Microsoft in Web photo racism row Click on link if you would like to read an article about this.
So someone at Microsoft decided that a black man in an advertisement directed at Polish consumers is not a good idea. Or perhaps I should say "a black man's head," since his hands were fine.
If this had happened in the United States, I think it's probably more likely that the "photoshopping" would have occurred in the opposite direction--a white guy would have been replaced by a black guy. "We can't have a photo without at least one woman and one person of color, afterall." Given that this was directed at Polish consumers, however, I have to imagine that someone made a calculation about how much "color" would be acceptable to that very white population. I spent two months in Poland and it is clearly the "whitest" locale that I've ever visited--even whiter than the BJC during THON. (Can't we do something about that, by the way.)
Here's another way to think about this. Companies shift their advertising to appeal to different markets all the time. An ad for buses in San Francisco might have an Asian woman, for example, while the exact same advertisement for Memphis or Miami buses would replace the model with a black woman in Memphis and an Hispanic woman in Miami. Is that racist? Someone decided that a black person will be less appealing to Polish consumers. Would you use photos of straight couples in your advertisements in LGBT magazines? Sometimes, no doubt, but you'd more often opt for a gay or lesbian scene.
At the heart of the Microsoft issue is that they cut out the black man's head and replaced "it" with one from a straight up white guy. It just feels raw. Maybe the event got press simply because the manipulation that drives the advertising dimension of marketing was exposed for what it is...manipulation. And maybe it's because when companies shift the "cultural inflections" in their ads, it feels right. But when they do the same thing with "race" it comes across as disingenuine. And maybe, just maybe, all of those people sitting around the table in that photo represent one single culture -- corporate culture. To tell one of them that he has to "relinquish his seat at the table because of his race" is...well...racist. Isn't that what racism is?
But really, don't accept my interpretation of this Microsoft debacle. What do you think?
462 comments:
1 – 200 of 462 Newer› Newest»When I first read this article, I didn’t know which issue to start with because I found so many problems with it. First of all, I found it hard to believe that Microsoft would make such an obvious mistake. Such a large corporation should have the best advertisements and it’s very unusual that no one caught this mistake before this ad was released. If they were going to change a person’s skin color, how could they forget to change the color of their hands? That was a careless mistake on their part and this whole issue could have been avoided if they took their time.
Because Microsoft didn’t pay more attention, they got themselves into a very touchy situation. Because they decided to remove a black person from their ad, they are now coming off as racist to the public. Replacing a black man for a white man makes the company seem like they support white people more or find white people more important. I don’t believe what they did was right but I may understand their reason for doing it. I don’t think it’s right because their advertisements should be promoting diversity and should look to appeal to a larger group of people and not only whites. I understand that the ad was made for a Polish audience but I highly doubt that the Polish consumers would steer away from a Microsoft product just because an ad featured a black man. I am a bit confused because I also doubt that there are no black people in Poland.
My main question is why Microsoft felt the need to change the color of the persons skin? Did the advertising team really think that it would really have a negative effect on product sales? Because I don’t know much about marketing or ads, I give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they really did think that a black man featured in their ads would negatively affect sales based on their target audience. After all, a company’s main goal is to sell products. They are spending money on advertisements and they want the ad that is going to make them the most money. If removing a black man is the way they thought they’d make the most money, I understand their reasoning.
Even if I understand their reasoning, I definitely don’t agree with it or the way they went about “fixing “ the ad. As I stated above, the Microsoft employees should have been much more careful. I don’t think the company was trying to be disrespectful or racist, but they did manage to hurt people’s feelings. As for the bloggers who said that Microsoft was trying to “please all markets,” I think they are delusional. It was a careless mistake, not any attempt to symbolize harmony. I hope next time Microsoft watches what gets published. They could have avoided a huge mess if they just took a few seconds more to look over the ad.
To be honest, I was not shocked when I first saw this article on CNN.com. Along with what you stated, in America someone would be going to jail for this and Nancy Grace would make sure whoever did the photo shopping would go up for the death penalty. White people in America, as I am assuming whoever was responsible for this debacle was, take political and social correctness to the extreme. Their excuse was probably that they were trying to emulate the target population of the advertisement. In America we are of mixed races, so we should “want” to see a mixture of races in our advertisement so that all races will want to buy the product. The advertising executives took this a step too far in assuming that Americans would not find out that their Polish customers would only feel safe buying products with white people in the advertisements.
At this point one has to ask if Microsoft was simply giving in to the racism that exists in Poland, or were they themselves being racist in thinking that a majority white population would have an issue with seeing a black man in an advertisement. If I had to guess, I would say that Microsoft was giving into the racism in Poland to try and make a financial gain. It is almost funny that Microsoft did not take into account the collateral damage of such an advertisement. The company has so much money one would think that Microsoft would just re-shoot the advertisement with a white guy instead of replacing the black guy’s head with an oddly placed white guy’s head. For Microsoft, I guess what this really comes down to is greed. I think people get offended by this change in the advertisements because it centers on the uncomfortable topic of race.
No one in America wants to be called racist, but we tend to throw the term around like a football. I’m really undecided of whether or not I even care about this matter. Being white, I’m not sure if I would be offended if my head was cropped out of the yearbook and the head of another black person was put in its place to even out the diversity of the class. I would really like to know the opinion of the black guy in the original advertisement and of the white guy whose head was used in the second advertisement. I wonder if they are distraught over this matter or if they received enough compensation to where it is all water under the bridge now. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation will now probably have to open a few cultural awareness centers in Poland as a means to end this public relations debacle.
I think it was not in Microsoft’s best interest to have altered the advertisement directed at Polish consumers. Obviously, it was a mistake and it was not done in spite of colored people; the advertisement was modified to appeal more to the target customers, not to make a statement about race. However, we live and work in a world that is multi-cultural. Most Polish businesses probably work will people of all races so why would they make such a change to an advertisement? And, why would they not change the Asian man to a white man as well? I can hardly imagine that a black man would change people’s mind over whether to purchase Microsoft products or not; the Asian male and the white female apparently would not. If they wanted to correctly target their audience and not seem racist, then they should have replaced the Asian with another white male. It just does not make sense to remove one race and not the other. It is singling someone out and that, to me and in many people’s eyes, is considered racist.
At the same time, I am aware that I am looking at this from the perspective of an American, where representing every race is acceptable and expected. If I was the one responsible for this advertisement, I would ensure that a variety of races and both genders were represented; it is a part of our basic American principles to do so. Not all Europeans, however, may share these same ethics and have the same view points on the matter because their society is not as racial mixed or as sensitive as ours. Polish consumers probably prefer that their advertisements consist mainly of white people because their population is predominately white. Nevertheless, Microsoft is a global business that works with customers from all over the world. To think they could get away with changing an image and not have people question their motives is foolish. We live in a world where people can access anything – even an advertisement from another country – and they will judge a company’s every move. Microsoft should have just taken a different picture for the Polish advertisement from the start if there was going to be problems with the color of models used. Maybe before they were worried about losing sales from one country because of a black male in their advertisement, but now they have an even bigger problem in their hands. They have to worry about losing sales from the rest of their customers across the world who have seen the change in the advertisement and now question whether Microsoft represents and accepts every race. Microsoft should think about reorganizing their priorities by putting their moral standards first and their profits second.
As a business major, I understand the concept of finding a target audience and aiming the ads towards them. In every topic except race and at times gender this is perfectly acceptable. A snowboarding company would look foolish if they advertised towards golfers and vice versa. The idea of marketing towards a specific race turns controversial because people do not want to be considered racists. At times the leaders of these large companies are racist and want to keep certain ethnicities from buying their products. For instance Tommy Hilfiger and FUBU both developed their brands for a specific race, Tommy for whites and FUBU for blacks. The truth of the matter is that no matter who you target your product towards does not matter. There are black people that wear Tommy and whites that wear FUBU. I believe that the idea that you have to balance the race in your advertisements to appeal to your customers is wrong. Although different races have different attributes than others I can not say that I have ever seen an advertisement with a bunch of black males and thought wow, now I am not going to buy that product. The fact that Microsoft went so far out of their way to appeal to a white audience is a little ridiculous. I don’t believe the Polish, nor anybody else in the world would be turned away from buying a Microsoft product that they needed for their company just because of the skin color of a man in an advertisement. The fact of the matter is that even if the Polish are extremely racist to the point where they will not buy something connected to a black man Microsoft should not have succumbed to the racist ways of another group. Besides we live in a very well connected world, did Microsoft honestly believe that no one would notice the change? Even if they had not forgotten to change the skin color on the man’s hands at least one person traveling between the United States and Poland was sure to notice the swap of a black male for a white one. This event I’m sure, or at least I hope, did more damage to the company’s sales than good. Although I do not like at all what Microsoft did and I do believe that they should not have done what they did, it is only a small step above what all the other companies around the world do. Instead of just selected all white people to be in the photo which I am sure other companies have done in Poland, they decided to photoshop. In my mind either way these companies are in the wrong. I am sure they know the benefits more than I do, but I feel that the race of a person in your ad would not have a large impact on how much your product sells. The problem with race today is that people are too worried. If we could all sit back and be able to joke about it and not get mad the world would be a much better place. Race is not as big of a deal as people believe it is. Whether you are black or white doesn’t dictate how you will act and whether someone is white or black in a Microsoft ad should not dictate whether or not you buy the product.
When I read the article posted on CNN about the Microsoft ad getting altered, I personally found it to be completely ridiculous. I immediately thought of a two different things wrong with the issue. Number one, the fact that they felt the need to alter the models in the advertisement, and number two, the way that they went about altering and cropping the ad. I read the article over twice so that I was able to get the bet understanding of the article as possible. I can not in any way grasp why Microsoft felt the need to alter the advertisement. Microsoft claims itself to be a global company. If this is the case then they should not feel the need to alter an advertisement for different parts of the world which they are advertising to, in this case the Polish culture. If they want to continue to grow as a global company they should not have to alter ads for every different cultural areas. Although Poland may be predominately white, they should accept the fact that the company is global and something that should not be changed just because of how they all look. If the people of Poland were going to have such a problem with the models in the multiracial ad then Microsoft should have used completely different models to satisfy the ideals of the Polish people.
Why is it that the african american man was cropped out but the Asian model still was present in the Polish ad?
I thought when the point made in the article about a blogger saying that Microsoft was trying to please both markets by having the man have a black hand and a white head makes absolutely no sense. If this was the case then the original ad with the black, white, and asian man would have been perfect to do this. Immediately after reading that suggestion of the cropping sounded like it would just be a huge cover up for their mistake. I think if they felt the need to remove the black man they should have removed the whole body and placed a new model in completely. I think leaving just the black man’s hand in the ad is a slap in the face to all African American people, regardless of where the ad was being shown.
Changing the advertisement shines a terrible light on the company, Microsoft, all over the world. Americans seem to pride themselves on not being racist, they should be proud to show off their support in multiracial communities. Who knows, showing ads with an African American model in a almost all white community, like Poland, could be the start of more acceptable of African Americans in their community.
To start off, after reading the BBC News article, I find it highly doubtful that Microsoft was “attempting to please all markets by having a man with both a white face and a black hand” as the article mentions. I think that is absolutely ridiculous. If they were really attempting to please all markets, then they could have left the ad alone – since it showed an Asian man, a white woman and a black man. That’s diverse in and of itself. I think the most realistic explanation is the one brought up by Sam Richard’s post where he said that the population of Poland is predominately white. This seems to be the most logical reason since Microsoft wants to make their product appealing. They probably thought that the white businessmen of Poland would feel more connected to the product if they saw “people like them” in the ad. Their advertising tactics shifted from culture to culture. In American culture, we always strive to be politically correct and diverse. Look at our recent election, there was more talk about Barack Obama being a black man (even though he’s only half black) then about his political experience (granted, it being limited). Again, like Sam Richards stated in his own post, we almost have an unspoken quota about including minorities whether it be blacks or women in the media. I also think this is ridiculous. This does not count as diversity if it is staged. Things should just happen naturally. But back to the Microsoft issue, I think they are wrong to change the ad in that manner. This is just an example of them being lazy. If they really wanted to have different ads that are geared towards different cultures, then so be it. But at least create a new different ad, do not just Photoshop a different colored head in. The fact that they left the black hands in the ad means that either someone wasn’t paying attention and doing their job or they were being lazy and figured no one would notice. Either way, Microsoft is in the wrong here. I wonder if this was a group decision or if it was one top exec that made the decision and everyone just followed along. Did no one really speak up and point out that it might be ethically wrong to change the race of a man in the ad to “increase sales”? Along these same lines, did the black model and the white model (that replaced each other) have anything to say about this? Did the black man think it was okay that he was being replaced or did he maybe not even know? Microsoft should own up to their mishap instead of saying they are “investigating” the mistake.
Although this article is the result of an advertising snafu, it inevitably raises the issue of race. Because Microsoft was careless in creating this ad for Poland (a mistake that should not have been made in a company of that stature), it now must deal with speculation on whether or not it is a “racist company” or politically correct in creating its advertisements. Had the mistake not been made, and the man had been completely transformed into a white person, hands and all, the issue of race would have never been brought to the forefront, despite the enormous involvement it has always had in the world of advertising. The advertising giants that work for Microsoft are geniuses at what they do, hence the worth of the company, and their salaries, and they know what color people should appear as in their ads. It is not Microsoft that has a race issue, it is just that they are trained to cater to their audience, and if their audience is racist then their advertisement for that particular group will reflect that view. We shouldn’t be pointing our finger at Microsoft but rather we should be evaluating the way our friends, family, and ourselves view race, for it is “regular people” who ultimately decide what advertisements will look like. Even though ads in the U.S. are likely to have a person from every possible denomination represented, that is a result of our fear of offending anyone and our training to be politically correct, as well as the fact that our population is indeed much more diverse than that of Poland’s. Although some people might wonder if the color of one man in one ad could even have an effect on a company like Microsoft, I believe that it most certainly could. We don’t want to admit it and sometimes we don’t realize it because we do it subconsciously, but we absolutely do judge an ad based on the persons age, race, gender, and weight. So should advertisers be leaders and just represent all groups no matter what their audience may think? If people were unbiased and not judgmental, advertisers could put whomever they wanted in their commercials or on their billboards, but to think that they could lose money by being completely nonjudgmental is just not a business risk a multimillion-dollar company would be willing to take, and I don’t blame them. Until the world is completely rid of its racist tendencies, advertisements will continue to be biased and unfair to certain groups. It would be wrong for us to sit here and talk about how corrupt and morally wrong Microsoft is when most of the people around us think the same way. So if we are not willing to say something to the people around us, why are we so willing to put down a company such as Microsoft that will probably never hear our personal complaints?
I read the article and the first thing that came to my mind was not again! Another small problem that could have easily been avoided if someone just knew a little bit about Photoshop. I’m not one to be bragging about being a Photoshop expert but how in the world does someone forget to change the color of the guys hands? If this mistake would have been caught we wouldn’t even be talking about this subject right now.
I could also see why they changed the black mans face into a white man face. If they were using that ad in Poland, and its one of the whitest areas wouldn’t that make sense to change the ad? it’s a business and its just another strategy to make the most profit possible. The thing is if it happened in America there would be big problems. It would be like an elephant in a china closet. Other race mostly the black race I imagine would boycott Microsoft and stop using there products. Some would even say that Microsoft is even racists but in all reality its just a strategy to keep the customer happy in which would be Poland. So in another way you could even say Poland is racist. But you cant make that assumption just because of some company that is supposed to be at the top of the class in this kind of stuff. What I really think is Microsoft should hire someone to catch this kind of stuff before it gets leaked out. Like a Photoshop manager or boss of Photoshop. Maybe next time they wont have to deal with complications about white heads and black hands. But you also have to put in the fact that where all humans we make mistakes there is going to be errors. Its all about how we handle them and I would assume that Microsoft handled this well. They wouldn’t want such a small problem to turn into a huge deal and potentially lose customers. I think that the right move would be to just leave the black man in the photo from the beginning and never even change the photo. Then there would never be a problem with a white face and black hands. Just thing about it when you go into a store to buy a Microsoft supplies. You go in and get what your looking for. For example if you were looking for a computer. You go and get the computer, you don’t make your decision because of the box and how many different races are on the cover. Who does that? So that’s my opinion on this issue its just another small problem that people look way into. Just remember next time your buying items in stores and you don’t buy the item because of the outside picture on the box. And we should work on getting more races in the BJC for thon.
No one knows what the real intentions behind the photoshopping of the Microsoft picture for its Polish website were. It is very debatable whether this was just a photoshopper’s ignorance, an innocent mistake, or that of deliberate racism. I think the main issue is that people spend too much time in trying to (1) please everyone and (2) be politically correct. In the United States, it is known that photos of this sort “need” to contain people of color and at least one woman. It is also arguable that Poland would “need” to do this the opposite way, because Poland is virtually made up of a white population.
I will focus on the United States “view” first. Being a white female American I see political correctness not being necessary. If it were me viewing a picture of all males of color I would not even look twice. I think that by the United States doing everything in their power to not be racist, they are always “walking on egg-shells”. The result is being more racist. When these photographers and designers are at the photo shoot and only wanting a black male, an Asian male and a white female, they are being more racist as if they just accepted anyone. Political correctness is changing the way everyone looks at things and making people learn to “bite their tongue” when it may not be necessary to even do so.
Now focusing back on the Polish website with the black male’s head being replaced by a white male’s head. This is pure racism, in my opinion. This goes under people trying too hard to please everyone. It is showing how ignorant the people of Poland could be, or at least the photoshoppers. Apparently these people, who have the job to photoshop pictures, thought it was necessary to show more “white” in their website. This is most likely because most of Poland is made up of whites. Poland should open their eyes to more “color”. They cannot do so when photoshoppers of a major company are changing the “color” to white.
Microsoft has a lot to learn from this mistake. They are trying too much to please everyone. If they had just put the same picture on both website, it most likely would not have been an issue. Racism may not still be a major issue in most parts of the world, but we are holding on to racism by trying to be politically correct. It reminds us that racism once was, instead of simply moving on and learning from our mistakes. Children should be taught to be able to say the same things around people of another race as if they were in a room filled with all people of their own race. That way future generations won’t have to “walk on egg-shells” and can live as if racism never existed.
The ad that ran in the U.S. looks like a classic American ad. There is a Chinese man, a black man, and a white woman, which is exactly what one would expect from a country that tries to include all races in the media and in television. Advertisers know who their demographic is, and in America that is many different types of people and races. I find it very interesting but not at all surprising that they would change the ad that was to appear in Poland. I think it is a fact that people are more willing to trust and buy things from people that look the same as they do. It’s probably not even conscious on most people’s parts, it’s just an innate thing that humans possess. I’d like to think as an idealist would that having a black man in the ad would not have turned a polish person from the product, but that probably is not reality. Poland is extremely “white,” for lack of a better term, and people trust who they know and what they are used to. Honestly, I think that the Microsoft advertisers were smart to think to change the image to a white man for the ad that was to appear in Poland. As an advertiser it is extremely important to really think about how a person looking at the ad thinks and what they are going to take away from viewing the ad. Obviously, they could have been entirely more thorough about it and not completely forgot about the man’s hand color, but nevertheless an analytical advertiser would think of that idea, and I really do not feel that there is anything racist on their part. They are doing their job to sell and present their product in the best light to the specific audience they are targeting, so they will do whatever it takes regardless of the ethics of the situation. People may be outraged by this and think that it is appalling, but this happens all the time. Most companies do not overlook such large skin color inconsistencies, but the marketing behind the ad is extremely legitimate. Microsoft is clearly going to receive a lot of flack for this, but I think people should really consider the circumstances surrounding the situation before they judge the company so harshly. Just because Americans are used to minorities in their advertisements and in the media does not mean that every country would be and Microsoft had to be conscious of this. America has so many different types of people and races and we all have a degree of acceptance with this. I really think that all Microsoft is guilty of is sloppy advertising; All they did was target a specific audience with their ads, so they are not guilty of racism.
First of all, I can't believe that such a successful corporation would screw up so badly. Secondly, why the heck would they bother changing it? I think this is a case of political correctness gone terribly wrong, but isn't it also over-the top to feel the need to put every race and gender in an advertisement? I find it absurd that Microsoft has to worry so much about the people they are putting in their advertisements. Obviously they want to be an approachable company that caters to everyone, but is putting, or removing, a black man from an advertisement really going to make more people buy the product. The advertisement already has a pretty diverse lineup as previous comments have said. I think that in a way, Microsoft was discriminating against the Polish because the company thought that they couldn't handle seeing a black man in an advertisement.
This isn't the first botched advertisement that I have seen. During a weight loss supplement commercial the "after" picture of a rotund white man was the muscular body of a black man with the white guys head on it. While this type of commercial would often lend to more mistakes, as their product is shady, I feel that these advertisements show the business and marketing workers' disconnect with what people actually think. If they were actually just honest (a laughable thought for those in the advertising industry) they wouldn't make these mistakes and wouldn't look like complete idiots.
In a way though, I think that it looks just as forced and fake when they put every nationality in an advertisement. Microsoft, or any other company for that matter, is not fooling anyone when it puts out these advertisements.
This debacle just goes to show that even major companies can make enormous mistakes - and still get away with it. People are still buying their products and they are not really hurting from this mishap. These corporations can really do whatever they want because people still need their business so I think it's laughable that they actually worry enough to alter and screw up and advertisement.
You would think that since they took so long to worry about the advertisement, they would spend some extra time making it look nice at least. Businesses need to be careful about how they market a product, but this is just completely ridiculous. Honestly, I'm not even really sure that people care about this gaff. It's not like Microsoft is going to go out of business any time soon.
