This photo is from another city but the same Pepsi ad has been on a T bus shelter on Mass. Ave at Harrison Ave. by Boston Medical Center for weeks. To me the ad is condescending in a racist way. It’s one thing if a black person says “fo sho!” but quite another when a huge multinational mimics black slang to sell cola. The whole ad campaign features many different slogans – you may have seen them around – all with the new Pepsi logo, which is a rip-off of one of Obama’s campaign logos to boot.
Please share widely!
Embarrasing like when you hear Michael Steele say the GOP is going to be “off the hook”.
<
p>Hey, at least the ads don’t say “fo shizzle”.
So can Obama speak in “black” vernacular or Oprah with no claims of be condescending? How about if it was a black marketing VP at Pepsi that decided on it, “condescending in a racist way”? Stop being over sensitive to harmless things like this.
<
p>Here’s an interesting article about black vernacular becoming popular. It talks about terms like “dissed” going from black culture to white culture. So are whites who have adopted “dissed” being “condescending in a racist way”?
<
p>Next you’ll be organizing a protest if Tiffanys advertises their extraordinary “bling”.
Personally, I’d prefer ads not perpetuate stereotypes. Whether people talk like that to each other is another thing; after all, it’s a free country. I would hope Obama or Oprah would not speak that way in public. I expect standard English from people in their positions.
Just check some campaign speeches by both to predominantly black audiences. It’s no foul in my book but neither do I believe Pepsi, the NBA or anyone else is committing a foul by saying something “hip” or “current” such as “…tricked out name tag” by Progressive insurance. Nor do I find it offensive if companies advertise in a lingo which their target audience understands (Chinese ads in Chinatown…).
By all means if it’s a different language, like Chinese, then use it when appropriate. The audience is also a factor, but these ads in question seem to be visible to everyone so the potential for stereotyping still concerns me. As for Progressive, I’ve actually never quite understood what “tricked-out name tag” means, so if anyone cares to enlighten me feel free. Apart from the cultural issues I just tend to favor formal language conventions anyway. Even something informal like blogging you may notice I try to use proper grammar, syntax, spelling, punctuation, etc. (not that I haven’t committed my share of blunders which of course I don’t notice until AFTER I hit the post button!)
“A ho looking for tricks gets all tricked out in spandex, jewelry, hot-cha-cha lipstick, and a wig.”
which in of itself is now a different concept from literal pimping with ho’s.
The story of the American culture over the last fifty years has been co-opting and sanitizing legacies from non-white subcultures, most markedly Afro-American and gay subcultures. How long must an African-American term exist before it is “safe” to use without being accused of stereotypes.
<
p>Granted, fo-sho is a somewhat seventies legacy, out of the mainstream in any subculture for a few decades now. Does the subculture that popularized an out-of-use term retain cultural/intellectual “rights” over it, or does it fall into the mainstream?
the first thing that came to my mind when i read “fo sho” was the song “we are the world”. the term is used in it, and i’ve always thought it was the most pathetic lyric. not because it’s vernacular, but because even way back then its use in an instrument of boosterism seemed stilted and uninspired.
…in the sense that OMG, LOL, etc. are “mainstream”. Otherwise the proper way is still “for sure”.
that became a highly popularized mainstream variant in the 80s.
Mainstream, not grammatically correct.
<
p>There are plenty of grammatically incorrect usages in advertising. I don’t think that’s what people are discussing here — rather if there is an element of racial stereotyping in the use of a phrase that originated in the African-American community.
<
p>If this phrase has been “maintstreamed” — that is, used widely enough that it is no longer the more-or-less exclusive province of one subcommunity — there is no complaint of stereotyping.
<
p>On a side note, I will say that Pepsi historically has stood out as one of the first companies to employ different marketing strategies and operations to sub-communities. Pepsi was the first national brand to create a dedicated sale structure aimed at African-American communities in the US and French-speakers in Canada; in other words, Pepsi adapted its selling to the community, rather than expecting the community to the company.
My gut reaction was that this particular ad, coming from the Pepsico marketing juggernaut, was condescending to blacks and offensive to me, a white guy. I would like to know the reaction of BMG readers of color if they care to identify themselves as such and comment.
