 04:44:29 pm:
This is indeed a fabulous piece of creative, and the message is positive. But let's not praise it like it's a PSA. At the end of the day, this ad's just there to sell soap.
  By STEPHANIE | LEONIA, NJ October 8, 2007 08:26:50 pm:
Sorry, Unilever. Great execution or not, you don't get to indict the industry within which your other brands are contributing to the "onslaught." Ogilvy garners the kudos for the work and our PR brethren at Edelman get to manage the messaging fall-out. I comment on it further here: http://www.devriesconversations.com/?cat=10
  By srisailan | CHENNAI October 9, 2007 02:06:10 am:
From the advertisement pespective this ad conveys many things in a short period,but the intent of advertising is truly commercial.
Companies like Unilevers should redefine their stance on Social moral and responsibility. While operating in a multi-faceted market and having its multiple brand presence in varied categories,it becomes even more important to address the market with a sense of belonging to the society.
At the end of the day O&M has seen its dollars and Umilever has managed to grab the attention of its loyal customers, but what is Society left with?!
Srisailan.K
K_Srisailan@Yahoo.co.in
India
  By mcavallini | HAMILTON, NJ October 9, 2007 09:29:15 am:
On the matter of whether Dove is legitimate in taking a position counter to stablemates in Unilever and Ogilvy, I'd say it's OK. Especially in a pluralistic society, one does not expect every member of a group to believe and espouse every value in the same way. Even within a nuclear family, people disagree, sometimes expressively. The true test of Dove's sincerity will be, as Garfield said, how consistently Dove sustains and evolves the value. And so far, so good.
  By james jordan | Pleasantville, NY October 9, 2007 11:55:04 am:
So Dove is not a part of the beauty industry? It's a "fund"?
In theory we shouldn't be able to seperate a brand from its message. And that's the problem.
This video only works if you pretend that Dove is not what it is: a business built around enhancing and changing womens' skin, hair
and appearance. There is a good message here, but the minute the brand comes in to claim it, that message is undermined.
It doesn't just feel hypocritical. It feels cynical and manipulative.
  By james jordan | Pleasantville, NY October 9, 2007 12:30:47 pm:
The Dove Brand is on much more solid ground (not to mention more honest ground) when, instead of pretending to be outside of the beauty industry, it defines its own (banded) kind of beauty. I like the values of Dove's "real" beauty. I don't like it when the brand gets unreal and pretends to be something other than what it is: an aggressively advertised, image driven, beauty business.
  By kck6vb | Cincinnati, OH October 9, 2007 04:29:56 pm:
The campaign isn't perfect, and in fact it is full of inconsistencies and hypocrisies, but nothing in life is perfect. There are two things I love about this campaign: It has helped improve some girls self esteems and it catapulted an advertising trend towards showing healthier models and healthier attitudes.
Many girls may see through the transparencies of this money making campaign and not think twice about it, but for many it makes them stop and think and talk to others about body image. Dove deserves credit for just starting the conversation.
Since the start of the Campaign for Real Beauty, many other brands have jumped on their bandwagon and every time a brand does, that is one less unhealthy model women have to look at. Kudos to Dove for taking the first plunge.
  By kelly.okeefe | Richmond, VA October 9, 2007 09:51:22 pm:
Yes, this is a lovely campaign, but that only makes it worse when we learn that it's a fake. If the values reflected in the campaign don't reflect the company that paid for it – and clearly they don't – then they are nothing more then well crafted propaganda aimed at manipulating people into thinking that Dove cares about these thing.


It's nice to see positive imagery in advertising, but it's a lot nicer when it's authentic, not just a cynical corporate trick to sell soap.


Dove is a product and products don't have beliefs or values. Companies have values, so why don't we ask Unilever?


Unilever, if you're listening, what's it going to be? Treat women like real people, or sex slaves? Pick one.

  By lisagild | LOS ANGELES, CA October 10, 2007 03:22:03 pm:
A great intellectual dialogue, and one that as a brand futurist I engage in everyday. But as a mom of a four year old daughter (and two sons!), this made me cry.