I think Americans as a whole worries way too much about political correctness. Many other countries (while they have a lot of issues and differences that we take for granted) are much more open about differences. While they may not agree or be all peace, love and happiness, at least they are honest.
My first impression was that the initial ad had been altered to include a black man- who wasn't really in the shot. Look closely at how it's attached, the angle the size in relation to the hand. That was the initial error- reuse outdated clip-art and make it politically correct. for me, the larger question is, is it ethical for the original image to have been altered so that the mix of the company workforce is misrepresented, or is the alteration acceptable, since it may encourage minorities to apply for jobs? The new white guy's head is so poorly done that it's comical.
First off, it seems as though this problem is one that could have been avoided very easily had Microsoft taken the time to think before acting. As a Marketing Major, I understand that advertising internationally may require different techniques than those already employed domestically. Further, in target areas that do not have a lot of diversity it may seem as if sticking with this norm is the most appropriate way to attract customers. However, as an American company, Microsoft should embrace the fact that we live in a multi-racial society. It is well known that America is notorious for its “melting pot” characteristics and its tolerance of peoples from all walks of life. It is unreasonable to believe that people from other parts of the globe would actually believe that a powerful American company does not have and does not promote diversity within its walls. So, it seems to me, that it would have been easy for Microsoft to boast of these traits and, in turn, be viewed for what it truly is by the people of Poland. This tactic may have even been the right one for their advertising campaign in the country. Perhaps, people in Poland understand that the world is a diverse place and strive to interact with this dynamic world. They may even be looking for companies that will help them diversify their own culture in order to become more relevant on the international scene. Had Microsoft thought about who they are as a company and the most realistic way to portray them self worldwide this may never have happened.
On the other hand, Microsoft may have deemed it necessary for reasons beyond our understanding to change this ad from a multi racial one to a predominately white one. This, however, could have been done with infinite more care, tact, and sensitivity. It is just plain rude to change solely the head of a person on an image seen by millions of people. Further, it is insulting to us, as consumers, that Microsoft would think that this change would not go unnoticed. I am not black so I cannot speak for the community as to how they feel towards this situation. Nonetheless, I recognize the insensitivity that the company had when altering the advertisement. Would it have been that inconvenient to simply replace the black man with a white man altogether? Yes, this is still not the most ideal situation and it still does not promote diversity. However it would have at least prevented the awkward situation of having a character with a white head and black hands. This, to me, is the essence of the issue as it sends so many wrong messages to the public. It suggests that people can be easily replaced and that especially minorities can be effortlessly swapped out for a white person.
All in all, it seems as if this situation stemmed from Microsoft trying to be all things to all people. However, in marketing we know that this is not possible for any company to achieve. Had they simply portrayed themselves as they truly are this debacle could have never happened.
I find this article to be hilarious; I can’t believe Microsoft was stupid enough to get caught! This is not the economy to be making careless mistakes, people are getting fired for dropping the fries, and the employees over at Microsoft are forgetting to change the guy hands! And let’s not talk about the idiots who let the original ad be released. The ball was definitely dropped several times on this one. They know how Americans get about race, now those people have to get fired to prove that Microsoft is not racist company.
Companies do these kinds of things every day, let’s not act like this was the first time, because it surely won’t be the last, so please don’t go and get your panties all in a bunch. And as a black woman I’m not offended at all. Microsoft is in the business of making money, and if they have to change a face to make that happen, then that’s what they are going to do. They were trying to appeal and relate to the audience of Poland, and the last time I checked there isn’t an overwhelming population of black people in Poland (I didn’t know there was a major Asian population over there either, seeing as they decided to keep the Asian guy, but I digress). Now I’m sure there are a few of us black people over there (because as many of you know, we Everywhere) but I’m sure those few, have more important things to focus on than making sure there’s a black person in every ad. Only Americans have that kind of time!
And since I’m writing this, I should take the time and address the feelings of the black guy who got pushed to the side. To anyone who cares and is wondering, the black guy is fine. I sure he still got his check and he is doing lovely, but if he decides to take his little five minutes of fame and capitalize on his oppression by the white man, he might want to milk Microsoft for a few more extra dollars in the name of his pain and embarrassment.
"The white head and black hand actually symbolize interracial harmony. It is supposed to show that a person can be white and black, old and young at the same time," said one blogger on the Photoshop Disasters blog.
What idiot said that? And what naive person actually believes it! Why are people always trying to make things deeper than they actually are? There is no symbolize, no interracial harmony! The idiots at Microsoft just forgot to change the guy’s hands. And honestly if I was just passing by that ad in everyday life, I probably would have never noticed the guys hands. And if I did, I would just assume that the white guy hand a little tanning issue, and I would have moved on. Microsoft is not a racist company; they were just appealing to the Polish market, all in the name of making money! And for the record, there are other races at THON, we just don’t stay the entire time, 46 hours is a long time to be standing!
When I first read this article it surprised me that Microsoft such a big company would make such a big mistake and that no one caught it in time. It seems to me that someone in Microsoft was definitely trying to change the person’s skin color to white but forgot about the hands. It does surprise me however since in today’s world everyone is working in a multi-cultural environment why Microsoft felt that it was important to change the skin color. I don’t really know why they thought that changing the person’s skin color would affect sales. I could see if Microsoft was trying to direct its product to a white audience but I don’t really think that in today’s society that is helpful by any means. So many companies today try appeal to all different types of races when selling a product because in today’s world no one race is more likely to buy a product than another race. Maybe certain age groups are more likely to buy a product over another age group, but that has nothing to do with the color of your skin. Especially Microsoft’s product that is something that no matter what race you are that everyone wants to buy. Another thing is that even if the Polish were racist against blacks Microsoft is still a worldwide company and the things that they may believe is correct at one branch will still affect the company as a whole. One would have to think that this picture was altered in this way because there is some racism in Poland and the Polish branch was trying to make more of a profit. If this was the case then I have lost a lot of respect for Microsoft for knowing that the picture was going to be changed just to make a couple of bucks and give in to the racism in Poland. Microsoft is a big company with even more money, that the thought of them even having to Photoshop a picture instead of just taking a new picture baffles me. Another thing that I want to know is did the black person have a say on whether his body and hands could be used in this picture but not his head? I wonder how he feels about this whole situation and about the company now. That it is only ok for him to appear in the picture at one branch of the company, but not another branch seems absurd to me. Maybe over in Europe this is not as big of a deal, but I feel like Microsoft has a obligation to do what is right and not necessarily what will give them more of a profit. Overall this picture should never be on one website one way and another website a different way because that to me is giving a false impression of what Microsoft believes in.
After reading this article I have to say that I can’t blame Microsoft for what they did. Poland is a very white area and because of that showing a black man in their commercials could come off as a little odd and stir customers away from their product. However, being that Microsoft is such a huge corporation and so well-known currently, it really isn’t necessary to change the man’s face from black to white. Microsoft already has thousands of customers as it is and this minor change won’t make a difference. Especially if the change has become so obvious and now makes Microsoft actually look really stupid.
Now coming from an American point of view, either ad would have sufficed because of how diverse our country is and how were used to being surrounded by people of all races and backgrounds. Due to this it can be really hard for me to really understand why changing this ad was really such a big deal, but what is easy to understand is that they were not very smooth with how they handled it. I don’t get why they couldn’t just make a brand new ad with all white people so it didn’t turn out to be so obvious that they changed it. It’s clear that Microsoft has the money for it so could no one in the company think to do that. They had to be lazy and just switch the faces so now they’re going to have to face the consequences.
You can’t really feel bad for them because not only did they bring this on themselves, but they make so much money that you know they can easily rebound from this and move on. But what if it was a much smaller business that had the same problem? Would it affect their business a lot more than it would affect a corporation like Microsoft? It probably would since smaller businesses don’t have as much money to fall back on just in case this problem actually stirs away possible customers. However, could the difference in the ad actually attract customers? If you’re surrounded by ads that only feature white people and you see an ad with a little more “color” it could catch your eye and get you more interested in it. I’m not saying what Microsoft did was ethically the right thing to do, but who is not to say that they made this mistake on purpose. Just look at all the attention this “mistake” has gained. It has people talking about Microsoft and you know that’s going to lead to some increase in sales. We’re not talking about a brand new, inexperienced company, but Microsoft who obviously knows what they’re doing and do it very well. Either way whether it was done on purpose or not, this idea of racism in the media is not going to leave for a very long time. This topic is going to be argued over for many years to come.
As a major corporation, Microsoft has a responsibility to advertise and market their products and company name. A major part of that process is creating ads that will appeal to and satisfy the potential customer. Apparently Microsoft thought that adjusting the racial makeup of their ad would improve their successes in Poland, being that its population is greatly white. Is doing this wrong? In a business sense, no, it is simply a marketing tool. In a racial sense, it probably is. I’d say it depends on how heavily you weigh race issues. From the outside, Microsoft’s photoshopping appears to be racist, but you can’t blame them for adjusting ads to satisfy the target audience. In Microsoft’s defense, I have to say that its primary role is not to promote racial equality, but to advertise and sell the company name and product. Sure, racial fairness is definitely important in the workplace, but I will not agree with the argument that altering an ad, even if it means removing a black man, is unacceptable. To me, that is utilizing known information about the customer and smart marketing tactics to sell a product.
In my opinion, everyone is way too focused on being politically correct. Too much emphasis is placed on this topic; it is made into such a big deal. Those who have seen Microsoft’s original and altered advertisements worry about the ethical side of their decision before they ever consider thinking about the business aspect. Society has shaped us into practicing political correctness even if it means surpassing common sense and personal opinions. A situation like this really makes me wonder if people are criticizing Microsoft’s ad because they truly believe that replacing a black man with a white man is downright unethical. Or are they doing so just in the name of being politically correct? Today’s world is so focused on this idea that we are practically forced to accept this principle or risk being called racist or intolerant. With such high stakes it’s no wonder that people jump to the conclusion that Microsoft is racist. Race is a touchy subject, because nobody wants to intentionally offend someone else, but I think we place political correctness too highly.
I think it is necessary to ask this question: In Asia, for example, would you expect a local company to create an ad with two white people, one black female, and one Asian male? No, you don’t expect this to be the standard or better yet, get offended when they place advertisements containing only Asians in their cities. In fact, I think it would look pretty out of place for such an ad to exist in the heart of an Asian country. After considering that, I’ll ask why Americans take Microsoft’s photoshop situation so gravely.
I think that it is very interesting that while in the USA, as Sam says, it would have been more likely for a white man to be photo shopped into a black man, but in Poland there was a reversal. It seems like US advertisers do try very hard to avoid discriminating, by including at least one African American in every group of white people. Penn State is especially good at this–in every pamphlet I received in the mail from the school I could be sure to find at least one smiling black student in the mix of grinning white men and women, just to prove that the university does indeed have some diversity, (much of which I’ve yet to actually discover on campus). But the point is, I was really shocked when I read this article because I assumed the rest of the world was just as concerned with political correctness as us here in America. If this photo shopping had happened here, the country would be in an uproar. Is our country really less racist? Or are we just better at hiding it? If we are moving towards a truly “color blind” society should advertisers in the US really worry about filling their “color quota” by throwing in the “token black man”? If a white man was photo shopped to become a black man would there be as much controversy surrounding the issue? Probably not. I think when actors or models are chosen to appear in advertisements or commercials they should be chosen strictly on their abilities and not their ethnicities. If that means having a Microsoft ad depicting a room full of just Asians, just Whites, or just Blacks, then so be it. To me, by putting too much focus on “diversity” we are creating even larger barriers between us, instead of learning to not really see color at all, (even though I doubt a truly colorblind society can exist).
This ad also makes me wonder too if research has actually been conducted to show that consumers in Poland are more likely to respond to an ad with all white faces. If this is true, I would be surprised. Maybe growing up with friends from so many different races has made me naive, but I would never think that a black man selling a product like software would make people more or less likely to buy it. I mean, this wasn’t a J-Crew ad. The photo shopping just doesn’t seem to make any sense and I don’t understand it. Maybe Microsoft really is racist.
Then again, maybe some advertisers knew what they were doing all along and were just attempting to open up a race dialogue to the world. After all, how could such a big company make such a huge mistake by not changing those hands?
The fact that they substituted the black face for a white one, but not the Asian face is the controversy because it isolates Africans as the race that would not appeal to eastern Europeans. Microsoft made the picture edit because they wanted to appeal to the Polish population. Africans are not a substantial part of the Polish population so they edited a character to be white. I’m guessing Asians do not make up a large portion of the Polish consumers, but the Asian character was left in the Polish version of the ad. This puts Microsoft in a bad position because apparently someone in the marketing department felt that it would be detrimental to sales if the Polish version featured a black man. The Asian man, on the other hand, would not hurt sales in the Polish version. Africans and Asians do not make up a large portion of the Polish population, and yet only the black face was changed to a white one. This gives the impression that only blacks featured in ads would threaten sales.
Also, when the black face was changed but not the rest of the body is also controversial. It shows that Microsoft felt that the actual facial features of the black man would hurt sales in Poland. It was not about the skin color but the actual African features that they thought Poland would not be able to relate with. If the original U.S. ad featured three white people and they sent the same version to Poland there would be nothing wrong. It’s the fact that an American marketer substituted a black man for a white man.
It makes sense to have a black man in the U.S. version because blacks make up a substantial portion of our population. Therefore, featuring a black man in the ad would not hurt sales. I don’t know how the general population of Poland feels about Africans, but this incident shows that American racial tensions are still alive. Microsoft assumed that a black character in an ad would hurt sales in Poland; this shows the negative race relations here at home. I feel like the edit itself is a little dramatic. The notion that one of the three characters race in the ad would negatively affect sales in Poland is crazy. Microsoft is an immensely rich and global corporation that should not be worrying about minute details in their ads. If a Polish person is interested in buying a computer, a character in the ad would not steer them away from buying one. After this incident I wouldn’t be surprised if Microsoft fired the person responsible and made sure the rest of their ads from here on out would be racially diverse.
After reading this article and some of other people’s comments, I realized just how many people thought what Microsoft did was wrong. Apparently for Microsoft to Photoshop a white man’s face onto the originally Black man’s body is wrong. But why is it wrong? Since when is smart and efficient advertising wrong and racist? The only problem I see with the Photoshop job is that they didn’t do the hands as well which was a mistake, I admit. In my opinion, this is just an instance of smart advertising done by Microsoft. There’s obviously a “white” market in Poland and this ad is just targeting that specific target market. It wouldn’t make sense if they put three white people in the ad when advertising in an Asian or Hispanic market would it now? It all depends on what audience is being targeted for the product. If there wasn’t a slight Asian market in Poland, I really think they would have Photoshopped a white guy’s head on the Asian person as well. I think everyone is just blowing this thing way out of proportion. White people are way too sensitive about race issues. They assume that everything that could possibly be interpreted as racist is racist only because they, themselves are afraid of getting labeled as a racist. But not every single thing is racist, and especially not this altered advertisement. Microsoft did what every other single company would do; they tried to save money on advertisements by utilizing the same advertisement but altering it for each different specific audience they targeted on. Instead of maybe spending a lot more time and money by getting more actors for different advertisements, they just took one picture and then altered it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with what they did.
Now if you want to talk about racism, this is what I found interesting about another post. American Girl posted, “There is a Chinese man, a black man, and a white woman, which is exactly what one would expect from a country that tries to include all races in the media and in television.” What the fuck. How the hell do you know that Asian man is Chinese? What makes you say and think that that man is Chinese? This is what’s wrong with white people nowadays. White people and Black people had so much friction over the course of this country’s history that white people are now really just afraid to offend a Black person in any sort of way. But when it comes to other races of people, most of the time, when a white person sees an Asian person, they automatically think, “He/she is definitely Chinese. I wonder what level math class they’re in?” Or when a white person sees a Hispanic person, they think, “He/she is a Mexican. I wonder if they’re legal or illegal immigrants.” That Microsoft advertisement has nothing wrong with it. If the Asian person’s head got altered instead, nobody would have any issues with the ad whatsoever. White people are now afraid to offend the African-American race, but they don’t do the same with other races. American Girl thinking that Asian man was Chinese is more racist than the altered Black man’s head. This is what’s wrong with America.
Before reading your blog, I honestly never knew this occurred. After reading it, I was extremely shocked that such a mistake could be made so easily and carelessly. Considering the fact that this mistake would absolutely rile up consumers, you would think that Microsoft would be more careful while “photoshopping” this picture. Such a problem could have been so easily avoided if more care was taken. I don’t feel any sympathy for them in this situation because I think it is wrong to change the black man to a white man, and in fact racist. I understand that their reasoning for changing the black man to a white man would be to appeal to the vast majority of Polish consumers who are white. However, I don’t believe that having a black man in this advertisement would steer any of those Polish consumers away from what they were trying to advertise. If those Polish consumers are interested in the product, they will pursue their interest whether this black man is in the advertisement or not. Poland may have an extremely white population, but this does not mean the country is racist. I know that I am from the United States, a very diverse country, so I could definitely be naïve when it comes to my beliefs. However, I do feel it was wrong, and racist, to assume that the black man would have a negative effect on the advertisement. Each of the three people in the original picture are well-dressed, professional looking people, and nothing that they are doing would imply that they are not worthy of being a part of the advertisement. At some point over the last year I was considering becoming a marketing major, but I ended up deciding not to and I was not sure of the reason. However, after reading this blog, I realized things like this must happen all the time. Although it is understandable for advertisers to make changes such as these, I still don’t think it is right. I also don’t think consumers are as much aware of the skin colors in an advertisement as the actual advertiser is. Now, I really don’t think I would want to pursue a career in marketing because I realize you almost have to be racist to get the people you are working with to agree with your ideas. It is true that ads directed at certain populations change depending on the types of people they are directed at, but I don’t think I would be able to make those decisions, because I do believe in equality. If I was a marketer, I would have to agree with a change such as this. It is scary to think that changes such as these are made all of the time, and the only reason this was noticed was because a mistake was made. I don’t agree with these changes. A strong advertisement is a strong advertisement, no matter what different races are in the advertisement.
Let’s first take a look at American commercials. For instance, McDonald’s advertisements are sure to blatantly include the most ethnically diverse set of individuals enjoying their Big Macs around a single table. Where is this meal taking place? The United Nations? I confess to being a white person, but I don’t believe it would be offensive to anybody if a commercial selling a food or clothing item were to include only Caucasians. I know it certainly wouldn’t offend me if McDonald’s showed a commercial with a table full of blacks. Therefore, if a company wanted to sell their product to a specific target audience, it would be only practical to air a commercial that is representative to this target audience. This is the reason why McDonald’s and other national chains choose to include persons of different races in their advertisements. America is an ethnically and racially diverse nation and large companies understand that they can market to the largest audience if they create a commercial with individuals representative of the country they are broadcasting within.
If you are following my argument, it is easy to understand why the Polish advertising company in question altered the picture. According to Wikipedia.com, Poland’s ethnic make-up consists of 97.6% Poles, 1.3% Germans, 0.6% Ukrainians, and 0.5% Belarusians. This means that blacks are nearly non-existent in Polish society. If you were in charge of advertising an item to a population with this demographic composition, wouldn’t you try to shape the image of your commercial towards your target audience? I have a feeling that if the image of the black man had remained in the Polish version, Polish citizens unaccustomed to living among blacks would be surprised to find a black individual in a local advertisement and not even recognize what the thing was selling. As a result, the advertisement would become more of something to laugh about rather than an effective marketing tool. I have been to several Caribbean Islands where the local advertisements selling national items do not include a single white person. Are the Caribbean Islands thriving with black supremacists? No, the correct answer is that except for seasonal tourists, most of the Caribbean Islands are demographically black.
I cannot completely let the Polish advertisers off the hook. Let’s not forget about the Asian man in the original version that remained in the revised version. Because I already mentioned the demographic make-up of Poland, it is easy to see that Asian individuals are also nearly non-existent in Polish society. It is this mistake that most likely caused the racial uproar to occur. If they had instead chose to Photoshop the Asian man and the black man, I would assume that the revision could be called a sensible advertising move, instead of a possible racist modification.
As bizarre as this advertisement is, I am not too surprised that the “switch” was made from the black man to a white man. What would be the benefit of putting a black person in an ad for a computer company in Poland? First of all I don’t believe I have ever seen a black Polish person or met a black person that has visited Poland. So having any black person (other than Michael Jackson who is a world icon and black and white) would not attract any specific group.
So what did the Polish Microsoft marketers do with the original American advertisement, which had a black guy in it? The advertisers decided to poorly photoshop a white guy’s head on top of the black guy’s body. But apparently they forgot that the black guy had black hands and left the hands unchanged. Could that have been taken the wrong way? Yes, but I believe that could have just been an honest mistake leaving the original black man’s hands in the ad instead of also making the hands white.
Now, If this ad can be perceived as racism, then there is racism in almost every advertisement out in the world. When watching BET (Black Entertainment Television), I have noticed there are commercials all the time for interest free credit loans, instant cash advances, and hair products which all consist of black actors and every now and then you will see white actors sprinkled in. Marketing is all about appealing to your target audience.Who watches BET? Mostly black people.Who lives in Poland? White people.
Now something that could be taken as racist, or offensive, is this pastry company in Mexico called Bimbo. Bimbo makes a large selection of sweets such as cinnamon rolls, doughnuts and some mexican pastries. However, there is one pastry made by Bimbo, El Negrito, which is controversial. While it does taste delicious, on the cover of the pastry wrapper is a little black kid with an afro,baggy shirt and jeans and basketball shoes. What is the point of naming your chocolate pastry bar “ the little black boy”? I don’t get that. I feel like if anything,while funny, is one of the most racist advertisements i’ve ever seen.