Actually closer to “fo shor” but the ‘r’ was not pronounced very strongly. I’m white, but I grew up going to racially mixed schools (in Berkeley, CA), so Black vernacular influenced my slang.
<
p>Personally, the ad doesn’t bother me. I guess I don’t really see how this is any different from the numerous ad campaigns that mimic the Boston accent in one way or another. (ie. the recent campaign for mahhhkaahh’s mahhhk whiskey) Those are also somewhat patronizing, especially when they’re selling a product (like Kentucky bourbon) that have nothing to do with Boston, but they seem to continue without controversy. Perhaps if I were Black (or spoke with a Boston accent) I would see things differently.
In related news, Pepsico has cut a deal with the racist, misogynistic homophobe Michael Savage. They’ll be distributing Michael Weiner’s (his real name) energy drink, Rockstar.
If anything, I’d say Obama ripped off Pepsi.
<
p>
<
p>Why? Because their black? Should I have been offended by the ad campaign for some phone company when they did WAZAAAAAAAUP? Aren’t they mimicking white slang?
http://vps28478.inmotionhosting.com/~bluema24/s…
Those were the wassup guys. How you could forget the best ad campaign of the 1990s is beyond me. Their product remains beer-flavored water, but they have good ads…
<
p>
<
p>and, of course…
<
p>
If pepsi put a white guy in the fo sho ad, would it not count?
<
p>Fact is, I never heard or saw an actual real-life black person say “WAZAAAAAAAP?” That’s manufactured diversity in the ad.
<
p>Should pepsi be un-allowed to target black audiences in their ads? Is there anything wrong with that? Besides, anyone will tell you that you don’t actually say “fo sho”, it’s more of a “f’sho”.
I didn’t mean to add this to our discussion, but just love watching the ads. Since you ask, though, it’s a fair point.
<
p>I agree that I’d never heard “wasssup” as a slang term for any culture until these ads came up. Furthermore, this campaign actually did parody the mainstreaming process a with ads showing stereotypical Italian-Americans saying “how you doin'” and preppy tennis club whites asking “what are you doing?”
<
p>I’m sorry I wasn’t clearer in my earlier posts — give nthat it’s been 40 years since fo sho showed up, I can’t see it as anything other than parody, be it of a wider mainstream or narrower community.
<
p>Finally, the wassup ads are also a reminder of how outmoded these discussions have become — several of the actors appear, at least, to include backgrounds not African-American.
It’s a nod to Obama’s logo by Pepsi, which as you say has a logo with similar features. This is the part of the ad that I think is very smart and effective.
here
it was modeled after Obama’s logo rather than speculates on it. The older pepsi logos look like it was well. So, who’s to say Obama’s people didn’t rip off pepsi?
Pepsi introduced this new campaign right after the election. So regardless of who started it, the latest iteration is Pepsi capitalizing on Obama’s election.
The World Court of Graphic Design!
Picture shows the logo’s evolution.
It seems obvious to me that the circle logo is and was a derivative from the cap logo. Does anybody know if the caps themselves actually looked like that or if the picture of the cap is not representative of what the caps actually looked like?
The Pepsi caps did look like that at one time (with the three colors swirl on it), whenever that logo (the fifth from the left) was first developed. Would have been a poor capitalization of the new logo otherwise, if one did not take advantage of that.
<
p>The new logo is quite a departure from the old one, honestly. My guess is that they are trying to be even more iconic than they were (trying to get you to recognize the new logo without the word “Pepsi” right there) in the same way Nike successfully did.
<
p>Also, it’s an updated look from a very old-looking brand. Smoothing out the curves reflects the “new” sorts of design that are popular right now – witness how rounded Apple-designed products are, and how that has been reflected all over the place.
<
p>My guess – as a logo designer but who has not read anything about this new logo’s intentions anywhere – is that first and foremost, this logo redesign is about updating their brand to the 21st century design sensibilities. But if you think that the ad agency who developed it, or the people at Pepsi, did NOT take the similarity of this logo with the Obama logo into account, you are brain damaged. đŸ™‚
Pepsi blanketed DC with ads saying “hope” with the Pepsi logo in January, including a widely-dispersed marketing campaign incorporating the new logo at the Inauguration (titles included “my fellow Americans”). I don’t really think it’s a coincidence.