While quite cynical and skeptical usually, I'm a big fan of Dove and all they are doing to open the conversation and change expectations. I fervently hope that Unilever and many, many others will soon wake up and be inspired to give us parents that much less we have to "talk to our children" about! Instead, it's lots more fun to answer questions like "what do blind people see when they dream, mom"?
  By Tarek | Hackettstown, NJ October 11, 2007 09:52:13 am:
Great campaign, no doubt. The trouble with high-road social cause advertising when paired with the practices of a large corporation - other than ofcourse using a social cause to peddle soap - is that eventually, the brand owner will be held to the same standards.

Frankly, I've always felt that Body Shop would have been a better candidate for this type of advertising; at least Body Shop can stand behind its corporate mantra and not have to answer questions about inconsistent, polar opposite communication propositions on other brands within its portfolio.

More than anything, well done to Bob Garfield for asking the important questions about the Dove campaign that I assume have been on every marketer's mind for a long time. TMA - NEW YORK, NY

  By JACK | TORONTO, ON October 11, 2007 01:53:12 pm:
Ironic that Garfield would give this ad four stars. It's not the future of advertising, but the end of it. Once you've indicted the entire profession for the benefit of a single participant, there is nowhere else to go. Interesting that the leading voice predicting the decline of the economic model of advertising, fails to see the decline of the creative model happening simultaneously. Who hasn't been in a client meeting recently where the idea of the anti-brand brand was seriously considered?
  By Kyle | Newmarket, NH October 15, 2007 02:10:05 pm:
You all seem to believe only an innocent brand can take this position. Even big brands have to start somewhere. In the brandscape there are countless brands which harness counter messages and remain loved by their consumers. Timberland boasts their environmental responsibility to the general public however, turns the corner and sells footwear to the logging industry. Also just because we know who Unilever and Ogilvy are does not mean the consumer will make that connection. Dove gets the benefit of the doubt because their message needs to be talked about. Time will tell what happens. ~Kyle Sevits
  By MelissaSSue | Torrance, CA October 17, 2007 05:10:59 am:
Young girls do not just get their idea of themselves from cosmetic ads and the magazines they support, but from the shows on TV, which I assume is sponsored by some of the companies Dove is associated with.
And while my daughters and other people's sons are basted in a society that tries to mimic the ads and TV, I'm supposed to be able to keep her sane and self confident by just telling her what?
We have found in our family that just loving your children is the best way to build self esteem rather than lecturing them all the time (we tried both ways, believe me). Maybe, they won't shun the beauty and fashion call since it is so pervasive, but they will be confident. And if Dove is so darn sincere they and their associates could sponsor TV shows that portray girls and women more naturally in looks and character instead of the giggly sex tarts we tend to see when we turn on the tube.
  By GUY | SAN FRANCISCO, CA November 14, 2007 01:30:12 pm:
Of note is the strategic emphasis. While the opposition continues to be the beauty industry, the focus is again upon children, and Dove is appointing itself as a moral guardian. Or concerned on-looker at least.

There are three ironic elements to this:

1. Telling parents to talk to kids misses two important realities. 1) Kids are influenced by example, not what they're told. 2) If mothers continue to be so focused on their outward appearance and gaining acceptance of others, worry about their weight ro what people think of them, have 'beauty treatments' like manicures and pedicures, etc. the lack of change in the image problmem of the younger generation will speak for itself. It's the mother's that have to change behavior, not preach.

2. Dove encourages parents to face off against the beauty industry, and while Dove's campaigns continues to champion the rally, unhealthy female imagery and expectations are being simultaneously reinforced by the same company. The Axe/Lynx brands which targets male teenage with fantasy is also owned by Unilever. In an age of transparency, this is ill advised.

3. The celebration of the brand's inclusive point-of-view about beauty has been pushed aside, at least for now. Granted, there are challenges in keeping a fickle, short-attention span society engaged once they've become comfortable with an idea – and the rise of the reality programming genre has certainly diminished the visual distinctiveness Dove's 'real beauty' imagery.

The advice for Dove: lose the faux compassion and be authentic.

If you're serious about change, then encourage parents themselves to change and be better role models. Inspire them to be a great example for their daughters. Then perhaps there'll be sustainable change, not hollow brand gestures.
:

Note: Comments submitted to AdAge.com are posted automatically and will include the user name with which you registered. Ad Age reserves the right to delete comments that are insulting or personal in nature. Comments may be used in the print edition at editorial discretion. Comments are restricted to 500 words or less.




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