In conclusion, are the people at Microsoft trying to be politically correct or racist? No,I don’t think so. I think the Microsoft people were just trying to market their product better. Do people ever complain about too many black people on BET or too many Latino’s on Telemundo? No. The Microsoft add is not the most racist thing I have ever seen, like I said there are far worse adds. I do feel, however, that Microsoft may have just used poor judgment. But in the end, this isn’t racist.
When first reading this article, I had mixed emotions about it because I can see the issue from both sides. This could be seen both as racist and as a marketing technique. I don’t believe that it could be a way for “harmony” by incorporating a white head and a black hand.
The automatic first thought is how could it be possible to change the black person to the white person and have it gone unnoticed? I feel that Microsoft knew what they were doing the whole time but maybe followed through with it the wrong way. Them having to pull the ad and making up some excuse that they “don’t know who changed it” is the wrong way to deal with the situation. It IS making them look extremely racist that they replaced the black male with a white male, and sloppy too, noticing that they didn’t change the color of the hand. Being such a huge corporation and making a huge error in advertising makes the company look bad.
On the other hand, this could be viewed as a marketing technique. Many companies, when creating ads, want to appeal to as many people around the world as they possibly can to sell a product and do so successfully. The ad appeared in Poland, which is predominantly white. So changing the ad to all white people may have been to appeal to Poland, without intentionally trying to cause controversy. But the error they made was not changing the color of his hand. If it was intended to be a marketing technique, they should have really reviewed the ad before releasing it.
In my opinion, I don’t feel that the intent of the company was to be racist. I feel that they were trying to sell a product and that was the decision they made to do so. Unfortunately, they overlooked the severity of the situation and didn’t really look over the ad as well as they should have and these are the consequences they have to deal with. Their marketing technique was probably a success in Poland, but when America got wind of it, that’s when the tables turned and the racist aspect got brought up. But what I don’t understand is why they did feel the need to change the color of his skin. A black person in an advertisement won’t steer people away from the product if it is great and selling well. If it was the intent to appeal to the Polish audience, they should have been more thorough and careful. They left his hand black making matters much worse and making them look sloppy. This ad could go either way, depending on your personal views and beliefs. I personally feel that it was just a marketing technique gone awry.
I think picking and choosing different male/females as well as white/colored individuals in advertising is important. It doesn’t shock or bother me that they switched a black man for a white man when trying to appeal to polish consumers. I’m not sure if any one else has noticed this but I’ve seen large amounts of polish people that move to the New Jersey shore in the summer time’s, most work on the boardwalk and some lifeguard. Vacationing there I’ve got to meet and have conversations with a bunch of them. I remember they didn’t seem to be very diverse or used to my society, so again Microsoft’s decision doesn’t surprise or bother me. As far as if they meant to leave the white mans hands black on purpose to represent equality is something I don’t think they tried to do. It was an obvious mistake that had nothing to do with racism. I think it’s interesting how different company’s and organizations try to market them selves on television commercials and magazines. I think the bluntest commercials you can see on the television today are those made by McDonalds. Maybe because I’m white they stand out to me but I feel like even black people think McDonalds commercials are corny and go overboard with trying to appeal to just black people. Every commercial is there’s colored individuals either rapping stupid lyrics to a stupid beat, singing a hard to watch and listen too slow jam R&B song, break dancing on a cardboard box in an alleyway, or people hanging on the bleachers at a basketball court. I’ assuming their trying to appeal to urban consumers but they just make who ever it is their trying to market to look stupid. I’m not sure I can remember the last time a white guy was in a McDonald’s commercial. McDonalds and their commercials don’t bother me but I think the head of their advertising and the people who “ok’d” their commercials should get fired. I feel companies like Microsoft are obligated to think about exactly who and what color individuals they use in commercials and magazines. It’s something everyone trying to market their product ha to do. I don’t think it’s racist if someone were to use a black woman in Memphis and a Hispanic woman in Miami, it’s all smart advertising and I’m sure it’s proven to work. I wouldn’t hesitate to use gay and lesbian couples in LGBT magazines; they wouldn’t buy it if I didn’t. Just like I, a straight male wouldn’t buy a Maxim magazine if I knew there was a bunch of gay men posing, lesbian woman posing are ok though haha. Overall I think it’s not worth getting worked up over what type of race these companies are using in their advertisements. The only thing I don’t like is how they sometimes make it so obvious that it’s annoying to watch or look at.
WOW!!! Honestly, I agree with what Sam said. I believe that Microsoft is trying to justify the change in the ad. The company is defending themselves since the Polish market is primarily white; they think that this is justifiable. I am absolutely blown away by the change in the advertisement. As mentioned in the United States diversity is everything in advertisement. Honestly, I doubt companies make advertisements so racially diverse because they want to. In the United States the racial diversity of an advertisement is just expected- companies are more concerned about a law suit for being racist of not being an equal opportunity employer then they are concerned with the fairness of equal representation throughout races.
Something that is funny to me is that all those people in the Polish ad could be from the same exact place. As in America people are not concerned about if the person is Irish, Polish, German, or Italian American we just want to see that white skin somewhere in the advertisement. Same thing goes for the Asians.
I went to a Catholic high school that was not diverse at all. Out of my graduating class of 173, there was one black male, 1 Asian female, and 1 Asian male. However when the time rolled around every fall to advertise for the annual open house you bet the school made sure at least 1 of the 5 blacks and 1 of the 5 Asians were in the advertisement. I believe that one year the slogan for our school was “where diversity comes together”- Which is quite a load because the school was like completely white. Schools, companies just try to portray an image of being diverse and accepting just to sell their products and keep out of any type of scrutiny.
Don’t get me wrong- I’m not saying that only white people or blacks or Asians should be in advertisements. I’m saying that companies do not mix races in advertisements because they feel that they should but just because they don’t want to get themselves into any type of trouble.
I think that the fact only the head was cropped out is a little absurd and offensive. I mean really- if you are that concerned about your audience and your reputation why would you do that? That’s very offensive to anyone- I would be embarrassed to have been the one on that team to make that change. I cannot believe that anyone would be okay with that. People need to have a little more pride in their work and their reputation. Honestly I understand the business aspect of the Polish audience but if I was the one calling the shots, believe me I would have re-shot the entire ad or left it the way it was quite frankly.
From one point of view I can understand why the picture may have been changed for the polish version of the advertisement. If the company was trying to market to a certain group of people who did not find it appropriate to have a black man in the picture it makes sense. They are just trying to make their service as appealing as possible to their audience. The presence of the black man’s head may be controversial in Poland. The fact that most of Poland is a predominantly white country may be a good reason for altering the image. However I don’t think the argument they use to justify the black man’s hand makes any sense. You can always tell when someone is being honest, or when they are just trying to cover something up. The bloggers claim that the black hand remains connected to the white man’s head because they are promoting “interracial harmony” but that makes no sense at all. Interracial harmony would be promoted if there was a black man amongst an Asian man and a white woman, as seen in the original. I believe the truth is that some political extremist found the original image and changed it in a hurry. After submitting it to the marketers, they posted it as their advertisement. I believe that it was only after the advertisement was posted that they noticed the black hand. It seems that the alleged “photo shopper” couldn’t find a hand in the correct orientation to fit the picture or I suspect they would have done that as well.
Another possibility is that Microsoft purposely gave to order to have the man’s face altered in hopes that no one would ever find out. I find this very unlikely seeing as how Microsoft is such a highly prestigious organization. I do not believe they would ever purposely take any action that could be seen as racist, even if they wanted to. It wouldn’t make any sense because they would lose business. Also it would not explain the black hand. This Altered picture was clearly a scam done by one lone person with some built up anger who wanted to start some commotion. It obviously ended up working if the story made it to the BBC news. I don’t think there’s any real story here other than the fact that there are still racist people in the world and they want their voices to be heard. But we all already knew that.
At first I didn't know how to take what happened. After thinking about it I feel Microsoft was not trying to be racist by any means. This Ad is being blown way out of proportion. Microsoft was just trying to attract the type of people they assumed would be their buyers. However, they made a big mistake by not correctly editing their ad. They're such a large corporation. Therefore, there's no way they should have let such an obvious mistake slide by. I'm sure there's many people who saw that ad before it was made public. Microsoft should look at the competence of the people they hire. What they did is just part of a marketing stragety. One wouldn't have a tampon commercial full of men. Ad's, commercials, and other forms of advertisment are made to appeal to potential buyers. I do agree that in America we want to see a variety of different races. However, if that's not done then it's simply sad. There's no need to persercute Microsoft for not doing so. The company does look ridiculous for going out of their way to target a white audience. i'm more than certain nobody would have been deterred from buying a Microsoft product just because a person of color was on the ad. So as I said before companies make ad, commercials, and other forms of advertisment to appeal to certain people but sometimes that's simply unneccessary. I'm sure the race of the people in an advertisement is not the sole factor as to if a person would buy the product or not. So to wrap it up I feel Microsoft just made a silly and unneccessary mistake. Hopefully, this helps the way they try to advertise their products. There's no need to put people in an ad or not put people in an ad based on their race. This day in age for the most part everyone enjoys and embraces diversity. I wonder what the black model and the white model thinks about the whole ordeal. Are they offended about the whole situation? Did they even know about the swap? People are focusing so much on the Microsoft corporation but are they thinking about how it impacted the two models involved? Hopefully, one day corporations and businesses won't discriminate in their advertisements and still make the same or more sales. We just need to all realize we're all on the same playing field. No race is superior to the other. Everyone should be color blind when it comes to seeing other human beings. Issues like this should never occur in the first place. I'm sure Microsoft has learned it's lesson. Hopefully, other corporations have learned from it too.
"My father was a white and my mother was black. Them call me half-caste or whatever. Me don't dip on nobody's side. Me don't dip on the black man's side nor the white man's side. Me dip on God's side, the one who create me and cause me to come from black and white."
`Bob Marley
As a marketing major I have studied this phenomenon at length. The truth of the matter is that it is really not that big of a deal. Marketing personnel employ this technique in almost every advertisement you see, mostly without the common consumer even noticing. It is a marketer’s job to appeal to its consumer base and a lot of that has to do with where they are advertising to, who they were advertising to, and how they were advertising. It is common sense that an ad that works in the proper/conservative south is not going to be the same ad that is run in New York City. Demographics are a primary tool used in the advertisement world and to ignore them would cause determent to your job and your product.
While it is sad to think that race of the people in the ad are taken into serious consideration it is not all that surprising. Everything about the actor in the ad is gone over with a fine tooth come. Age, race, gender, weight, height, and looks all play a major part in deciding who will be right for the advertisement. Developing the right ad is like casting for a movie, all the parts need to go together and you have to be working to reach your target audience. In a mostly white country it would make sense to have a mostly white cast of people because that is their reality. Would it have been more acceptable to not to have had a black man featured at all in any of the running advertisements?
Companies are hard pressed now a day’s not to offend anyone while still promoting the actual product. They have to worry about showing enough diversity in weight, gender, and race and that can be applied to every region that their promotion will appear in. This is near impossible when you have people from one region being exposed to and criticizing an ad that wasn’t even made for them. It makes me upset to think that people take this much offense to a stupid ad that will be shown for less than a year. The topic of diversity of race is being forced on people by extremist who analysis media until they find something politically incorrect. I believe that if people would learn to not be overly sensitive about gender and race that the media world will naturally level itself out. It is the people crying-wolf that make diversity such an issue not the corporations who are trying to appease everyone. It was one thing to push for diversity when it was a very uncommon concept that needed to be enforced but today diversity is very prevalent and until issues like this are blown out of proportion most people don’t even notice slight differences such as a person race or gender. America needs tougher skin.
From one point of view I can understand why the picture may have been changed for the polish version of the advertisement. If the company was trying to market to a certain group of people who did not find it appropriate to have a black man in the picture it makes sense. They are just trying to make their service as appealing as possible to their audience. The presence of the black man’s head may be controversial in Poland. The fact that most of Poland is a predominantly white country may be a good reason for altering the image. However I don’t think the argument they use to justify the black man’s hand makes any sense. You can always tell when someone is being honest, or when they are just trying to cover something up. The bloggers claim that the black hand remains connected to the white man’s head because they are promoting “interracial harmony” but that makes no sense at all. Interracial harmony would be promoted if there was a black man amongst an Asian man and a white woman, as seen in the original. I believe the truth is that some political extremist found the original image and changed it in a hurry. After submitting it to the marketers, they posted it as their advertisement. I believe that it was only after the advertisement was posted that they noticed the black hand. It seems that the alleged “photo shopper” couldn’t find a hand in the correct orientation to fit the picture or I suspect they would have done that as well.
Another possibility is that Microsoft purposely gave to order to have the man’s face altered in hopes that no one would ever find out. I find this very unlikely seeing as how Microsoft is such a highly prestigious organization. Microsoft is a very publicly conscious company. I do not believe they would ever purposely take any action that could be seen as racist, even if they wanted to. It wouldn’t make any sense to be openly racist because they would lose business. Also, if the Photoshop editing was done purposely that does not explain the presence of the black hand. This Altered picture was clearly a scam done by one lone person with some built up anger who wanted to start some commotion. It obviously ended up working if the story made it to the BBC news. I don’t think there’s any real story here other than the fact that there are still racist people in the world and they want their voices to be heard. But we all already knew that because the kkk still exists and there are still people driving around with confederate flags on there cars.
Wow, another issue with the advertising industry. I feel as though these issues have been quite prevalent lately. This seems strange to me, because I was hoping/under the impression that such racism and prejudice was improving in the world versus 5 or 10 years ago. However, people may be speaking up about the advertising industry more than in the past. Or for me personally my views of the world and race are changing as my experiences with other cultures are changing. As a matter of fact, last night I was sitting with my Indian friend, half Korean friend, and Asian friend. They were telling stories about the prejudice they have received from others and how many cannot distinguish their true race from other races. As I looked at all of them I realized I did not associate them with their races. I only saw them for who they were. It was really incredible and I had a glimpse of what many talk about as being “racially colorblind”. Unfortunately, this was a result of my getting to know all of them. In relation to advertising, the consumers are unable to develop personal relations with those in the picture other than their appearance.
It is just known facts about advertising; you need flashy, eye-catching, and noticeable campaigns. That is why there is a modeling world and of course photo shopping. It is rare to see overweight and unattractive people on advertisements. This is a form of prejudice all its own. It is commendable that some companies such as Dove have recognized this fact and now feature women of all sizes and shapes. In the Microsoft advertisement, all members are attractive and in good shape, which is the first form of appeal. They all are smiling and seem to be important, another form of appeal. Now comes the race and gender. The woman is appealing to other women who acknowledge her power and standing with this corporation or group. The two different races of the men allows for political correctness and an awareness of men of various race in the position of power. In America, this advertisement is largely geared for political correctness. From the Polish advertising standpoint, it makes an incredible amount of sense for them to replace the black man with a white-man’s head because the Polish population would be able to “relate” more to the white man. However, I do not agree with this move. It is strange that they did not replace the Asian man’s head as well. I feel that it was not right and incredibly twisted to simply replace someone’s face and leave the hand the same! If the Polish advertisers felt they needed to make such a change they should have found a completely different advertisement and not have cropped someone’s head out. The advertising industry is primarily based on appearance, this fact is very difficult to change and overcome especially with the technology of today, which makes it incredibly easy to change and alter images. Advertising may be one of the most racist industries. Correcting it will be very difficult due to political correctness and the large array of racial accusations from a large variety of people. It can be improved, and a good starting point would be to cut down the photo shopping and image alterations.
Upon reading the article, I wasn’t surprised that a company would do this, especially for financial gain. I also wasn’t too surprised to see this from Microsoft because they always try to squeeze every penny from consumers.
The only aspect of this picture that surprises me is that Microsoft would make the mistake of not changing the color of the man’s hand. I would think if a company is going to do something for marketing purposes, they would do it meticulously.
I personally don’t agree with the fact that they photoshoped the only black man in the photo from the ad in a strange effort to draw more consumers, but again, I’m not too surprised. I wonder why they would automatically eliminate the black man and not the Asian man? This also seems more prejudiced because it almost seems like the default choice is to eliminate the African-American. Given I don’t know the demographic distribution of Poland, I can’t assume the black to Asian ratio is x or y. I suppose if there are little to no black people in Poland, then Microsoft figures they have no need to make an outreach to that particular demographic. In addition to the demographic make up of Poland, the other factor that could be under consideration is multicultural tolerance in that country. My great grandparents immigrated to America before World War 2 from Poland. My mother told me stories when I was younger that my great grandfather was prejudiced against African Americans even though he himself was an immigrant. This made me wonder whether Poland has a low tolerance for minorities or if my great grandfather was a racist simply to conform to the demeanor of the American people in that era.
The whole diversity in the photo in the American version simply shows inclusiveness to give the idea that the company has everyone in mind to give a sense of unity to all consumers. This reminds me of an article I read about a Penn State ad in which an African American man was photoshopped into a picture to give a message of diversity and inclusiveness. Though Penn State is not very diverse, every penny counts in their eyes and anyone who has money to give is welcomed with open arms.
In the Microsoft article, the one blogger on the Photoshop Disasters blog is completely deluded in his attempt at justification with his statement about “interracial harmony,” it made me laugh. If that were the case, I’m sure a few decades ago, America would have rather photoshopped minority arms and legs onto white people than given them their own space on advertisements.
In conclusion, I believe that the actions of Microsoft were greed driven and the decision to modify the advertisement was inappropriate especially if they genuinely wish to promote acceptance of the diverse consumer base. They look two-faced in doing this because they wish to be inclusive in America, yet exclusive for other parts of the world, but hey, it’s Microsoft.
I was completely shocked when I read this article. Microsoft is a leading company in the world today and should 100% know better than to pull a stunt such as this. Yes, the company was trying to advertise to a different market, however, changing the face of a black man to a white man is pretty much confirming racism in my mind. By doing so, Microsoft is essentially saying that they won’t get a certain market because there is a black man in their advertisement. Not only does this make the company look racist, it also shows a lack of confidence to a certain extent. Since Microsoft was clearly trying to appeal to the Polish market, they are for all intents and purposes saying that if there is a black man in their advertisement, they won’t get any business from that market. If that actually was the case and they ended up not getting business from the Polish market, then there are two things that Microsoft could do in the future. First of all the company should be more careful when changing ads that they want to appeal to potential buyers. Clearly someone made a huge mistake, but it is on the company as a whole to make sure that an advertisement looks exceptional before it goes out to the public. Put it this way, you wouldn’t turn in a final paper without proof reading it first. Secondly, if Microsoft felt that they were losing so much business to the Polish market because of the ad, they could create stronger and better advertising in other markets that can appeal to a group of people that are much more diverse. So instead of having a specific ad for one group of people, they should create an ad that a large group can identify with.
A question that was raised as I was reading over the article and looking at the picture was, why change the man’s face and not his hand? You can still tell that the man sitting at the desk was black, it’s just not as obvious. I do agree with the point that companies need to appeal to certain markets, but by blatantly changing a black man’s face with a white man’s, it doesn’t look that great in the eyes of the public. As I said above, Microsoft needs to be more careful about their photo shopping, otherwise you end up with a controversial debate. With all of this said, I think it would be really interesting to hear what the black man has to say about all of this. I’m sure he is looking at this is being quite racist. What would it be like if the tables were turned and the white woman was cropped out of the picture for an Indian woman or a Chinese woman? I feel like a lot of the time people forget to look at things from a different perspective. I know I would be not only pissed off, but possibly even embarrassed if I was cropped out of a major company’s advertisement just because of the color of my skin.
First, I must admit that my favorite part of this blog is that they just changed his head, not his hands. I definitely got a good laugh out of that one.
But in the interest of actual context, this ad did not shock me. I have frequently been watching television commercials and watched as they placed the 'necessary person of color' amongst the white people that would have otherwise dominated.
Being a die-hard Grey's Anatomy fan, I once had it pointed out to me that its main cast was the most diverse of all the primetime shows, with three African American characters, and one Asian actress. Also, it was the only one that showed the Asian in a relationship with one of the African Americans. Upon finding this out via news report, I was proud of myself because the diversity had never been something I had noticed. It hadn't seemed out of the ordinary. But what surprised me more was that they were making such a big deal out of it.
I guess I had always assumed that it was required to have multiple races in televised things, what with programs like affirmative action in place meant to create the illusion of racial barriers. Whites will always choose whites, and in a country of mostly whites, it’s proportional for there to be more of them then people of color. With a country that was so bent on eliminating race, it seemed only expected.
Was the person from Microsoft an American? Is there a racism problem in Poland? It makes sense, when presented from the LGBT point of view that the actors in the commercial would reflect those it was directed towards. You wouldn't advertise a dance show with stuck up pale computer nerds that haven't heard music outside of World of War Craft in three years let alone danced to any. But if that was the intention, why would they have casted an African man in the first place? It’s the change that bothers me, not the motive behind it.
Race is something that will always exist because people will always have different skin colors and come from different places. Racism is how people feel about different races. I acknowledge races. I walk down the street and see blacks, and whites, and Asians and people from the Middle East and Italy and India. But I do not feel negatively towards these people, I do not distinguish them any differently, fundamentally from myself. And for the people in charge of this commercial to be called racist I believe is entirely true for assuming that the Polish people would feel negatively towards this black man in their commercial, assuming that Polish people feel the same way about race that Americans do.
The whole Microsoft advertisement issue is one that, in my eyes, should have had little to do with race. A company gearing their advertisements to their targeted audience is a smart business strategy and should be encouraged and practiced. It is a proven fact that people respond better when they can relate to the person informing or in this case showing off the product. Is it wrong to use this information to try to get ahead of other companies. They are merely using their country’s demographics to make an educated decision on a smart advertising campaign. They messed up big time though. Personally I would have, instead of photo shopping the image, just used a completely different person. That may not sit well with many people because the idea of it all. As if someone else is not good enough. I thing that, had Microsoft just originally used the white guy the general public would have never questioned the advertisement. Also, if they decided to it would have been up to the company anyways and there would be no debate about it.
