The way the advertising industry portrays men has drawn
increasing scrutiny in both the trade press and the mainstream
media. Defenders of the status quo -- in which men are depicted as
irresponsible fathers and lazy, foolish husbands -- are starting to
feel outnumbered. It's an understandable feeling.
In 2005, Bob Jeffery, chairman of JWT, said his agency had committed
itself to developing "smart, positive portrayals of the modern
man." Meanwhile, anti-male ads have been criticized by, among
others: Marian Salzman, chief marketing officer of Porter Novelli;
Mark Tungate, author of "Branded Male: Marketing to Men";
syndicated columnist Kathleen Parker, whose weekly columns appear
in 300 newspapers; TV host Bill Maher; CBS News anchor Charles
Osgood; nationally syndicated radio-talk-show host Laura
Schlessinger; syndicated columnist Jacey Eckhart; Chicago Tribune
columnist Ross Werland; law professor/author and blogger Glenn
Reynolds of Instapundit; Christine B. Whelan, author of "Why Smart
Men Marry Smart Women"; and major-market-talk-show hosts Al Rantel,
Mike McConnell, Ron Smith and Joe Elliott.
The evidence is clear: "Man as idiot" isn't going over very well
these days.
Defenders of the advertising status quo generally put forth the
following arguments: Males are "privileged" and "it's men's turn,"
so it's OK to portray them this way, and that men simply don't care
how they're portrayed. Both of these arguments are highly
questionable.
Young males certainly aren't privileged. The vast majority of
learning-disabled students are boys, and boys are four times as
likely as girls to receive diagnoses of attention-deficit
hyperactivity disorder. Girls get better grades than boys and are
much more likely than boys to graduate high school and enter
college. According to the National Center for Education Statistics,
women earn 60% of all bachelor's degrees and 60% of all master's
degrees.
That adult men are "privileged" over women is also questionable.
Yes, men do make up the majority of CEOs, politicians and
powerbrokers. They also make up the majority of the homeless, the
imprisoned, suicide victims and those who die young.
Negative depection
How fathers are portrayed matters. Fatherlessness is one of the
greatest threats our children face. Syndicated columnist Leonard
Pitts Jr. recently said: "Twenty-eight percent of American kids ...
are growing up in fatherless homes, heir to all the struggle and
dysfunction that condition portends. ... Who can deny those [are]
appalling numbers[?]"
Among the many ills of fatherlessness are much higher rates of teen
drug abuse, crime, pregnancy and school dropouts.
While the advertising industry's negative depiction of fathers
certainly isn't the cause of fatherlessness, it is part of the
problem. In a TV culture like ours, the fact that the only fathers
one can see on TV are buffoonish (at best) does influence young
people's perceptions of fathers.
For young men, it makes it less likely they'll aspire to be
fathers, see their own value as fathers or, as Mr. Pitts explains,
want to do the "hard but crucial work of being Dad." For young
women, it means they'll be more likely to be misled into thinking
that their children's fathers aren't important, that divorce or
separation from them is no big deal, or that they should, as is the
increasing trend, simply dispense with dad altogether and have
children on their own.
Is it true that men really don't care how they're portrayed?
Evidence strongly suggests otherwise.
According to Leo
Burnett Worldwide's 2005 "Man Study," four out of five men
believe media portrayals of men are inaccurate. The study found
that men care more about the way they are viewed than was generally
believed.
When Kate Santich of the Orlando Sentinel did a feature on
"men-as-idiots" advertising in 2004, she says she was "astounded"
at the amount of mail she received, almost all of it critical of
the way men are portrayed in ads. In a Washington Times article in
January, advertising-industry journalist Todd Wasserman described
getting a similar reaction to a recent article he wrote on
anti-male ads.
This sentiment was reflected in the popularity of the highly
publicized campaigns we've launched against advertising that is
hostile to males. Several thousand protesters participated in both
our 2004 campaign against Verizon's anti-father ad "Homework" and
our 2007 campaign against Arnold Worldwide.
Get on Her Good Side
Our campaigns have drawn widespread support from women, who
generally do not like to see their sons, husbands and fathers put
down. As Rose Cameron, senior VP-planning director and "man expert"
at Leo Burnett, says: "One of the great markers [society] looks to
about the intelligence of a woman is her choice of husband. So if
advertisers position men as idiots in the husband scenario, then
you're commenting on her smarts. Women have told us, 'If you want
to get on my good side, you do not show my husband as the
idiot.'"
We have three suggestions for the advertising industry:
- Create more ads that are father-positive. Some recent examples include AT&T's touching father-daughter ad "Monkey"; First Choice Holidays' "Slow-Motion Hugs"; and Ford's father-son ad "We Know."
- As we consider whether it's wise to make men the butt of every joke, we should also consider the joke itself. Many see the 1960s as the golden age of advertising. Those who crafted the ads of that era created work of superb quality, seldom if ever resorting to the contempt, shame and aggressive ridicule of today's ads.
- When an ad does need to poke fun at somebody, stop automatically defaulting to men as fools.