I believe Microsoft was running a risk by simply using photo shop in the first place as a means to change the targeted audience of their advertisements, but they could have gotten away with it. That being said, they could not even get that right. The overall fatal flaw of the advertisement was the fact that they didn’t even photo shop the black mans hands out of it. This issue is what brings up cases like “how much black is too much” and “black hands are ok, but surely not a black face”. But lets be honest, would you really want to buy something if the advertisement had a black man with a white face or a white man with black hands? This would have utterly confused me and I probably would have taken a picture of it to laugh at it later. Really though, this is what swept this issue off its feet and spiraling it down into a heated race debate over whether or not it is racist to do so.
Again, I say no. It is not racist to try to better target a company’s audience. Although photo shopping someone out is pretty low and I can not say I agree with it.
This picture reminds me of the University of Wisconsin scandal. A few years back, the university sent out brochures to prospective students featuring some of its fans on the cover. When the original copy was found, it was apparent that a black male was photo shopped into the picture to make the school look more diversified. Some were very offended by the actions taken by the university while others did not see what the big deal was. This new Microsoft situation has brought with it some of the same emotions.
I for one do not think it is as big of a deal as people have made it out to be. It is obviously racist which is something we can all agree is wrong but does it really make them bad people? While looking at these events we have to remember that both Microsoft and the University of Wisconsin are businesses. In order for a business to survive it has to appeal to certain ethnicities, cultures, and even religions. It is up to these companies to draw their own line on how far they will legally go to sell a product. In this case, what they thought would be a great marketing scheme ended up backfiring and potentially costing them business. When you think of it that way does it really seem like Microsoft set out to offend anyone? With companies like apple competing against them they cannot afford to lose anymore business and would never try to set themselves up for humiliation. We can look at this from a hypothetical view as well. Say no one realized what Microsoft had done. They would have possibly increased sales and this marketing strategy would be considered genius and innovative.
Just like with any new advertising technique, there are certain risks. When someone realized sex sells, they knew very well it came with its own dangers. This idea came during a time where skirts above the knees were considered very provocative and trashy. Even if it was ridiculed then is it not one of the most popular techniques in today’s society? An idea can grow to become very successful but can also start out successful and climb down the ladder. Smoking cigarettes was once thought to be one of the classiest and coolest things you could do. Advertisers had no problem appealing to their audience because celebrities basically did it for them. Kids and adults all wanted to be a part of this fad. Now, the tobacco industry faces nothing but ridicule for any ad they create. Since new health information has come to surface, companies are facing trouble with counter commercials and even law suits.
So is it ok for a business to do what can legally be done in order to stay in business? That is for each individual to decide for themselves. Although I do not agree with the methods used by Microsoft and Wisconsin, I believe that daring advertising is key to a successful company.
When I first read this article, I found it comical that Microsoft would make such a careless mistake. How could they possibly crop out the face of a black guy but leave his hands black? This mistake is blatantly obvious. So many problems and so much tension could have been avoided because Microsoft is such a large corporation that I’m sure it would have been no problem to fix. Or even re shoot the whole advertisement with all white people. But since they did not, they got themselves in way over their heads and can now be portrayed as racists and many may think that Microsoft supports white people.
Microsoft is now coming off as racists to the public which has upset many people. I can see this happening for an American advertisement to photo shop a black person in for a white person. And honestly I don’t think this would have looked as bad. This is because in American advertisements like to promote diversity. And although America may be predominantly white, there is still a lot of diversity and the corporations want everyone to buy their products. Also I think white people will get less offended by an advertisement with different races rather than black people getting offended by an advertisement with all whites. I think it is just because of the predominance of whites in America.
Personally I would not be turned off of a product that had a black person or an Asian in it. I really could care less either way. If the product is targeting an audience of one specific race that is a different story. In America I think most advertisements are diversified so they will not seem racist. All they care about is selling and making a profit so they will do whatever it takes.
Since this was a Polish add I really do not know whether to agree or disagree with Microsoft. Like I said, they were trying to do whatever it takes to make the most possible profit. I am unaware of the racism in Poland, maybe there are not a lot or even any black people, but I guess it all depends on how the Polish people feel about buying products with people of different race advertised. I understand that Microsoft was targeting the audience of Polish people, so they tried to make them all white because they thought the product would be sold more. However, if Microsoft was going to do this they should have been more careful about it because now they dug themselves a hole and look like racists. Yes Microsoft may have been giving in to the racism of the Polish so they tried to change the American advertisement to get business from the Polish, but in the end they most likely lost business to people of other races. I agree with a previous bloger that said “They have to worry about losing sales from the rest of their customers across the world who have seen the change in the advertisement and now question whether Microsoft represents and accepts every race. Microsoft should think about reorganizing their priorities by putting their moral standards first and their profits second.” If they would have looked deeper and been more careful, they would have easily made the profit they were so worried about getting.
There seems to be this ever present issue of attempting to be “politically correct” when it comes to all aspects of life. Who exactly put this pressure on everyone to constantly be checking the way they say things? It is so interesting for me, seeing so many different people coming from so many different backgrounds, and yet I feel we all deal with the same issues. As a future educator, I constantly worry how to classify a person as to not offend them. But who even defines what is politically correct in the first place?
I feel as though Microsoft made a marketing decision, which unfortunately crosses this “politically correctness barrier.” I like to think I am not prejudiced in any way, however if a company is attempting to reach a country of primarily whites, why should a black person be included? Yes, it could be taken as offensive to some that this picture was edited for a specific audience, but how are we to judge how another nation deals with different peoples.
I also seem to notice, at least here in the US, the white-dominance mentality that still exists. The nation is trying to change this, there are laws dictating there must be different racial and genders displayed in commercials, television and movies, but that is an American decision. For us to sit here and judge how another county deals with different races and genders is up to them. I feel our nation tries, although not always successfully, to fall back into the “always being politically correct and making good moral judgments” mentality. If this is how a nation has always been because of religious, moral or other reasons, isn’t it most fair to take their judgment and value it for what it is rather than to judge it in a negative light?
We too are also a cultural and racial melting pot in the US, however if Poland is mostly white, why would they have a person of color in their marketing? After googleing the racial makeup of Poland, I stumbled across this information: “According to the most recent estimates, Poles constitute 97.6% of the total population.” Also, after searching in Google images for “polish people” I went through 10 pages of photos without seeing a person of color. This is saying something. If I was a black person, and I knew there were no others like me in Poland, I would not be offended by this.
But this comes down to a bigger issue in my book, is Microsoft being politically correct? Well technically if it is the marketing in Poland, then yes, if it is the marketing department in the US, then well this is kind of a double standard. Maybe if the American ad was the one which was photoshopped this would be a different issue, but to me, this one should just be let go.
I think it's crazy, yet so predictable, that Microsoft would attempt to protect themselves against the "racist" label by stating that this ad was supposed to be geared towards the Polish market. Granted Poland may be predominantly white, they could have easily done another shoot with a white man. The fact that the shoot was originally done with a black model and they took it upon themselves to photoshop and replace the black models head with one of a white model. I am not sure if I would personally label this as a racist act, but I do however find the whole act to be extremely disrespectful. This incident reminds me of a L'oreal scandal with an ad they ran featuring the singer Beyonce Knowles (who is a black female). L'Oreal basically photoshopped her skin to make it significantly lighter. She was almost unrecognizable and it left many members of the black community feeling offended because to them, it felt like L'oreal was saying "the lighter your skin, the more beautiful you are," which isn't right. Naturally, L'Oreal defended themselves from the "racist" accusations by stating that they did not photoshop the pictures, and that Beyonce's skin appearing lighter was due to the lighting. Major companies would never actually admit to making racist decisions because in order for them to keep making money, they must appear to cater to everybody. Shunning a particular group of people would mess up their sales.
When it comes to the business and corporate world, advertisement and marketing is the most important component. The single most important objective of a business is to let the consumer know their product and to target the people who are most likely going to buy their product. In the United States, it’s very common to see a product that is mainly used by a certain ethnic group or race to be in front of the advertisements or commercials. In my opinion, it doesn’t seem racist; I see it as a good marketing tool to target your base consumer. I, being a business major can understand this. In this particular case, with the black man being replaced in an advertisement by a white face with close to mediocre Photoshop skills, seems to me as the same thing they do in the United States
I don’t know a lot about the demographic of Poland but I would believe it to be predominately “white” for lack of a better word. So I would believe that the marketing or advertising executive up at the Microsoft office saw it as a better marketing choice to put a white face there. If you think about it, how many black people could possibly live in Poland. It may seem that he was replaced because he is black and he is in an office but I don’t think so at all. It may be perceived as a very shady act on the part of Microsoft because of the way they changed the advertisement. I do believe that it would have been more impertinent they to have just snapped a whole different advertisement all together. But in all honestly, who knows if there was a good reason behind it.
To further explain, my opinion on this, I don’t like how people are quick to cry out racism when something happens that pertains to African Americans. I myself am African American and I hate feeling as if we are always being oppressed or discriminated upon whenever something that could acutely be related to racism pops up. Racism is everywhere in every form. But for advertisements sake, I don’t think it’s related to hate towards a race prejudice because most advertisements are designed to meet the eye of the demographic or group that that are most likely going to buy the product. If this happened in The United States it would be a different story because, Microsoft products are bought from every race and there would be no reason to cut out the African American man in the office. In Poland I would imagine that it would be much more different because I’m guessing there is not a lot people of color there so it wouldn’t be wrong to change up the advertisement.
After reading the CNN article, I found one blogger’s view to be absolutely ludicrous. Attempting to please all markets by having a man with both a white face and a black hand,” in my opinion, is the last thing the advertisers were trying to do to show racial unity. It is obvious that Microsoft did not believe that a black man in the image would cater to be Polish population’s image of a professional environment. Nonetheless, is it so wrong that different areas in the world prefer different forms of advertisement? For example, in America, Pepsi and Coca Cola constantly use sex to sell their products by placing the newest popstar dancing provocatively in a belly -baring shirt. In religious countries an advertisement like this would cause just as much of uproar as the Microsoft add has caused. Does this mean that countries such as Saudi Arabia are repressing their population’s sexual freedom? I understand that sexuality and race are completely different aspects but they both bring about the same questions. In America, a country famously referred to as a melting pot, advertisers are pushed to incorporate many different races and kinds of people in their advertisements to influence the maximum amount of people to buy their product. Switching from a black man to a white man in the Polish advertisement was in a way “playing safe”. The white man would not discourage people to switch to Microsoft in Poland but the black man might have. At the end of the day advertisers are not around to be civil rights leaders and use their advertisements to spread a message about acceptance but to be selfish and sell their products at any cost. Depressing as it might be, it is how the world works and has been for quite a while. “White people” are rarely shown plopped in the middle of Asian models and actors enjoying a Pepsi on posters plastered in Japanese subways. Yet, we rarely see these “white people” complaining claiming that Asia is racist. The huge controversy sparked by this Microsoft advertisement was indeed that a black man was CHANGED to a white man. Forgetting the hands was a sloppy mistake I personally am shocked that a huge international company such as Microsoft would make. Yet, it poses the following question: Would people have even noticed that the advertisement was racist if the advertisement had not forgotten to make the hands white? To elaborate, let’s say the Poland Microsoft ad was all white and the American ad contained different races- but with no photoshop mistakes. Not only would people not have noticed anything wrong at all, but failed to realize that racism exists- everywhere. And it is not necessarily bad all the time. Consumers will usually buy from others “like them” or from people they want to be like. A cold hard truth.
I agree a lot with what Asian Sensation said in their blog. There seems to be an urgency to cry racism when that is not what was intended. A good advertisement makes it easy for the consumer to see themselves in the situation and when the vast majority of the country (Poland) is white, it does not seem to be an implausible action to make the black man a white man in that particular advertisement. In The United States, individuals strive to be politically correct in their actions and words in my opinion out of fear of being called a racist. There are an abundance of different races, skin colors, and ethnicities in our great country and it is a shame that being different can be taken offensively. Why is it an issue that the black man was replaced by a white man? Commercials involving vacuums and cleaning products always have a woman as the main character because they are stereotypically targeting women in the ads. You will probably also never see an unattractive female in a beer commercial because it is supposed to be an appealing situation for the advertiser’s primary target: males.
I do not feel that the hand was intentionally left black like one of the bloggers in the article suggested. I think it was an accident and was not a way to “symbolize interracial harmony.” When someone in marketing is trying to promote a product they should not be thinking about interracial issues but what they feel will increase the interest of the product. The mistake of leaving the black hand in the advertisement should have been picked up by someone before the ad was made public. The mistake was not picked up and it still should not be a big deal. There are so many more important issues that should be in taking precedent to this minor marketing error. No one was injured and no one should be taking offense. The advertisers were doing their job and making the ad as appealing to the consumers as possible. This is good advertising. I showed my roommates the pictures in question and they did not even notice that the man with the white head had a black hand.
This might be a more difficult concept to grasp because as a nation we are so diverse. We see individuals of different races and ethnicities on a daily basis on our campus. It is most likely a rarity to see individuals that have different skin colors in Poland. It does not seem unusual to have ads appealing to people of several different ethnicities and colors in America because we have so many citizens that are different colors and have different ethnicities.
The article about Microsoft altering a picture brings up the issue of race through advertising. When advertising a product or name, you have to consider your audience. This includes race, age, education level, income level, any special characteristics, etc. In America, we have many different races to cater to in selling a product or maintaining your company. It seems to me, that when you feel recognized and acknowledged, you would feel more comfortable buying the product or supporting a certain company. So an advertisement that involves things you relate to grabs your attention. As an example, there are certain brands that cater their advertisements towards black people, such as Apple Bottom Jeans and Sean John. They advertise their clothing on black models – naturally attracting a black cliental. Other companies such as Lacoste and Ralph Lauren gear their advertisements towards white people. Their advertisements feature white people wearing their clothes – causing white people to gravitate towards their apparel. The way executives arrange their advertisements contributes a lot to the subconscious pull people feel towards a product or company. Having said this, Microsoft advertising officials seem to be working the advertisement towards the largest audience that will be viewing it, depending where the ad is placed. On the US’s website, the group is multiracial, including a white female, black man, and Asian man. In general, the US is made up of a multiracial population. The fact that all three of the groups – Asian, black, and white – are represented, will attract all three groups to buy Microsoft products and support the corporation. It shows that the company and its products are suitable for all people – race set aside. On the other hand, the ad placed on the Polish website replaced the black man’s face with a white face. This changed the advertisement to majority white faces instead of multiracial. Since the Polish population is predominantly white, it makes sense that the advertising officials would change the advertisement to cater towards white people. The more relatable the advertisement is to the audience, the more likely it is that high numbers will buy Microsoft products. On one hand, it seems very wrong – even racist – to try and sell a product by including and excluding certain races. I understand that it doesn’t matter someone’s race when it comes to interests and things, and they shouldn’t be singled out or overridden in advertising. On the other hand, they’re trying to stay afloat in an economy that is less than great. Advertising is crucial to the volume of customers a company attracts. Companies try to appeal to an audience, enticing them to buy their product. As a white person, if I saw an advertisement for a company geared towards black people or Asian people, with all black models, Asian models, etc, I would feel like that product is not for me. While I think it was sketchy for Microsoft to change the face of the advertisement, I also understand the basics of advertising, and it gives insight into possibly why Microsoft did what they did.
Before reading this article, I had no idea this unfortunate mistake had occurred. It is difficult to believe that Microsoft, such a large company, could make such an obvious mistake, let alone allow for such a change to be attempted. You would think that before a commercial would air, especially one that was being altered, multiple employees would have to review and edit it before it could be seen by the public. I find it extremely careless and hard to believe that none of the employees could catch such an obvious mistake, especially when the change should not have been made in the first place.
If this mistake occurred in the United States, I agree that it would probably have happened the other way around. If the commercial originally consisted of all white people, Microsoft would have probably changed it so that there was a mix of races. Everyone is so concerned with not being called a racist that they do everything in their power to include people of different ethnic backgrounds just so that they can be seen as “worldly” and open to people of all races. However, this in fact could be seen as racist. If the only reason companies include people of multiple races in their commercials is because they do not want to be seen as racist and lose consumers, not because they care about diversity, then they truly only care about selling their product. On the other hand, can we really fault them for that? Companies base their advertising off of the needs and wants of their consumers. If black consumers in the United States want to see a black person in a commercial for the products that they are buying, and Polish consumers want to see white people in their commercials, then of course businesses are going to comply with those desires in order to sell their products.
Regardless, I do not think there was a need to change the commercial in the first place. It is changes like these that are truly keeping the world from being diversified. Although from a marketing stand point I realize it is a company’s goal to advertise to their projected consumers, and in Poland that may be primarily white people, but why should it matter if someone of a race other than white appeared on the commercial? I am sure that the Polish understand that due to the fact that Microsoft is such a large company they advertise in countries other than just Poland. I do not think the Polish would be shocked to see an “Americanized” commercial from Microsoft. When altering a commercial I guess there is always a risk of making a mistake, and in this case I do not believe the risk was justified. If Microsoft wants to appear to be so culturally diverse to Americans, why can’t they also promote that ideology abroad? I definitely see the altering of this commercial as racist. I think that in order for our world to become more accepting to people of all races, such single minded behavior needs to come to an end.
Personally, after reading both the article and the blog it’s really hard to tell if this is right are wrong? But if you look at this in the perspective of the marketers it becomes a little clearer. Even then does it make it right? Or is this really a question of free speech?
Is it wrong to change an advertisement to gain better review with different audiences? Isn’t that the sole purpose of advertising? With the little experience that I have, working with marketing professors and previous employers, I’ve discovered that one topic comes up when selling a product or service is involved. That is, that the salesman, in this case the three employees, must be trusted in order to reach the potential buyer. In other words: you wouldn’t by a cake from a butcher who you trust has skills with meats, rather than breads, and you wouldn’t by sliced ham from a baker who you trust to make cake.
By placing a white male in the photo in the polish advertisement, they are catering to the predominant white population. But in the American ad, Microsoft took a safe route in being “politically correct”. I personally feel political correctness is a load of you know what. The fact that I can’t be myself and play toward a certain kind of American, white, black, yellow, brown, red, or green, makes me “un-American”; But so does being politically correct. By not being able to speak my mind without fear of hatred by my peers and government, doesn’t that violate my right to free speech? But by speaking my mind, you’re just going to say I’m racist if I were to rich white men vs. poor Hispanic men, or are you?
In reality someone is liable to have a completely different view of this and take it to heart and feel oppressed. I on the other hand could care less what color of the guy’s skin. Again if we take a look at this situation from the marketer’s perspective, we can see why the decision was made. If you are a “upper-middle” class male who is free of hate of certain peoples you should be able to decide on buying a product on two things: Salesmen trust, and product features, in that order. So if you were to see a car commercial, under the previous two circumstances, and saw a black man who is at the same socio-economic level as you, dresses like you, and talks like you buying a Dodge Charger, you may feel inclined to buy that product. But if you saw a brother from the hood dressed in a black hoody grabbing his genitals and play loud hateful music in the same commercial, you will be less likely inclined to buy this product. In the end car commercials and other various advertisements are all the same; they are all communicated through the world language of visual stimulus. If the brain is teased in a good way, buying is more likely to be a yes, If it is negative, it is most likely a no. The fact that you trust the people in the picture is a sign of positive stimulus.
So in conclusion, by photo shopping a white guy into the polish advertisement the marketers are catering to the predominant white people of the area, allowing a gate way of trust to open resulting in higher sales of the Microsoft product. Where they justified? In America, no, should they be yes.
What kind of society do we live in that people think it’s okay to do something like this? Yes, you can argue that it’s all for the sake of correct publicity and aiming the advertisement at the group it’s meant for, but really? So the Microsoft ad was for a Polish scene, does that really make a difference? There’s an Asian man in the advertisement, and no one took any offense to that. Here’s something I really can’t comprehend. I am a white female, I am primarily friends with other white people, but I do not have a problem with blacks. Sure, Asians are seen as really good at math, but why do I feel like blacks are primarily targeted in the media in a negative way? It’s weird, you would think after the Civil Rights Movement and everything that occurred that we would be in a better place today in regards to racism. I’ll admit, my grandfather is one of the most racist people in the world, and so is my grandmother. Yet, seeing the way that they act, I don’t want to be like that and most of the people in my generation tend to be the same way as myself. What confuses me is how the people in between the generations of myself and my grandfather are stuck in this neutral, yet still somewhat racist rut.
I took a photography class online this summer and we spent a great deal analyzing photo shopped images of celebrities and such. The public always tends to be in an uproar when a famous person appears on the cover of a magazine and the image is manipulated. Why, then, is this alright? It makes no sense to me! I feel like advertisements can be tweaked for the audience at which they’re aimed, I know ads directed at teenagers don’t have the same affect on middle aged people and so forth. Microsoft, however, handled this situation in a terrible manner. If they were going for primarily white across the board, the black man shouldn’t have been the only minority who was removed from the ad.
I’ll end on this note to Sam. Funny that you should mention that THON is a primarily white event. My sister was on the overall committee in the past and they contacted Oprah Winfrey to see if she would be willing to give some kind of donation or acknowledgment to THON. Oprah refused because in all of the footage that she saw, the event was predominantly white and she didn’t see any black Four Diamonds children.
It's ironic to me too that the slogan is "Empower your people." Wow, Microsoft. You really empowered your African American customers by removing a representative of their race for your advertisement. If Microsoft is empowering any people, they are empowering the racist and close-minded people of the world.
Microsoft’s mistake of photo shopping the image was both right and wrong. Although Microsoft was trying to advertise and market to two specific countries, they should have done more than just photo shop a picture and replace the head. Marketing is very important to reach your target audience, and Microsoft was most likely using their information on demographics to make sure that people were in fact watching their advertisement. In today’s marketing world it is vital that you market to the right audience. For example, it would not be smart on a company’s perspective to make an advertisement in English and play it in a country that speaks a language other than English. It would not attract any customers, so marketing and picking the right features of a company’s ad is very important. This change was a good idea by Microsoft because they felt that their target audience in Poland was the white race so they had to reflect that in their advertisement. The marketing department at any other company would also look at demographics so they know what to advertise where and I think Microsoft would have been fine if they just took a little more care in switching the ads, and possibly redoing the ad with a totally different person, not just a head.
By switching the race of the two men in Microsoft’s ad showed that Microsoft was just trying to attract people’s attention in a different country, so they can receive the most benefit from the advertisement. It is also interesting that only the man’s head was changed in the Polish version which leads us to believe that it was not about the skin color of the black man, but rather the appearance of the man’s face. Microsoft must have felt that his facials during the advertisement would not be appropriate for the Polish audience so they cropped out his head and changed it to a white man. This is how Microsoft went wrong in producing this advertisement. This shows lack of care on the part of Microsoft because they show racism in their ad by switching the black man to a white man in the different ads. Personally, if Microsoft left the black man in the Polish ad they would have been fine because they have the other big races featured as well. In Poland the black and Asian race might not make up a big part of the population, but I am sure Poland is still a diverse country. Not all of Poland is white, so by changing the Poland ad to a white man was wrong. What about the people in Poland that are of the black race? They are left to see an image changed to reflect the main Polish audience, but in reality Microsoft just lost those of the black race in Poland.
It is a very interesting topic that has brought up a lot of media attention for Microsoft. By changing the race of the person in the ad, Microsoft did both the right and wrong thing. They were right because they were trying to advertise to the most people in Poland, while at the same time they were wrong because Microsoft cared less about changing the entire body. They only cared about changing the facial features of the black man because they must have been afraid it would hurt their marketing in Poland. Next time Microsoft makes an advertisement they need to pay more attention to detail and give more thought to not changing their advertisements based on the demographics of a country.
This article brings up an important and popular argument that exists about the global media in general. The job of the media is to please the people. They do, after all, profit from having the most viewers, readers, etc. and therefore, in order to succeed, they have to advertise in ways which they know will please the majority of their audience. So, the polish Microsoft likely changed the color of the man’s face because they knew their audience would react better to a white face as opposed to a black one. Thus, the question arrises whether it is the advertisers fault for creating seemingly racist ads, or if it is the public’s fault for demanding them.
The answer, I believe, is both. Poland is a predominately white country, therefore, as this ad suggests, seeing white faces is what makes a majority of the polish public comfortable. But, this doesn’t mean that other races and ethnicities don’t exist here and around the world, so why should they be excluded from their ads? However, if the Polish public continues to “demand” only ads that are comfortable to them, then can we really blame the ad agencies for giving the public what they want? Isn’t it their job to please the consumer base? That said, as large of a corporation as Microsoft is, shouldn’t they be comfortable, willing, and responsible to take chances in promoting the diversity that exists in our world?
Racism prevails because people, by refusing to see anything other than what they are comfortable with, allow it to. Microsoft, and other advertisers, however, also add to this problem. They can protect themselves by claiming they are simply doing what the public is demanding, and therefore avoid questions concerning racism existing within their advertising corporation. However, even if they themselves are not racist, couldn’t they be using their global influence to ignite change and acceptance? If they include different people and ideas in their ads, they could make the differences between people and culture that exist in our world seem normal and acceptable, instead of uncomfortable. To me, this ad just proves the incredible amounts of racism that continue to exist in our world. What is it saying about the public if a corporation as large as Microsoft is afraid that using a black man in their ads will decrease their profit? If we’re ever going to expect major corporations to change their ads, we must look to ourselves to change our demands for them. Stepping outside of our comfort zone and seeing different people and cultures helps to defeat the ignorance many of us have toward people who are different from ourselves. And this, in turn can help combat the racism that this Microsoft ad has proved exists.
You think that such a large corporation such as Microsoft would have done this “fixing” correctly and realized that they needed to replace his hands along with his face. Companies like Microsoft spend billions of dollars in advertising you think that they would be able to check to make sure it was completely obvious to everyone that saw it. I think that it was wrong for Microsoft to photo shop the white guy’s head onto the black guy’s body. If they wanted two different commercial because they were showing it in two different locations, then they should have shot one with a white guy and one with a black guy. Also why didn’t they take out the Asian man, I doubt that there are many Asians in Poland. It’s messed up that they half heartedly replace the black man but I agree mostly that companies should be able to advertise to the people they want. I really don’t think that it’s a big deal for certain companies to advertise to one race. Now I am not saying that this is the right thing to do but for the most part companies know what they are doing and how far they can go before the make certain races or groups angry. But it was wrong for this computer giant to exclude the black guy from the Polish commercial. I doubt that the people of Poland would not have bought Microsoft because there was a black man in the commercial. I always wondered that if they did not put that woman or person of different color in the picture would that company be called sexist or racist. So if a company was to make a commercial with all white males in it would that cause a problem with the rest of the people? All in all I think it was stupid for the advertising department to cut the black guys out of the Microsoft commercial and if they really thought it was going to be a big deal for sales they should of just created two different commercials. Now they have to put up with people getting angry and offended over it. This probably won’t stop people from buying their computers but they now have to apologize and take time out their busy schedules all because they wanted to save money and make more of it. If you think about it, most advertising is meant to pull in one type of people. If you look back to famous television shows of the 1990s, white people had Seinfeld and black people had Martin. If a white person asked a black person about the most recent Seinfeld episode most wouldn’t know anything about it and this work visa versa too. This also works with most of the advertising we see in life.
This advertising mistake by Microsoft is a disappointment. While the idea of what the company was trying to do is clear to me, it is appalling how wrong the racism is in this company, which is displayed in this ad. If the people who were advertising understood race and the obsoleteness of it, this mistake would not have happened. However, because my major is advertising, I can understand how the company might have come to the conclusion to change the race of the people.
The goal of advertising is changing into creating an abstract idea tied to a product name as we move into the twenty-first century. Companies want you to recognize their brand and tagline with a greater sense meaning, not just see a concrete product. Part of the image of Microsoft is “empowering your people.” Now do Microsoft products actually empower people or is it just a tool to benefit the workplace? It is just a tool but with this new form of advertising marketers want consumers to believe the abstract empowerment comes from their product.
Another part of this complex advertising method is creating groups. Advertisers recognize that people conform to different groups and therefore want people to start applying their products to part of which they are and what personality they have. For example, in the 2009 Super bowl, there was a Cheeto commercial that displayed a loud, materialistic girl complaining about the boring, less materialistic part of town she was in. There was also another girl who was annoyed with the conversation and she had Cheetos. The company who makes Cheetos wants people who think that they are simple to understand the girl in the commercial and therefore buy Cheetos because it is somehow part of their groups characteristics to eat Cheetos.
This relates to the Microsoft commercial because in Poland, most people have a lighter skin tone. This is because of their ancestry and the colder climate in the North. Therefore, Microsoft might have wanted people to feel closer to the people in the advertisement by changing the skin color of the man who was black. However, this stereotype of race and the ideas that society categorizes by these physical differences is wrong. Although Microsoft was trying to conform with the societal stereotype of only relating to people of your race, this global company should have risen above this idea and searched for an new, more creative way to advertise while applying to the consumers.
Additionally, Microsoft getting caught proves that this advertising technique was a poor choice. Although they were trying to appeal to an audience, the global Internet community was clearly to swift for their careless mistake and cheap ideas. If Microsoft is going to appeal to separate audiences, rather than the global community, they need to come up with different, unique
My first reaction was “Lol they tried to spin forgetting to edit the hands.” After getting over the idiocy of the poor job at photoshop by, of all companies; Microsoft, I sat down to write serious business. The point has been made a number of times how the editing of the photo to reach and appropriate market is acceptable because we practically do the same thing: while Poland is mostly “white,” we here in Murka have more of a “melting-pot” of races and ethnic groups, so naturally, if Poland is white, market to whites, while here in the United States, where we all like to hear about ethnic diversity, have a multi-cultural group in the ads. This assertion is correct in a culturally relativistic manner and limited to the realm of practicality. To say that the re imagining of the advertisement was “ok” because it served a utilitarian purpose of selling a product is almost as lame of an excuse as saying leaving the hands was meant to be multi-cultural. The ends don't justify the means. Although I am not proposing any kind of egalitarianism, it is fair to say that capitalism is not a moral system, or a system aimed at pleasing everyone (what some called political correctness). It is, in fact, a Darwinistic system-survival of the corporate fittest; whoever can target the best audience and appeal to anything from their pathos to their pelvis will sell their product, surviving another quarter or fiscal year. The reality is if Microsoft was trying to sell a product to a large enough constituency of cannibalistic cultists Mac users, they would. The current economic system doesn't care if you're black, white, yellow, or dumb-as-a-doorknob, as long as you don't cost them money. It should also be noted that I am not trying to say that corporations are evil and trying to rule the world one buyer at a time. In fact, many corporations take part or even lead large humanitarian missions the places like New Orleans, oil spills, and the “Third World.” What the socio-economic system needs is a fundamental restructuring, starting with the way we as consumers (and as people) view race. I don't believe that Microsoft Poland should apologize because they were simply working in an inherently insensitive system. This photoshop error in judgement was simply the symptom of a much larger and subtly penetrating disease. If we as a globalized society want to prevent things like this from occurring in the future, we can't just attack an employee, branch, or company, but the socio-economic system as a whole. Long live the revolution, Patria O Muerte!
When I first saw this advertisement I thought that the Black mans head was photoshopped in, instead of the other way around; the mans’ head is huge! However after reading into this advertisement and the article that was attached to it, I realized that it was actually a clear sign of the racism that we have been unable to completely conquer in our world. Although I do believe society, as a whole, has made huge strides in the fight against racisms clearly there are still remains. For example, the blatant removal of a black mans face with that of a white mans’.
These advertisements were extremely shocking to me. However, what shocked me even more was that Microsoft would allow something like this to take place. After hearing about this advertisement from some friends I was convinced it was the Polish government who had made these changes and not the actual Microsoft Corporation, but it appears I was wrong. A scandal such as this one could hurt a company as large as Microsoft tremendously. Without a doubt all races and ethnicities use their products or are influenced by the use of Microsoft products. How Microsoft could allow such clear signs of racism in their advertisements is beyond me.
I was also shocked at how lightly this situation has been handled. I had never heard about this scandal or even similar ones when I am sure they occur often. For someone to blog on Photoshop Disasters, that “ ‘The white head and black hand actually symbolize interracial harmony. It is supposed to show that a person can be white and black, old and young at the same time,’ “ is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. That is complete nonsense that no one is buying.
Although I am not a Black American, putting myself in their shoes I can see how bad and angry they must have felt seeing the botchery of this advertisement. I personally believe that this add was basically saying that a Black person was not good enough to appeal to the polish audience and, was thus unfit to use a Microsoft computer in eyes of the Poles. Unfortunately every society has their own views’ on what is appealing and what is not. Yes, our society has taking large leaps away from racism. Often many jobs are selected blindly towards color however, not all aspects of life can be fair. Its similar in how you don’t see an overweight person staring as the sex symbol on the CW’s hottest new show.
Unfortunately at this time in our lives appealing still has many definitions, fat skinny, black, white, old, young, there many never be a time when everything can be considered beautiful.
To be honest, I’m a little bit torn as to how I feel about this situation. When I first read the article, I instantly agreed that this was a blatant example of racism. It seemed ridiculous that Microsoft would choose to remove the black man’s head, as if his presence in the advertisement was significant enough to alter its message. We live in the 21st century, where discrimination and racism has diminished greatly (though of course, not completely). Technology has allowed people on different sides of the earth to expose themselves to others of all shape, sizes and especially colors. We are not ignorant. We know what exists outside of our borders. It seems petty and insensitive to change the advertisement when our country prides itself on respecting and accepting differences.
At the same time, I’m currently studying advertising and public relations, and I can understand why this change was made, whether or not it was the right move to make. The sole purpose of advertising is to appeal to a targeted audience in order to persuade that audience to purchase a particular service or good. To create that appeal, advertisers need to create an ad to which consumers can relate. In this case, the advertisement is targeted at the Polish community, which is dominantly white. Although it may seem silly to some that the removal of the black man would impact that success of the ad, I believe the advertisers felt that it would make the message more effective. It’s hard to understand for some, especially Americans (and even more so, Penn Staters), because we are fortunate enough to be exposed to many different races and ethnicities. We don’t necessarily feel that seeing a mixture of races in an advertisement is unordinary or unusual. To us, it is normal to have coexistence of races, especially in a corporate environment. However, the Polish community may not have that same line of thinking. For them, seeing someone so different from themselves may subconsciously disconnect them from the advertisement. Microsoft acknowledged this, and sloppily made the change in the hopes of maximizing the company’s success.
I do not necessarily agree with the decision to crop out the black man; however, I understand the rationalization behind the decision. I believe our brains identify with what we are most familiar with, and it is because of that that we see our own race more clearly and distinctively than any other. On the other hand, it is sad that the world is still at the point where one group must cater to another group in the hopes of achieving results. Sometimes I feel as though we’re too caught up in appearing “politically correct” that we walk on eggshells, which ultimately does more harm than good. If we really hope to move forward, everyone needs to step outside of his or her comfort zone and acknowledge the differences that exist in others. Give the black hand back his real face.
Unfortunately, this article just clearly demonstrates exactly how the businesses in the world work today. In order to sell products, the most important thing to do is to reach out to the consumers. In Poland, who is going to be buying this product? The large majority white population which resides in this country. Businesses want to make money, and the last thing on their mind is whether or not they are going to offend another race or ethnicity which is a minority in that country.
All over the world, businesses incorporate who their audience is to sell their product. In South America, the women present in the magazines and adds represent the Hispanic community. Similarly, in Europe the women in ads will have “white” features. Furthermore, in Asian countries these women will also be the most beautiful representation of an Asian woman. All over the world, these marketing techniques can be observed. Mostly likely, a company will not put a picture of Asian women modeling lingerie in Chile nor a white woman modeling in Saudi Arabia. They want the consumers to relate to their product.
But another question could be what if it was not a black man who had been changed to a white man, but instead another ethnicity which had been changed. What if the man in the photo was from the middle east, and he had been changed to the white men. Would there even be an article in BBC about this occurrence? Would there be as much uproar from the community? Also, why didn’t they change the Asian man in the photo? Asian men are not frequently present in this country. The company thought that the black man would be the most discouraging person in the photo, and would not encourage the people to buy the product. That demonstrates that still even the largest worldwide companies, with some of the smartest advertisers still bases many of their decisions just on the color of someone’s skin. Furthermore, the add says to empower “your” people. They really should have changed the slogan too, cause an Asian man would not be considered part of “their” people.
In Poland, in reality, there is probably a very small population of Africans-Americans. Most people who are not exposed to other cultures and ethnicities tend to stick to themselves, just like in state college. Sadly, they are not comfortable with people who don't look, dress, and act the same as them? People want to be around what they are familiar with, what they know, and the products they buy are going to be the same. So why would a company trying to sell a product put up an add which people cannot relate to or feel comfortable with? It’s all about the consumer.
Microsoft is a worldwide business and tries to appeal to every type of consumer that can afford the software. Because Microsoft has such a variety of consumers, it has the ability to use different forms of advertisements and still get the results it needs. However, is there a problem with changing the race of a model? Is Microsoft really in the wrong, or was it just trying to make the most money possible? As a public relations major, I can see why Microsoft may have altered the advertisement—since Poland is predominately white, it is not in Microsoft’s best interest to advertise to the blacks in Poland—it’s a waste of money to advertise to a small audience. Advertisers try and focus on the largest audience they can get. In regards to just the altering of the face, it is much less expensive to alter just the face of the man instead of both his head and his hand—especially when it is not a drastic difference. Unless you knew that the picture was changed, you really can’t pick out the fact that it is a black man’s hand. However, this position also causes me to question why Microsoft would spend the money changing the face on this man when it wasn’t a picture that would offend the citizens of Poland. Normally companies are willing to spend the money if they believe that the advertisement will cause them to lose an audience. Did Microsoft really think that there would be that large of a profit, as in a flood of new customers coming in, after spending all that money on editing? I think that is actually the scariest part—the fact that someone thought that spending the money to change a face on the advertisement would benefit the company’s sales in Poland. And in my Public Relations class, my professor told me that a large amount of advertisements fail, despite the money spent. Advertising is such a game and it almost seems as though there is a checklist you have to go through in order to have a strong advertisement. Is there at least one woman? Check. Is there at least two different races represented? Check. Obviously, the lists become more specific depending on the desired audience, but no matter what, companies have to show that there is no racial preference when it comes to advertising. So it still puzzles me why Microsoft, a very large and recognizable company, would go completely against everything every other company has stood for. It is scary to think that someone felt it was necessary to perform this huge risk, and it is also scary to think that the entire nation of Poland is believed to buy items that advertise solely to white people versus items that advertise to diverse groups.
Microsoft’s action of cropping out the face of a black man to paste on one of a white man is wrong for quiet a few reasons. However, not putting a black man in the Polish advertisement does not necessarily mean that they should be labeled as racist. Microsoft is a running a business, and in order to promote their business they need to effectively market their product towards an ideal audience who, in this case, happens to be mainly white. Just because Microsoft has an advertisement without a black man does not mean they are racist. Logically speaking, it would be nearly impossible for Microsoft to create an ad that has a representative of every race. When directing their advertising towards Polish customers it only makes sense for Microsoft to have people who depict that specific culture in the actual advertisement. For example, McDonalds has markets all over the world, and in India (where people worship cows instead of eat them) McDonalds markets other meat and food products instead. It would be absolutely disastrous for their business to ignore this cultural practice and use the same exact advertisement that is used in the United States. An advertisement in Africa of all white men using condoms to avoid the spread of HIV would probably not be as effective as one that consisted of all black men. Furthermore, I would expect an advertisement in Japan or China to be comprised of mainly the Asian race. Similarly, since Poland is comprised of mainly white people, it would most likely not be as profitable to portray another race in the advertisement. People are in business to make money, and more money is made through effective marketing. If the advertisement is not directed to the right customers, then it’s not going to be effective. Although I would argue that the way in which the picture was cropped, with the original black model’s head completely cut out, is wrong. If that were me I would want an apology, but Microsoft does not need to apologize for altering the ad to better represent Polish people. Let’s be real here. I hate to be the cynic, but there are people that are racist, and there is probably a lot of discrimination in Poland where they aren’t exposed to as much diversity as here in the US. I think that Microsoft actions are more a reflection on the real world rather than on their company’s values. If Microsoft were refusing to sell their products to a particular race, well then I would label them racist. However, just altering advertisements to make a larger profit does not indicate racism. Microsoft did make a mistake when they tried to just paste another man’s face on top of the black man, and this was an ignorant move on their part. So, while I don’t agree with the way Microsoft went about altering this ad, I also do not find them to be racist.
I agree with some aspects of this blog on “Political Correctness or Blatant Racism” but I disagree strongly on others. As an advertising major I can understand what the Microsoft Company might have been thinking when they changed the black man at the table to a white man. It’s very important in this economic situation that we are living in today to make sure that what your selling gets response from the consumers. This might mean making sure that your product appeals to the biggest population possible so that the most money can be made for the good of the company. I agree that this may seem harsh in comparison to the idea of racial equality and making sure that everyone is represented fairly. But different parts of the world are made up of different races and populations and it just so happens that Poland has a vastly larger majority of white people. Does that mean that the company should sacrifice the possibility of losses millions of dollars in sales over this one advertising campaign just to try and please everyone? I don’t think so, I agree with the thought that this picture represents a “corporate culture” and it is just giving a good representation of what Poland’s specific “corporation culture” on average looks like. I do agree with the notion that the poor photo shopping skills in the campaign are very offensive and bring up bad feelings toward the corporation of Microsoft. In all likelihood, this mistake makes different races, especially African Americans and black men all over the world, who see this advertisement question how seriously some people take race. This can be a very dangerous problem for the Microsoft Company and their future attempts to reach out and be progressive with the black community. Many people won’t forget a mistake like this being made by such an influential company for a long time. I find that I don’t have so much a problem with the fact that the picture is of all white workers, because of the fact that it is in a largely white demographic. I have a problem with the fact that the company didn’t take the time to photo shop in the correct hands for the man that they replaced. This mistake should have been found and fixed a lot quicker and handled with more class so as to not force it to become such a problem. I don’t think that the idea of having different races featured in the same ad but in different places should be seen as manipulative in any sense. I think that this kind of advertising is in fact very smart because it allows the companies to reach out to the largest amount of people possible. Personally, when I’m shopping and I’m deciding between two items, it’s nice to have an advertisement nearby showing someone like myself, that I can relate to, using the product to help me make my decision. If that makes me seem like an easy target than so be it, but I don’t think it’s an issue that needs to get mixed up in the more serious issues of race and racial relations.
I agree with the author of this blog. Two issues in particular caught my attention: The idea behind marketing regarding the shift of appeal in advertising and the issue in relation to advertising and manipulation; specifically the Microsoft company.
First of all, I believe that race does come into ply when marketing. For some reason people are still drawn to their culture and therefore advertising is based around culture and race. Since culture and race has not blended, people still are affected by race. Therefore, advertisers found that by changing the color of the person to attract different types of people, they will increase their profit. People are drawn to what they are used to and feel comfortable with. If there is an Indian person advertising a product in a predominantly white area of the United States, chances are the white people in the community will not purchase the product. However, if the person in the commercial was white, the product might appeal to more of the white community.
In relation to Microsoft, I believe that if they used a black man to advertise in Poland, the advertisement would not be successful, however if they used a white person the company would find much more success since the population in Poland is not as diverse.
Secondly sad but true, I do believe that the corporate culture focuses on success and success only. I believe in corporate America success is defined by the value and profit made by the company. Therefore when it comes to advertising, companies will do anything to cut costs and increase profits just as Microsoft did in Poland. They knew that using the advertisement with the black man would not be successful. Instead of standing up for diversity and valuing race, they choose to change the person in the ad in order to make a better profit. This is probably a common thing amongst companies.
Personally, I am trying to think of how advertisements have affected me. I think the United States has recently increased diversity in their ads as well. A lot of makeup ads and clothing ads appeal to all races. I do not think I am affected and drawn to a product because a particular race is advertising it. However, thinking back to when I was younger, I remember only have white Barbie’s and white dolls. I remember seeing black Barbie’s on the selves at a toy store, but they were very limited in selection and did not have nearly as much as a variety of choices and the white Barbie’s. Recollecting back to childhood again, I also do not recall ever seeing a black Santa. Every Santa in the mall was always white. I think this is a very interesting topic to study and statically would like to know just how much the issue of race affects advertising.
I believe that any controversy over this ad is just ridiculous. The point of advertising is to make products appeal to a certain group and if that group happens to be white and more responsive to a homogenous group that is representative of them then that is what the ad should include. The whole phenomena of including an array of ethnicities in every ad comes off as a very desperate attempt to have our culture appear like all races and ethnicities are intertwined, which they are not. In most places I have been, for the most part, different races live separately. When I lived in North East Philadelphia I went to a school that was almost entirely white and lived in a neighborhood that was almost entirely white. When I moved to Doylestown in the suburbs, my very large neighborhood had one family with a black husband and two Indian families. The very clear distinction between white and black areas is a reality that overly pre-meditative ads cannot hide. By including a non representative yet diverse group of people in an ad just to be “p.c.” just makes advertising firms come off as ignorant to the current race situation or eager to ignore it. No one sees companies adding Native Americans into ads and this is because they are few in number and therefore do not need to be included for the company to seem politically correct. However, like I said previously, most of the places I have lived or visited did not have many black, Asian, or Indian people so I don’t think they need to be included necessarily for the ad to be appropriate.
In the case of leaving the hands black and only switching the head comes off more as a lazy editor than anything else. The difference in the skin color between the hands and face is barely noticeable so I do not believe it is anything to get worked up about.
I also believe that having a black man or a white man in an ad does not make that much of a difference in who purchases the product. Just because there is not a white woman in an ad does not mean I will not be interested in the product. So essentially, I think the idea of meticulously picking people for ads to appeal to everyone is just a waste of time.
I think that we have become so caught up in the idea of being politically correct that we are just not being realistic anymore. There are still divisive lines in many places in America and throughout the world and creating ads that dismiss this truth is silly. People need to realize that acknowledging differences between “races” does not make you racist, just a realist.
I think that the Microsoft advertisement is more embarrassing because of the their laziness to notice that they did not photo shop the man’s hands. I am a marketing major and it is a common practice to change ads to appeal to different target markets. However, that does not mean that a company should not pay attention to the details that they change in each ad. I do not think that Microsoft supports white people over black people only because the original advertisement had a black man in it. If they were opposed to people of color why is there an Asian man and a black man in the original picture. As for changing the black man to a white man, I feel that is more of a negative reflection on Poland. I understand that they are a very white nation, but if the advertisement would really have a negative effect on the people because there is a black man in it, maybe they do need to see more ads with people of color. If companies keep spoon-feeding nations like Poland advertisements that they are comfortable with they will never grow as a nation.
As for changing ads in general to meet target populations I do not think that is a bad thing. If companies are willing to use people of color or different sexual orientations doesn’t that mean big businesses and the media are more open to differences in people? And if companies are more than willing to use different people in different ads then maybe people will be more willing to accept different groups of people if they are seen in the media more often. For example, in my marketing class last semester we had a day where we watched television ads that were exactly the same except they changed the people for different demographic and geographic areas. One of the ads was a Levi jean’s commercial with a heterosexual couple and then the same ad but with a homosexual couple. The ads will be targeted on channels for each of the sexual orientations, but that does not mean that a straight man might see the ad with the gay couple as he flips through the channels. Once he sees the ad then maybe he will become more open to the idea of homosexual ads on television.
I do however think that instead of worrying about a black man and a woman in every advertisement in America it should just be more natural. If that means all black people and no white people then so be it or if that means all women and no men then so be it. I know that as of right now that is not a possibility but I hope one day in America there are no rules about what races and genders are in an ad and how many are in a particular ad.
The main issue that is generated by the Microsoft advertisement is certainly racism; however, it’s the big picture that surrounds it that should raise the eyebrows. The fact that such a powerful, global company deems it necessary to racially profile in their advertisements in different parts of the world should be the main focus in this argument. It is 2009, and how far have we really come? Yes it may be beneficial in a marketing sense to include races that correlate with the demographic of the area being targeted, but realistically is that not racism? I argue yes. The fact that a product will sell better if its advertisement is racially equal to the consumers has an underlying theme of racism that is still very present throughout the world.
I agree with Sam’s statement that simply replacing the African-American man’s face with that of a White man is “raw” and unsettling. I find the fact that Microsoft did this in such an impersonal manner as to leave the exact same hand in the photo quite offensive. It basically says that if a citizen of Poland looked at the ad quick enough and saw an African-American, they would less stimulated then if they glanced to see a White male. If that does not scream racism then I am not sure what does. Yet, there is still Asian representation in the advertisement? Apparently, according to Microsoft, an Asian man in a corporate setting is more acceptable than an African-American man. This confuses me; I was under the impression that this advertisement was altered to cater to Poland’s prominent White demographic, yet Asian is not white. No matter which way you think about the issue it leads back to racism against African-Americans.
Unfortunately, as long as the world has billion dollar companies that are represented in numerous nations this issue will be present. As long as marketers are in business different racial groups will be targeted depending on area demographics. The worst part is that most people never even notice the manipulation by these companies until it is exposed in an article like this. What does that say about racism in the world today? I think it says a lot. Everyone gets outraged and ashamed by an issue like Microsoft’s ad, but it is hard to not see the hypocrisy in it. We go around day to day and many of us fall for advertisements that are directed towards our demographic, I am admitting that I do, and never think twice about it. The fact that it takes an article like this to point out the presence of racism in the world that we live in today just confirms our collective mind as still being narrow.
In my opinion this situation is neither political correctness nor blatant racism. The fact of the matter is that the whole point of advertisement is to convince a person that THEY should buy the product in question. The best way to do this is to show people images of people who the customer relates to enjoying that particular product. If dealing with a mostly white polish audience, it is undeniable that they (regardless of the implications) will relate better to other white people. I believe that people should disregard race entirely when deciding how well they can relate to people, but unfortunately that is just not the way the world works. As soon as people realize that it is not only possible, but in many situations likely, that upon further inspection they will relate just as deeply with people of other races as they will with their own, the world will be a much better place. However, as unfortunate as it may be, people just don’t realize this fact. Whether or not the advertisements of the corporate world are inhibiting the potential realization of this fact is a completely irrelevant fact to the advertisement agencies.
The argument towards the end of the post which states that a black person is losing their seat at the corporate table simply because they are black is complete crap in my opinion. Yes, the black character is losing his seat because he is black, but it is an imaginary character losing a seat at an imaginary table. There is no real person losing his seat at any real table, which makes that argument entirely irrelevant.
In my opinion the fact that Microsoft was perfectly willing to leave the black mans hands in the advertisement and not his face is something else that makes perfect sense to me. When a consumer is looking at an advertisement, an image showing someone’s hands (presumably hands on a computer) is focused far more on the computer than the hands, because people don’t identify what people look like by the appearance of their hands. However, as soon as a face is introduced, the consumer immediately looks at that face and tries to see whether or not he can relate to that person. If the answer is no, then the entire advertisement is a waste of time. The consumer will think, “Who cares if this person on the screen is enjoying the product, that doesn’t mean that I will.”
I believe that the only mistake made by Microsoft in this venture was that they got caught. Clearly they don’t care about the ethics behind their advertisement schemes beyond what effects it may have on the consumer buying their products. This is just another unfortunate happening in the world. People may one day learn that they can identify with other races just as easily as with their own, but until that day I highly doubt that equal racial distribution will ever occur within advertising.
Microsoft, like all other businesses, can only survive by generating a successful profit. When it comes to marketing, every company is forced to research and reveal a target market for the product being sold. The target market is simply the key to the door in which the most customers will walk through, and therefore the largest profit to be made. The target market can vary from age group, to sex, to occupation, to race. Are companies whose target market is women sexist? No, of course not. They are simply marketing their product in a manor that would be most appealing to the ideal customer.
Though I do not completely agree that Microsoft’s employees made the most intelligent decision, from a business perspective, their goal is to achieve the largest profit possible. Perhaps the fact that it was photo shopped made it seem cruel or racist. Microsoft could have been less lazy and have taken a completely new photo. Different companies contain different target markets and sometimes it depends on race. KOOL cigarette advertisements tend to be marketed towards people of color. That does not make the company racist towards white people. They did their research and generated a marketing strategy that will turn the greatest profit.
When it comes down to the un-photo shopped hands, from my perspective, I believe it was simply a careless mistake. The blogger describing the image to represent interracial harmony is silly and a forced explanation. People have to start getting over themselves and stop their extreme political correctness and cry for racism. Such actions as affirmative action are the outcome of such cries and are a form of reverse racism.
America, having such diverse racial groups throughout the country, should have such an advertisement containing people of different races. Not because it is “the right thing to do,” but because it is the ideal form of marketing when trying to obtain the largest number of customers. If Poland’s vast majority is white, the most intelligent marketing strategy would be to advertise in a manor that appeals to their white community. Altering the image was a business tactic. People must get off their high horse and end the accusations of racism. In no way, shape, or form was the action a blatant racist act. People these days are too worried about political correctness and are constantly ready to scream racist at any given opportunity. There are points in peoples lives where a racist act does occur, however, some people take it to the extreme. I believe if the image was not photo shopped, people would be less inclined to call it racist. Microsoft made the mistake of not creating an entirely new advertisement, and unfortunately, must deal with the reprucussions.
I do not think that the race of a person in an ad should change how people feel about it. That doesn’t mean that it sometimes doesn’t affect certain people’s opinions, but I do not think that we should change our advertisements to fit people who feel that way, because this will only keep the cycle going.
Poland is primarily white, but does that mean that when they see a black man in an ad that they disregard it? Probably not. In most cases people probably don not even notice the color of the people in advertisements. If you ask me what race the person in a Tylenol or Geico commercial is, I wouldn’t have a clue, because that isn’t the point of the advertisement. If a Pepsi ad uses a white actor and Coke uses a black actor, will soda choice be split by race? My first thought is no, but could we subconsciously change our preference? Now I’m not so sure. Maybe the only way to keep the peace is to make all ads diverse, and in Poland’s case, the opposite. However, I think the point of advertising should be the product. If the ad is any good we will be paying attention to the words, the concept and the product, not the actors.
However, the other side of the argument is in the United States we may not photo-shop our ads but the actors are chosen very carefully to appeal to as many people as possible. As you said in the blog, many ads include: a white male, a woman, a black man and depending on the audience, an Asian. Advertisers do this intentionally to appeal to the US’s diversity. Our advertisers are essentially doing just what Microsoft did in Poland, changing the ad to fit the audience; it just isn’t as blatant as photo-shopping.
I do think you are correct in saying that this particular ad is being talked about so much and so negatively, because it exposes what advertising is really all about. This happens every day in the United States but we don’t even think about it. Many advertisers are guilty or racism of some form, why is Microsoft taking so much crap for it? Truly, this isn’t anything unusual.
While Microsoft made this decision to try to appeal to the Polish people more effectively, I feel that they could have easily avoided the whole situation. Essentially “covering up” a black man in an ad makes the company look racist even if it was intended for a primarily white audience. If they had made a new ad to fit Poland’s demographic rather than photo-shopping the old one, it probably would not have been an issue.
When I first looked at this article and the advertisement that it was referring to, the first thing that popped into my mind was “What are these people thinking.” With the well-know corporate name Microsoft, you would think that these people would have the skills to Photoshop correctly. But besides the Photoshop screw up, I can honestly say that I don’t think that this article was being racist at all and I will explain why.
Looking at any advertisement, I always look at the people first and I picture myself in that ad. Many people do that with advertisements to be able to relate personally to them. When companies choose their target audience to market to, it usually affects their ads and the kind of people to place in them. They want people to look at the ad and relate it to their own life. Culture is something that is looked at heavily in advertising. When you are dealing with a country that is so diverse in culture such as the United States, you need to be aware of all the people you could possibly be targeting and try and cover all races. But with countries such as Poland, the population is predominantly white as Professor Richards says in his blog. So if you are planning to market to Poland and the majority of people are white why would you place a black man in the picture? Yes there could be people of different race such as black living in Poland, but it is not the majority. Yes you can make the argument that the ad was trying to represent a corporate culture, also something Professor Richards suggests, but the corporate culture could be different in Poland. I agree that the corporate culture is referring to all countries everywhere, but one could distinguish corporate culture for their own country as something else. Poland’s corporate culture would be all white people around a conference room. I think it really depends on how you take this article.
I don’t think that it is racist to shift your appeals to different audiences, when in places of different cultures. Miami does have a high population of Hispanic people, so why not use that to your advantage and target them. You aren’t saying anything bad about other races or degrading them, you are simply using demographics to promote your product and advertise.
Do I think that Microsoft handled changing the ad in an unprofessional way, yes because there was a defect to the ad and it should have not been printed with mistakes. But when it comes to this ad being racist, I can’t say that I agree. My reasoning might be slightly affected because I am an advertising major, but I think that I make valid points as to why the article is not meant to be a racist piece.
I think it was wrong of Microsoft to have altered the advertisement by directing it towards the Polish consumers. It should not be the race of a person’s color or appearance to change how people feel towards the ad. Clearly, this ad was not done to be racist but was a mistake despite of the colored people. The advertisement was tailored to appeal to the consumers and target them. In the world today, we live in a multi-cultural world. I do not agree with them changing the ad to fit others, this way the cycle of racism will continue. Even though Poland is mostly white, it does not mean that if they see a black person in an ad that they would not approve of the product or business. The working force in Poland is a probably all-different race, so there should be no reason why they cannot have a black person in an ad. There is an Asian man in the ad and I do not understand why they did not change him to a white man, as well, as they did for the black man. That should not change a person’s mind on whether there is a white, black or Asian persons in the ad. It does not make sense for them to replace the black man to a white man, they should have done it to the Asian man, as well and make it correctly to target the audience and not seem racist. In most commercials you barely notice if they used every race in the ad or not. If you looked at the GEICO cave man commercials or Mac commercials, ask yourself if you would consume these products if they used black, Asian or white people would it make a difference for you to purchase?! It does not make sense to remove one race and not the other. I think the best way for ads to make universal and diverse is the best way to please everyone and keep peace. However, I think that the advertising should for product and not who’s in the ad. To me, singling someone out is being racist. American represents all races and accepts everyone. In this advertisement, it should ensure all races and genders, as in an American would agree. In the United States, the ads, commercials and pictures may not photo shop but most importantly they choose certain people to fit the picture for what Americans should look or be like. Many of the ads include, white males and females, black man and depending on the audience, Asians. The ad should drawl not what actors are used and us in with the words and concepts. Microsoft should reconsider their ads next time and look at the whole picture and accept every race.
To be honest, I don’t know how I feel about this article. I know that I don’t agree with the decision to Photoshop the Polish advertisement but I can’t help but wonder, as an American am I to sensitive to this issue? The United States is so worried about being “politically correct” that I feel like we might be too sensitive when it comes to the matter of race. When looking at an advertisement, as an American, I expect to see a representation of every race. Admittedly, I am a product of my generation and the ideals that are around me. I agree with the statement that was in Professor Richards’ blog, "We can't have a photo without at least one woman and one person of color, afterall." At least I believe that is the notion of American advertisers. I just think that as a country, we have made the topic of race such a touchy issue that it’s hard to talk about it without offending someone or a group of people.
With that said, we do have to remember that the point of advertising is to a sell a product. I do not believe that this was a mistake or a simple “overlook”. But if the consumers in Poland respond better to the altered ad, can we really blame Microsoft for doing it? The issue that DaWhiteApe brought up about whether, “Microsoft was simply giving in to the racism that exists in Poland, or were they themselves being racist in thinking that a majority white population would have an issue with seeing a black man in an advertisement.” really got me thinking. I really believe that the company of Microsoft is not racist but instead more worried about their profit then moral values. If Poland actually does respond better to a less “colorful” add, then I don’t necessarily agree that it is Microsoft’s responsibility to do what’s right in the eyes of Americans if it will hurt their profit. I do believe that there were other ways of going about it. We live in such a connected world, that there is no way this altered ad would simply go unnoticed. If Microsoft reshot the ad or made a new and completely separate ad to grab their target market in Poland I see nothing wrong in that.
As a young, white, American, female, I see Professor Richards’ class as being risqué, provocative, and maybe even out-of-line at times. I feel like when I listen to his lectures I am hearing something I shouldn’t be hearing, something that is inappropriate or just maybe blunt and I find it intriguing. I’m sure there are others that feel the same, others that think he is racist and inappropriate, while others I’m sure feel he simply sees the world and says it as it is. But that’s exactly my point. We all see and react differently to the topic of race. There is no way to definitely know what the reasons behind this altered ad were. But it is clear to me that depending on who you are, where you come from, and how you were brought up; many feel very differently to the actions taken by Microsoft.
This situation must be extremely embarrassing for Microsoft. Not because they were being racist, but because a company worth hundreds of billions of dollars could not hire someone smart enough to get the advertising right. This was clearly a mistake made when trying to cover up the black man with a white man. And the explanation in the BBC article by a blogger that they were just trying to “symbolize interracial harmony” sounds great, but obviously not the case. With that said, I do not believe this is racism. Company’s these days are always trying to be too politically correct by always having in there advertisements a white person, a black person, an Asian person, a disabled person and of course someone with Spanish descent to finish it off. And the ratio of men to woman is of course crucial. My point is that I think companies put too much emphasis on being politically correct with their advertisements. What makes more sense to me is marketing to your costumers. In the United States it makes sense for a company to have all different races and ethnicities on advertisements because the nature of the Unites States is that it is very diverse. If the photo shopping was reversed for the United States I agree the white guy would be photo shopped over to add a person of color. Then the question needs to be asked, is that any better? However, if in Poland it is predominantly white then I don’t see the big deal with making the photo of all white people. I think the bigger issue here is that a black man was covered up with a white man. Or I should say, almost covered up with a white man, he got to keep his hands. People may look at it like they were trying to “cover up” or hide the black man which would be closer to an issue of racism. I would be interested to see if Microsoft had taken the time to just take a new photo with an actual white man in the advertisement if this image would still be a big deal. I don’t think it would have been. I strongly believe the issue here is that a black man was photo shopped over, and Microsoft is just stupid for doing that. Microsoft just cares about making money so if they calculate more people will be reached with an advertisement of all white people then that’s what they will do and that is what they did do (just carelessly). It is not an issue of racism and people should not try to make it into one. It is clear this is just a case of target advertising gone wrong.
My initial response to reading this article was somewhat disbelief that Microsoft, one of the worlds biggest and most successful companies, could let something like this slip up. Its just ridiculous that they merely cut the head off the black man that was used in the ad in the United States and replaced it with a white mans head for the Polish version of the ad. While doing this they kept the exact same body of the black man, his black hands showing and all, with a newly fashionable white head. Did they not think anyone would notice this change and that they could get away unscathed. Clearly this was not the case. Now because of this stunt Microsoft is being called racist, which I do not believe is the case.
Although changing the race of the man from black to white seems like it was done for racial issues, I think there were other motives behind the decision. This decision was made primarily for the marketing aspect of the ad and not simply because Microsoft does not like black people, this is not the case. They decided to change the ad in order to appeal to a different geographic of people. The original ad, which consisted of one Asian man, one black man and one white woman, was released to the American public. This ad in my opinion does a good job of marketing to an American company and the American public because our population is very diverse and our corporate world is very diverse as well. So it makes sense for them to put three people of different races in the ad. On the other hand I do not believe that the original ad would have gone over as well in the predominantly white Poland. I have been to Europe three times in my life, non of which have I visited Poland, but I have been to Austria and Germany and they are somewhat close in proximity to Poland and share a similar racial demographic. All of these countries are very white and because of this I believe that Microsoft was not being racist they were actually being smart and did the right thing by changing, or attempting to change the race of the man from black to white, in the ad that was going to be used in Poland. But what does this say about the Polish public. Microsoft felt that they had to change their ad by removing the black man. I think the wrong is being committed by the Polish public that they would let something as insignificant as the color of someone’s skin in an ad influence weither they would buy a product or not. I also believe that if the second ad would have been put out in America some people would have called it racist as well but simply because there would have been too many white people in it. This is very ironic but very sad at the same time.
Is America living in fear of political correctness? The response to the Microsoft advertisement photoshop error proves that America is living in a time where being politically correct is key to survival. Any hint of racist remarks, images, or thoughts will put a person or in this case a company in the firing range of the press.
Yes, Microsoft photoshopped out a black man for a white man in a Polish advertisement. The mistake was caught only because the black hand remained in the image. This issue would not have risen if the photoshop error was not made, but it was. Would this advertisement change receive the same amount of press if the black man was replaced with lets say a Hispanic man with the black hand remaining? I do not think it would have. The company is trying to reach a target audience in Poland, where the majority of the people are white. If the company was trying to reach a target audience in Mexico it is likely the black man would have been replaced with a hispanic man. People respond to what is familiar, and in Poland a white face is more familiar than a black face. It is in the company's best interest to reach out to their consumers to the best of their ability through advertisements.
America is a highly diverse region of the world. Races from all over the world can be found in America so advertising in America generally will use a more diverse range of actors. When Americans notice errors like the Polish ad, they jump to the conclusion that Microsoft must have made some racist decision that had nothing to do with marketing. Usually Americans don't assume that Poland has a different ethnic background than the US so changes should be made accordingly to better reach the target audience.
Americans are very focused on race because of the many different ethnic backgrounds and races that exist in the United States. Different races have suffered in the US such as African Americans with slavery before the Civil War and Asian Americans with internment camps during World War II. Americans are too afraid to make one more error of that stature, which is where political correctness comes in.
America overreacts to issues of race because now it is all about being politically correct. One wrong move and you are considered racist or sexist. If a person does not want to be considered racist or sexist, he/she should include a person of every race in every photo/advertisement/tv show/movie. This however is not true. A director making a film about the life of Pocahontas is unlikely to cast a blue eyed blond girl for the role of Pocahontas so does that imply that he/she is being racist? No, it does not. The director will choose someone who can relate to character or resemble the character in some way so that the audience will be captivated. The same should apply to the Polish Microsoft ad. Microsoft was trying to reach its target audience in Poland, which is different than it is in America. Microsoft should have known to have corrected their error with the hand, but the situation as a whole was not blatant racism. It was more so about marketing and audience than race.
I think Microsoft’s marketing team made a mistake by altering the picture from a black male to a white male however I will not go as far as saying that it was a racist move. Either way it is a silly mistake that a large corporation should not make because it only brings negativity to your firm as well as making it seem like it was a racist move. In today’s world you must watch everything you do because a lot of times just a simple mistake or even jokes will be taken as racist or sexist and bring much heat to either you or your corporation. Perhaps Microsoft was just trying to switch up the ad because it would be shown in another country or perhaps they weren’t a hundred percent satisfied with the black males pose in the picture. Who knows? All I know is that such a mistake would bring an immense amount of heat to your corporation. If Microsoft was that unhappy with the ad or certain individuals in it then perhaps they should have shot a different add instead of changing an existent one. Being a white American male I cannot relate to how some African Americans may feel about the incident but I know if they were to change the white male with an African American male that I would not be upset or even waste my time thinking about it. I believe as Americans we are constantly worrying about being politically correct and making sure to not to neglect any races and a lot of times this thought process gets us in more trouble. We are constantly walking on nails trying to get it right the first time and be conscientious of all sexes and races therefore when there is an accident or mistake every one jumps to the conclusion that “Oh this company is racist they must not like out type”. When in my opinion there is more behind the story than that. It could have been many things why they swapped the two men out, however the first conclusion people jump to is that it is always something negative. I do not consider myself racist at all, nor do I get offended when I see things like this in newspapers and such, unless the article or advertisement is blatantly attacking someone of the another race. I feel as though people should start giving others the benefit of the doubt more often than they jump down others throats because then things escalade and stories get mixed around and before you know it something harmless is all of a sudden something negative or derogatory. I do not believe that Microsoft would purposely change the black male out because it would be shown in another country and I think other bloggers who believe that are the type that jump to conclusions before hearing the other side.
It is clear that Microsoft needs to take a photo shop class. Not only did they come across as mentally inferior, but also as racist. There are many issues that arise from this advertisement, but the main issue is why? Why did they paste a white guy’s face over a black guy’s face? Was it pure racism or is there an explanation? There are several possibilities, but none are a defense for Microsoft’s mistake.
Due to the fact that Poland is predominately white, it is possible that a white man is more appealing to the eyes of a Polish person. Although this is blatant racism, this could be true. If so, Microsoft has given into racism and changed the picture for that reason. Either creating racism or giving into racism, the fact remains that this incident is messed up in so many ways. There is no reason why a white guy on an advertisement instead of a black guy should make Microsoft more appealing. The thought that it might is inherently racist itself.
Another possibility is that it was just someone pulling a prank and the company was unaware of the change. Although possible, it is very unlikely that someone would risk a great job for something as stupid as this. The most logical reason is that the owners/board of Microsoft, is most likely all white. Based on statistics, it is very unlikely that Microsoft will have more than a few people of color at the peak of the company. Maybe the owners are all racist, pompous ass holes who think that they are better than any other race. \
An advertisement with only white people is not racist. Just because an ad doesn’t have a black guy or an Asian person, etc does not make an ad racist; however, using photo shop to make a black dude a white guy just to boost sales is when this ad becomes racist. To be honest, this is just as stupid as it is racist. Has our society become so low that little things like a white guy instead of a black guy (the hands are ok) make an ad more appealing. Who in their right mind says to themselves “Well I wanted a laptop, but now I don’t because I saw a Microsoft ad with a black guy.”
This incident showed everyone Microsoft’s true colors. By editing this ad and having it exposed, the world has seen the true side to this company, and it is quite ugly. Although only Microsoft will truly know the exact reason why this happened, there is no denying that this incident was not accidental. Someone from up top gave the order, and now Microsoft is getting what they deserve.
When opening this blog, the first thing that caught my attention was the picture. As I was looking at it, it confused me as to why they would have changed the face of the black man. The main reason I thought this was because there is so much controversy over equality and racial discrimination in the media. Of course I think it is wrong of the company to simply put someone else’s face on another man’s body, clearly showing that a white man has a black hand. Having a white woman and an Asian man also in the advertisement does give some diversity, and satisfies the theory of “We can’t have a photo without at least one woman and one person of color, after all.” Although they portray diversity, it is the shear fact that the advertisers blatantly covered the already posed black man’s body with the face of a white man. I know that, personally, I would be offended if they put the face of someone of a different color over mine. It sends the message that my race is not good enough to be advertising their product.
When I opened the link with more information about the photo, it stated that a blogger said “The white head and black hand actually symbolize interracial harmony. It is supposed to show that a person can be white and black, old and young at the same time." In my opinion, this is complete bullshit. It’s crap that someone would believe an advertiser wanted to show that through putting a white man’s face on a black body. It seems to me that the company wanted to market to their customers better. If they had wanted to show interracial harmony, the photo would have been the same in the United States as well as in Poland. In the blog, it says that if it were the other way around a white guy would have been replaced with a black guy and this is completely true, but in a good way. Our country is so racially diverse and we further investigated this in our class the other day. It amazed me to see how many different backgrounds people have come from. I take pride in knowing that I am from a country where people of all backgrounds are welcome. And, although all races may not be treated equally, we all share equal rights and laws are the same for all citizens. This sense of citizenship may not be shared by those in other countries, like Poland for instance. It is very discouraging to know that the advertisers thought they had to change the color of the man in the middle of the photo in order for their ad to be effective. The advertisers at Microsoft need to realize they shouldn’t change the identity of someone, whether it just be a picture or not, for the possibility of a more effective ad.
I feel as if this was a very unfortunate mistake that occurred, but all the press that this ad has received is a little bit extreme. I can totally agree that it seems wrong to just essentially cut and paste a new “white” face onto an existing “black” body, but I can imagine that Microsoft didn’t want to spend the money to shoot another advertisement. If anything, Microsoft should be embarrassed that not one person noticed the mistake. As a marketing major, it is understood that companies need to know who their target consumers are, as well as other demographics such as age, gender, location and yes, race.
In my marketing class the other day we just watched Coca-Cola commercials that aired in three different countries. They were all totally different. The American version had a white male actor, but the version that aired throughout Asia had all Asian actors, and the Jamaican ad only had black actors. Coke was marketing to each countries specific consumers, and since it was an actual commercial rather than a still print, they needed to reshoot each one to satisfy each audience.
As Americans we see ads everyday that are full of diversity. That is what we consider to be normal. However, I assume that in Poland their ads do not offer as much diversity, mainly because the country of Poland is nowhere close to as diverse as the United States. Would this be such an issue if the Microsoft advertisement was completely re-done with new blond, blue-eyed actors? Would it still be considered racist then?
I feel as if this needs to just be looked at from the business perspective, rather than an issue of race or gender. Otherwise, a huge can of worms will be opened, and people will start asking why only little girls are advertised as playing with Barbie’s or why you mainly see black models in rap videos. It is the job of Advertisers/Marketers to understand who their target audience is, and honestly they were just doing their job. It is understood that the majority of consumers in Poland are white, just like the Coca-cola commercial that aired in Jamaica where all the actors were black.
Bottom line, I do not really see the change in the ad as an issue for its Polish audience. If the same thing was done for the ad to be shown in the United States, then yes, it would be a big problem. Thankfully, as a country we are past the point where we only advertise products with white people. Poland may not quite be at that point yet. But, on the flip side, in Jamaica you can bet that most of their products are endorsed by black actors. It honestly just depends on the audience!
I really wasn’t surprised when I saw this photo and read the article about it online. The United States is a melting pot. There are so many people living here that come from different places around the world. In almost every picture that I see in the media that is advertising some type of product I almost always see an Asian person, a black person, and a white person in the picture. Usually at least one out of the three is also a female. The marketing companies and people who take these photos obviously plan out that they want to have every culture and sex represented so that when someone looks at the picture they will be represented either by their race or their gender. This way, no one will feel excluded. This is clearly what is happening in the Microsoft photo for the United States. I feel that making an advertisement to appeal to different audiences and different groups of people is not racist or wrong- it is a part of marketing and appealing to the people who you are trying to advertise to.
The fact is, Poland is predominately white. From a marketing perspective, it may be better to have more white people in the picture to appeal to the audience in Poland who are going to be buying the Microsoft product. I don’t think that this is an example of racism; I think it is an example of marketing. Where I think Microsoft went wrong with this picture was how they went about making this picture appealing to the Polish. The way that they replaced the black guy in the middle was wrong. They either should have replaced him completely which includes changing the color of his hands or not replaced him at all. I think that the part in the article where it says "the white head and black hand actually symbolize interracial harmony. It is supposed to show that a person can be white and black, old and young at the same time" is complete garbage. That was one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. Clearly, the person who photo-shopped the picture just didn’t know how to use Photoshop or was too lazy to change the color of the guys hands. I sincerely doubt that when they did it they had the idea of interracial harmony in mind.
Also, if Microsoft was trying to appeal to the “whiter” audience in Poland, then why didn’t they replace the Asian guy and make him a white guy? I don’t think that there are many Asians in Poland, so why replace the black guy and not the Asian guy? Microsoft also could have gone about their marketing in a different way. Instead of using the same picture and changing one of the models in the pictures skin color, they could have taken a completely different picture with new models.
Advertisements have one sole purpose- to appeal to their targeted audience to get them to buy their product. Much of this is though manipulation. Race is a touchy subject. Microsoft should have known better and made better choices if their intentions were to appeal to a “whiter” audience.
I personally find it hard to believe that a fortune five hundred company would make such a mistake as in forgetting to Photoshop the hands. I also don’t think that Microsoft is being racist in this ad by switching out a black person for a white person. It is just more familiar to see white people over in Poland so that is who the models are for this advertisement. It wouldn’t be any different to have black models over in Africa where the majority in some areas is black. I also think that this advertisement is getting blown out of control just because a black person was replaced by a white person. If a white person would have been replaced by a black person and the white man had black hands I think the media would laugh and continue gossiping about the world.
When someone said that they believe Microsoft intended for the man to have a white face and black hands to please both markets I thought that was completely ridiculous. I believe that Microsoft just made a simple mistake in their Photoshop department and forgot to change the hands. I’m sure that the ad of the black man is being used somewhere in the world, just not in Poland. Being a business student I understand that in business we have all different types of markets. In order to interact with these markets and appeal to these markets you must advertise to your specific market. Therefore you have to address your markets appropriately with models, scenery, and products.
I believe that this mistake that Microsoft has made makes them look more un professional than racist. Obviously Microsoft is an absolutely huge and respected corporation so they are always trying to impress their clients, as well as intimidate their competition. That’s why this silly mistake by a person in their Photoshop department is such a disappointment to me as a customer. That’s why this makes me question if they can’t even Photoshop a model correctly in a Polish advertisement then how will they create a lasting and great piece of software? If you honestly thought Microsoft was being racist in this ad then let me ask you; why does Microsoft do an excellent job in diversification in their company? They are a top company and have top diversification reports.
Sometimes in this country I think we push racism to the absolute limit where it is turned around to anti-racism. In this country we need to pride ourselves on being the home of the free and no matter what color we are we are still Americans. I just think that sometimes the media gets involved to deeply in the race issue and believes an honest mistake is automatically a racist issue.
The core of the problem isn’t within Microsoft, or even in their advertising department; the issue lies in the people who view this ad and their judgments about race. This department of Microsoft is made up of people who are getting paid to put out the best possible advertisement, to bring money into the company, and to create a positive image for Microsoft. For them, photoshopping a black person out of a scene in order to appeal to a dominantly white culture seemed like the best way to do this. What’s unfortunate is that I used the word appeal. Apparently, Microsoft felt as though white culture would respond less well to an image of a black man at a conference table. They thought that white people from Poland were more likely to buy their product if it was represented by a white person. These are people who likely study the effects of advertisement, culture, and appeal. Therefore, they would never sabotage themselves and their views about the effectiveness of marketing and racial inclusion is likely a reflection of the racial discrimination and beliefs of the culture to which they are marketing. The bottom line is that we as a culture, in the half second that we view these advertisements, make judgments. These companies are trying to draw us in and get us to buy their products within that half second. Apparently, Microsoft’s advertising department felt as though we as a society will respond better to a certain racial representation. It’s sad that that is the judgment that they have made about people, but I don’t think that they are at fault, I think society is.
The question as to whether or not this shift in racial representation based on location is racist is a difficult one to answer. In a perfect world, it wouldn’t matter whether or not someone had a different skin color than you when you looked at an ad, and relating to a person of another race wouldn’t be an issue. Apparently, we do not live in a perfect world. Therefore, is Microsoft really to blame? They are trying to make money off of society. When the day comes that the average white person, black person, Asian person, and any other person can look at an ad for a half second and relate to someone of a different culture, then maybe these ads won’t have to change based on location. Until that day comes, I can only expect that companies will continue to change their marketing strategies to accommodate the ignorance and half second racial judgments that their audience makes. The problem therefore has little to do with Microsoft and everything to do with the racial prejudices of culture today.
There is no doubt in my mind that from an ethical standpoint this ad released by Microsoft is racist. However, from the business point of view, the advertising team at Microsoft must have thought that replacing the black man with a white man in their polish advertisements would be a more effective way of selling their product. Since Microsoft is used world-wide and is a billion dollar corporation, I am assuming that they have expert advertising teams in charge of every commercial, billboard, advertisement, etc. that they release. These experts had to know that someone in the world was going to see both advertisements and realize what they had done in the advertisement and that Microsoft as a company would receive scrutiny for it. However, they also must have had evidence to make them believe that no matter how much scrutiny they received for this racist advertisement it would still not be detrimental enough to make them lose money and instead they would still profit from it.
Everyone knows that advertising companies angle their advertisements towards consumers that they believe will continue buying their products and people that they want to begin using their products. In this sense, I believe that every advertisement, commercial, movie, billboard, etc. is racist in one way or another. The Microsoft advertisement that was released in America included a black man because Microsoft wants their product to appeal to the wide range of races in the country. Apparently, they believed that by releasing the same advertisement but with a white man in the black man’s place in Poland would appeal more to Poland’s predominantly white population. If the American advertisement were released in Poland, the people there may not have felt as connected to the advertisement and therefore not as enticed to buy the product where as if the all white advertisement were released in America, Microsoft would have still been seen as racist for only having white people in their advertisements. No commercial, movie, or advertisement in America has solely White, Black, Hispanic, or Asian people in it because in America that would be deemed racist. There is always a “token” black man or the “token” Asian woman which could be considered just as racist as this advertisement.
The one thing however, that I really believe sets this particular advertisement apart from all other advertisements regardless of whether or not they only put a white person or a black person in it to make it seem less racist is that this advertisement was photo shopped to be this way. The company did not shoot two pictures for the advertisement; they cut a man’s face out and pasted someone else’s face on his body. Due to that fact alone, I find this particular advertisement to be more offensive than any other that I have encountered. Sadly enough, I still use Microsoft products and will most likely continue using Microsoft products because despite the wrongfulness of this advertisement, it isn’t enough to deter me from the ease reliability I have found with their products. This attitude is most likely the basis of what the advertising team in charge of Microsoft relied on when they released this particular advertisement.
I feel that Microsoft made a mistake by not changing the color of the man’s hands; however, it was also a good way to stir up some controversy, and get some publicity to their campaign. I am not saying that Microsoft intended to make this mistake or not, but they have received a lot of talk, whether it has been good or not, their name is still out in the media.
I do believe that Microsoft is coming across a little bit racist, because they don’t feel that Polish people can handle seeing a black man. If this exact picture was to run in America, I feel Americans would have no problem with this, because America is so diverse.
However, if we want to stop racism, than why would we do it in our campaigns? If Poland isn’t used to seeing a black man, than they should slowly start seeing one in pictures, and this is the same for all races. If Poland is made up specifically of white people, than we should start adding a little bit of diversity to our ads, so that way I think we will start getting used to seeing certain types of people.
However, who is Microsoft to say that Polish people can’t handle seeing a white man. Microsoft should not have the right to say who goes in what ad. Microsoft is spending millions of dollars, changing the people and photo-shopping their ads, but are they really making that much more money by doing this?
I do sympathize with Microsoft because they are getting hit hard from reviewers. Companies make mistakes like this all the time, but because it is such a large company they are getting it extra hard. But other companies and people can benefit and learn from this. It can definitely get our country thinking, if we don’t change the people in our ads, could our world benefit from this?
All in all, Microsoft was just doing their job, which was to get consumers, and most companies will do it any way possible. They were not committing an act of racism, but just simply targeting their demographic.
Many ideas came to mind when I viewed the Microsoft advertisement. First, I agree with a post made by The Law who states that it is shocking that a company as powerful as Microsoft could make such a careless mistake. In other words, I believe that Microsoft purposely altered their advertisement to appeal to a different market. The article states that Poland is a predominately white nation, therefore, consumers in that area are more inclined to relate with people similar to them in any advertisement. As a marketing student, the business approach Microsoft made with this advertisement makes sense to me.
I don’t understand why this advertisement has caused so much controversy. Microsoft’s goal just like any business is to maximize profit. Keeping that in mind, Microsoft knowingly modified the ad seen in the article to distribute among several demographics. It doesn’t make any sense to accuse Microsoft of being racist. The original advertisement that was shown in the United States pictured the black man with no revisions. The title of Professor Richard’s post raises the question whether Microsoft has shown blatant racism or political correctness in their advertisement. If Microsoft was blatantly racist against black people then they would never use black people in any of their advertisements. However, this is not the issue surrounding this ad. The advertisement without the editing of the black man was created to be used in certain markets. As for other markets, the ad with the black man doesn’t appeal as much. As Professor Richards said in his post, there are areas within the United States that have high populations of different races. He used Miami as an example, which has a high Hispanic population.
Although I don’t see an issue with the approach of Microsoft’s controversial ad, I don’t necessarily agree with the way they went about it. Everyone knows that Microsoft is one of the wealthiest corporations in the entire world. With that said, I think a company with so much money should create completely different ads to distribute to the different parts of the world. It is unclear to me why a company as powerful as Microsoft would literally crop a person’s face from one ad and substitute someone else’s face in the same ad. This makes Microsoft look lethargic and brainless. I think had the company created an entirely different ad to use in Poland it would have been much more difficult for people to create any debate as to whether Microsoft is a racist company.
Although I think Microsoft purposely altered their ad to relate more to Polish people by replacing the black man’s face, I do believe that not changing the man’s hand was just plain lazy. I believe that was done accidentally. It doesn’t make sense to me how a person with a white face and a black hand represents a harmonious connotation. If Microsoft was trying to create that perception they would add more people of different races in the ad.
Microsoft if a company out to make money and the only way they can make money is if people buy their products. It would only make sense that a company would direct their ad campaigns according to what people would like to look at to keep the consumers interest. I feel that Microsoft is not being racist and is only looking to appeal to people and make money.
The media could look at other campaign ads and say that what they are doing is being racist. Pretty much every magazine or photographer does airbrushing to the final pictures whether it be a cover of a magazine or a billboard. A model may be heavy looking and the photographer would want her to look skinnier so he would change the picture around and airbrush her stomach. We don’t hear the media making such a big deal about that do us?
Another way to view this incident is perhaps Microsoft planned this the whole time for media attention. They may have thought this would have made a good publicity stunt to get more controversy which would lead to more attention. If this is true how come they didn’t change the Asian man’s head instead of the black man’s? Well most people relate to black and white racism and that may lead to more attention from the people. This may have caused some negative attention towards Microsoft but as people say in Hollywood any attention whether it is good or bad is good as long as they are talking about you.
However, what Microsoft should have done was a survey to see if their sales would drop if they used a black man’s face in the campaign. How would they know if the Polish people would react negatively if they used a black man? The thing is they probably didn’t know and did not want to take the risk and have their sales drop. That’s the magic of photo shop. You can have the same ad and manipulate it towards the society you are trying to pursue to buy your products. But, the one mistake that Microsoft made was not double checking to see if the whole body was photo shopped. If they had went over it one more time they could have not had all the accusations that their company is racist.
Lastly, Microsoft is usually not responsible for their ads as a whole. They have creative directors making the decisions on what is needed in the campaign to sell more products. If the finger is to be pointed at someone for being racist it should be toward the person who created the advertisement. However, the reason they most likely changed the face around was to be more appealing to the people.
Let’s face it… wouldn’t you rather look at something that looks like you?
After reading about this Microsoft photo, I was kind of surprised that this received so much criticism. Being a business major, I’m fully aware that different parts of the U.S. and the world get different advertisements that fit the needs of that specific region. In my opinion the main reason that this is getting so much attention is the White-Black aspect of it. Microsoft, a giant in the software market, probably knew exactly what was going on when they printed this ad and from a business viewpoint, they probably thought it was a great idea. On the other hand, from a social ethical standpoint, it doesn’t seem to be a good one. My question is why? Why do people in the U.S. care for an ad that will not appear the same way on our soil? This type of thing turns into controversy because people feel the need to express their opinions. The fact that race is the main point of this argument makes people go nuts. Capone makes a great point when he/she says that Tommy Hilfiger and FUBU are geared toward white people and black people respectively, but once in a while you will see black people wearing Tommy and white people wearing FUBU. Although it is not entirely the same, the idea stays at the forefront.
Microsoft, in its own way, thought it would be better for its company to feature a white person in their Polish ad rather than a black person. The only argument I have with what they did in the Polish ad was they obviously just photo shopped a white man’s face onto the black man’s body, not even changing the color of the hands from black to white. A company with that much money and probably a lot of interests on the line should take much more care of how they market their advertisements. How hard would it be to take a picture of a white person in the same pose as the black person in the ad and crop that white person into the picture? It kind of boggles my mind that Microsoft would take such little care with one of their advertisements.
Still A Mets Fan also makes a great point. Those who are going to try and argue that Microsoft was trying to please both races by featuring a white man’s face on a black person’s body are just plain dumb. You’re more inclined to think that Microsoft was trying to feature a mutant alien rather than have a person who is split between the colors of white and black. People need to understand the world and culture around them. The fact of the matter is Microsoft chose to put a white man’s face instead of a black man’s face in the Polish market. The Polish market, which is predominately white, most likely received the ad more warmly with that white person in the ad, which shouldn’t be the case but that’s a whole different argument. At the end of the day, Microsoft did what they did and apologized. That should be the end.
When I first read this blog, I had extremely mixed feelings. I had to sit back for a moment and go over numerous factors in my head. I came in to Penn State as a journalism and communications major and although that has since changed, I still carry some of those ideas in my head. First of all, I understand completely if Microsoft wanted to appeal to a certain audience or target market but that should have been realized in the BEGINNING; it should not have been done the way it was and the advertisement most definitely should not have been altered in the way it was. In any business situation, the marketing tactics must be altered to appeal to their ideal audience at the time being. Microsoft has every right not to put a certain race in their advertisement or to use only a certain race and by no means do I think that this makes them racist. Because they were directing their product towards the Polish demographic, it makes complete sense that they would want a largely white population represented in their advertising, in the same way that if they were marketing to Tokyo, they would want a largely Japanese demographic portrayed. It makes the most sense and would be in the company’s best interest to do so. From a former communications student’s standpoint, effective advertising = more money and why wouldn’t a company want more money? And from a completely neutral standpoint, I also would feel the same. If you want to be successful you must charm the demographic around you and you must make adjustments to your normal ways. I feel that my previous statement applies to many situations in the business field also. You want to appeal to your boss? You won’t “give them lip,” or act the way you do in front of your friends, would you?
On the other hand, I do not agree with the way Microsoft went about the alterations after THEIR mistake was realized. I understand that mistakes are made but when they do occur, the persons at fault must accept it as their responsibility and not try to make everything better and sugarcoat it. When that occurs as it did in this case, it will most likely upset more people and cause more drama than is necessary. By just pasting a black man’s face on to the white mans, Microsoft was inconsiderate. They are now facing the repercussions from more outsiders and being called racist by numerous individuals. In my opinion, they are not at all racist, they just made a mistake that I am sure will never be made by the company again and they have hopefully learned their lesson.
I’ve taken business and advertising classes before, and let’s face it, we all know that ads are manipulative and try to target certain people. However, this is no reason to completely shut the door on letting people of other demographics into your ad. In my opinion, this would only help increase the company’s popularity by showing diversity. The one thing that bothers me the most about this ad is the fact that Microsoft completely failed to look into its targeted demographic to begin with. If they knew this was for a Polish add, in a country with mostly all white people, then they should have taken that into consideration before hand. I’m not sure if replacing the black man was done out of racism, or if it was just pure ignorance and stupidity. In my opinon though, taking other facts into consideration, it does seem at least a little racist. Sure, maybe the people who made this decision didn’t think of it that way, but to people looking at the larger picture, it certainly comes off that way. The facts that I took into consideration to get to this conclusion are these. Why, out of all three people, did they decide to replace the black man? What about the Asian guy sitting next to him? If they wanted this ad to be directed towards the Polish majority of white people, why didn’t they just have all three people in this ad be white? I think this whole situation really just makes Microsoft look dumb. For one thing, the people that came up with the idea of changing the concept just because a black man was in the picture should be demoted, if not fired. Do they really think that having a black man in the picture will hurt their sales? If that’s the case, then Poland has more racial issues than America. I honestly don’t even know that many people who base ads as their decision maker on whether or not to buy a product. The only times ads are really that effective is when one company makes so many of them that you can’t help to know their name over all the other guys. Microsoft is absolutely one of those companies that everyone knows about and will buy, regardless of who or what they have in their ads. For them to think that having a black man in their ad would hurt their sales is just foolish. I bet if they knew this story would come out, they would seriously re-think their decision.
P.S- I know this has nothing to do with race, but why do they need a white MAN in this picture? Is it really such a terrible thing to have a white woman in an ad without a white man in there with her? Come on, I feel like we’re back in the 1950s.
This whole ordeal is a very interesting, especially since I am involved in an advertising class right now. We have learned so far that you have to appeal to your target market, so it leads me to question, was Microsoft wrong in doing this or were they trying to please the target audience? I feel as if Microsoft needed to more careful in their decision by adding a white man’s head, while leaving the black man’s hand for everyone to see. In other words don’t do something half-ass. Overall I think it was a poor decision on Microsoft’s part, but I can’t say that it was racism. I really don’t think that many polish people would have taken offense that a black man is in an advertisement. I think, if anything, they would have noticed it a lot more since polish people do not typically see black people. Therefore, if polish people are taking note to it, then it is more publicity for Microsoft. I think it was foolish for them to change the race of the man in the image. I understand your point about how in the United States a black man is more likely to be put into an advertisement, and the white man to be taken out. It may have been a good idea to have a black woman and a white man, or vice-versa. I personally do not really take note to the race of a person in an advertisement, unless the advertisement is really unique. The issue about the buses in certain cities throughout the United States is not a race issue for me. I feel as if the advertisement is appealing to the most popular race in that certain city, and that is not a problem. I think the main problem with Microsoft is that they made a stupid error by leaving the hands black! It would definitely be pointless having a straight couple in the LGBT magazine, but I think sexuality and race are two separate entities. For instance it would be stupid to have young twenty year olds in an AARP magazine, or the cover of a NAACP flyer to be all white people. The Microsoft image may represent corporate culture, but would that then lead to saying that black people are not typically found in corporate culture? That becomes a much more heated debate, and I don’t think Microsoft was aiming for that at all. I think Microsoft was trying to please their audience, and did not fulfill it in a professional way. In conclusion I think Microsoft made a dumb mistake, but I don’t think it should be interpreted as a race issue. I think it could have been a better chance of being considered a race issue if they changed if from a black man to a white man and the advertisement appeared all over the world. I just recommend that other large corporations be much more careful than Microsoft was when advertising.
I have to disagree with the person who posted before me and argue that Microsoft did not make a “mistake” in changing the head from black to white. This picture seems incredibly deliberate and planned. How does one just “accidentally” photo shop a different head onto the same body. Exactly - you don’t. Rather, I venture to say that this was a poor ethical decision made by the Microsoft advertising team. Perhaps they thought that by placing the ad in Poland it would avoid scrutiny, but being a computer company and all, they should know that news, stories and especially images travel fast – through the COMPUTER.
I understand that organizations and companies around the world perform stunts such as the one that Microsoft did in order to appeal to the public’s they are trying to reach. However, while companies attempt to please their target audiences by making the decision to alter an image, the consequences of doing so need to be seriously considered. The advertising team needs to discuss “if we make the decision to change a head of a black man to a white man, who will this affect? Will our company benefit from this change? Will the reputation of our profession be in danger?” It appears as if Microsoft did not think of these aspects while editing their advertisement.
Microsoft may claim to not be racist, yet I can’t help but wonder how come they actually changed the photo. They may claim it to be marketing technique, but by trying to market a more “white” audience are they sending the message that the “black” audience does not fall under the category of people who use Microsoft? Or are they implying that the use of a black person would reduce the sales of their product? Whatever they intended, they are sure sending out the wrong message because I cannot possibly think of a reason why, morally or ethically anyone would change this. To answer the question then, yes I do find it racist; regardless of the fact that people argue the lack of colored people in Poland. That would be like the United States changing the Atlanta Braves to the Atlanta Bunnies because we really do not have Brave Indians. The Microsoft public relations practitioner and advertising representatives are certainly under a lot of pressure right now because this change just seems completely absurd and unnecessary.
As I have seen in a previous post, Microsoft has so much money I do not understand why they did not reshoot the ad. I think that the mere fact that the image was completely photo shopped is what shocked viewers the most. Is Microsoft that lazy that they have someone simply photo shop an image rather than do the whole shoot again? These are questions I do not know. This whole situation just seems completely bizarre and completely avoidable. Microsoft made a really bad, unethical choice and I think they deserve the repercussions they are receiving.
Well first of all, it is obvious that Mircrosoft made a very large and embarrassing mistake. Someone would eventually pick up on the photo-shop. I don’t know if I would call it racism, but it is definitely some type of discrimination. I don’t think its racism because they aren’t trying to make the African American society inferior to whites. It seems like they are doing in a marketing point of view. Since there aren’t many blacks in Poland, why have a black guy in the ad? But the way they went about it was a very stupid move. They were probably trying to save money, but they probably should have tried to get eastern Europeans for a whole new looking Mircrosoft ad. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. What I don’t get is how they did nothing about the Asian guy. They photo-shopped the black guy’s head, but did nothing to the Asian. Am I missing something? Are there a lot, or more Asians in Poland than I thought? I agree with The Magic Man in that if it was in the USA, a black man’s head would be replaced with a white man’s for the sake of corporate diversity. Also, what really makes me angry is that they didn’t do anything about the guy’s hand. I bet you they forgot to crop it out, because there is no reason to have that huge mistake. That’s the reason this whole this is a controversy began because the black guy’s hand and the white guys face is a dead giveaway. In the actual article it says that one blogger said how the white face and black hand represent “interracial harmony” and that “someone can be white and black, old and young at the same time.” There’s only one word to describe that blogger’s thought…..bullshit. Microsoft obviously FORGOT to change the hands. How hard is it to understand? They were trying to make the picture attract its respective market and tried to save money, and did a horrible job at it. They should have just left it as it was, or made a whole new advertisement for the Polish people. I really don’t see what the big deal is either. Think about it, Microsoft is an American company that began in America by an American. I’m pretty sure black people live in America. So why do they have to change the people who represent the company? If I were to go on a company’s website, that was started in India, and I was at the main page saw a picture of a bunch of Indian guys or even one Indian guy, that’s what I would expect. I wouldn’t be appalled or turned away because of that. The guy is black, he lives in America, and works for an American firm, keep him in the damn picture. This whole situation could have easily been avoided.
Oh no Microsoft! Seriously they had to know what ‘can of worms’ they were creating for themselves when they decided to use photoshop to save some money in advertising . Honestly, I believe that Microsoft was trying to market their products to their specific target customer, (that’s a key element to marketing isn’t it?) but they definitely could have done it in a better way. In my opinion, Microsoft did a really sloppy job of changing the ad, how could they change the black man’s face to a white man’s face but leave his hands black. This gave me the impression that an executive realized that the Polish market is too white and set in their ways to want to buy a product where a black man is featured in an ad. Microsoft is full of smart men and women; someone must have thought the change would offend. I’m sure (at least I sure hope) the topic was raised before the ad was uploaded to the Polish website.
Second issue I instantly realized -- how much money does Microsoft have?! Yes times are tough and everyone is pinching pennies, no one is going to deny that, but when it comes to your company’s image right now is not the time you want to give potential customers a negative view. The money would have been well spent if Microsoft had just shot a new picture for the polish website if it meant keeping a positive relationship with their large American market.
I am also curious what people in Poland think about this ad photoshopping. Are they offended that Microsoft felt they had to take the black man from the ad before Microsoft would publish it in their country or did they agree that it was a wise decision to make the change. Do the Polish feel that they are being marked as a racist white society? If someone could answer this it would be amazing!
To sum it up, Microsoft made a mistake that they probably did not think was going to be a big deal. This just shows how the internet plays a vital role in businesses today. Now we can find out what is going on with advertising in another country, so companies have to be more conscious about contradictions they may make. I am not saying that companies have to have one universal marketing plan to apply to the whole world; that would just be a horrible business move. I think it was a stupid mistake and Microsoft will never make another one this simple. People should also not take the photoshop incident to serious and blow it out of proportion to be the next huge racist issue.
I do not believe that the alteration Microsoft made to their advertisement was wrong from a business perspective. I do not believe it had underlying racist meaning. When a company creates an advertisement, they do so by formulating a campaign that will best target the widest possible base of consumers. In America we are still recovering from our past racist mistakes and almost over exert ourselves to make sure that equality is present in all places, including advertisements. However in Poland, while they have also had their share of turmoil (the Holocaust?) racism is most likely not a priority for them since their country is not as multicultural as ours is. America has a need to promote diversity because we are often still so close minded about it. There is a White, an Asian, and a Black person in the advertisement for our country. Microsoft covered their bases so to speak. In 2005, the census in America showed that the top four races in the United States were White, African American (black), Asian, and Hispanic. They targeted the most consumers by including these three races, even by showing both genders. It also demonstrated diversity, so the advertisement was a win-win for the country.
In Poland, the majority of Microsoft’s customers are white and by changing the advertisement they are only trying to create the largest profit off of their services and products they possibly can. As Americans we look at this advertisement and immediately throw up our arms in anger because it is racist to assume that a black man couldn’t sell a computer as well as a white man could. I can see where people are coming from in saying that this change is wrong, but if the Asian man had been changed would their arguments be as forthcoming as they are now? I cannot honestly answer that with a definite answer, but I don’t believe they would have been because racism towards Asians is not as prominent as it is towards Blacks. It is only in a stereotypical fashion, such as laughing at the possible answer of engineers for the question about the most common major for Asian students. There was even a controversy with a L’Oreal Paris advertisement where Beyonce Knowles, spokesperson for the makeup company, looked to be lighter skinned in one advertisement versus another. The singer even stated there was no alteration but so many people were upset the advertisement was pulled. This is the same type of debate.
Overall what happened in America’s past is horrible and I am glad we are trying to make amends, however I believe sometimes people go too far as to the point of analyzing advertisements as to being racist or not. Is it strange a company doesn’t believe a Polish man won’t buy a Microsoft product if a black man is promoting it? Yes. However, I do not believe that their reason was racist, but rather as a determination to create the largest possible profit by targeting the normal consumer group, which happened to be white.
After reading this article, I have to say that this act does not surprise me at all. Microsoft photo shopping a picture for their advertisement to make it more appealing to the customers should not be considered a form of racism at all. Being an Advertising Major, one of the things I am taught is to learn how to appeal to different audiences while still selling a product. It is always important to always make sure you appeal to the majority. So, since Poland is a mostly white area with very few black people or others of a non- white orientation, I completely understand the reason to change the face of the black man to the face of a white man. Although, I do think instead of simply photo shopping the face of a white man onto the face of a black, Microsoft should have used a different model for the polish advertisement. But to claim that it was just a mistake and that they did not know who did the altering seems a little ridiculous to me. I doubt a company as large and successful as Microsoft would allow many people to have access to and publish their ads without some kind of consent.
However, I agree with the fact that if this had happened in the United States, many, many people would have taken much more offense to it. It seems that while many people of different races and minorities live in America, there are few groups that always seem to feel the need to be represented in the media. I one hundred percent agree with the statement that advertisements and television shows always seem to be required to have a female or a black person. Certain television shows have even been criticized for not having any characters of different racial backgrounds on them. I understand that because I am a white woman I have a different view on things, but is it not a form of racism to have requirements on putting people of color in an advertisement and not a quota on having enough white people in something as well? People today are so concerned with making everyone happy, and always trying to appeal to whoever is complaining. And the thought that the “corporate cultural” is the one pushing a man of color off of the table blows my mind. If anything, the “corporate culture” is the one that is trying to please people of all ethnicities and people of different racial backgrounds. But back to the original question, the issue of Microsoft being racist is completely ridiculous. While they made a mistake in trying to cover up their Polish advertisement, the company should not be judged for simply trying to apply to more customers.
When I first read this, I laughed. I don’t know if that makes me a bad person or not, but I laughed. Why would they go through the trouble of photo shopping a black man’s head out of a picture and replace it with a white man’s head. Are people in Poland offended by black people, or did they just think they could relate to it better because white people can relate to white people better? No, it’s dumb, especially just for advertising. They people were just sitting in an office looking happy? People shouldn’t be offended by someone just because of their skin color, especially white people. If they’re going to market something it shouldn’t matter what anyone looks like. Also, I think it’s a bunch of crap that they left the black hands in there to show “interracial harmony.” I think they just forgot to do it because they guys head doesn’t look right on the body anyway. He’s looking the wrong way, people’s necks don’t bend like that and his head is way too big for his body. So I think not photo shopping the hands was just a mistake. Now, I do understand that most people in Poland are white, so they would want to have a white person, which is still dumb, to maybe relate to them better. But I’m not really sure what the people are like over there. I’m not sure if whites have major problems with blacks, because if they do, I definitely understand why they made the black man white. It’s because they’re racist, but I don’t know if that’s the case. Another thing I didn’t know was did Microsoft pull the picture because people were complaining about it, or because it was obvious? They may have been all for this image for unknown reasons, but someone saw it and noticed that it was altered or they saw it and they were offended. If Microsoft got a bad image it would hurt them and they wouldn’t sell as much. But I definitely think that they were not trying to harmonize the black and white communities by making a guy have black hands and a white head. To be completely honest, when I look at the picture again, it doesn’t even look like the black guys head belongs on that body. It looks too big and weird. That might have been an even darker skin black man who they felt the need to change for America, and then they changed it again for Poland because Poland is even more racist than America is. That might be a little far out there but that guy’s head doesn’t look like it belongs in the picture. But there are still plenty of people out there who are racist and by photo shopping this picture proves it.
I think that the advertising ploy of switching a black guy to a white guy was a very poor decision for such a prestigious company like Microsoft. Yes, it makes sense that Poland is predominantly white, but does having a black person using a Microsoft product in an advertisement change your image of the company? Apparently Microsoft felt that a black man did not “fit” well in the Polish advertising scheme, but as a customer why should it make a difference? When I see a Microsoft advertisement for one of their products I think about the product rather than whom it is being used by (black, white, yellow, or brown person). Microsoft is a global company, it is reliable, and everyone knows that people all over the world are using its products. To me it makes more sense to have a marketing scheme that displays people of all different races using their products.
The fact that Microsoft left the hands black is mind-boggling. This is Microsoft we are talking about here, one of the biggest/ most successful companies in the world. I mean if you are going to be racist by switching the head of a black man to a white man it would be best to keep it a secret. The fact that they did it hastily without realizing the hands were black makes the issue even worse. One of the reasons is because the black hands displays obvious evidence of the organizations racism (wiping out any disbeliefs) and two it makes the organization look a lot less professional to the media. In today’s world, news travels very fast from very long distances. With programs like twitter and facebook it is tough for companies to keep things like this low profile, that is why large companies need to be more on top of issues similar to this. I don’t understand how they (Microsoft) thought that they could keep this away from the public. From a customer’s perspective it makes no sense to invest money in a company that has unethical traits or experiences. Who ever is in charge of this advertisement should be fired immediately! Besides making a mockery of themselves they are making a mockery of the entire company.
Whether they (Microsoft) were racist or just believed it was a better marketing scheme to pull this kind of “stunt”, this article will only bring negativity to the company. If I were black I would be upset with Microsoft after reading this article. I mean why would I want to support a company who took someone out of an advertisement because they were the same skin color as me? To many people Microsoft will now be looked down to as a racist organization. I definitely think this will hurt Microsoft’s sales. Who knows, now, people may be more inclined to buy Mac’s.
It makes perfect sense to me from an advertising standpoint to modify ads to appeal to a certain area. It’s not just overseas this happens. Every time you are checking out of a retail store and they ask for your area code or phone number it’s for the advertising people in the company. Once the cashier punches in those numbers, the data automatically gets sent to become evaluated as to who buys what from where. Different area codes or zip codes can indicate certain statistics about an area and marketers use this information to create a bigger bang for their budget bucks. So, if we laugh at the situation we think is only happening overseas or across the country, we are hypocritical because we have all contributed to the same kind of statistic. I come from a very diverse neighborhood, but every advertisement I see is generally geared toward the white population. Maybe it is because I am apart of that population that I just don’t pay attention or recognize the advertisements that are not intended to catch my eye.
The fact that they didn’t change the man’s hands was probably intentional. In a three second shot a viewer won’t notice that the skin shade of the man’s hand don’t match that of his face. (If it was a darker skinned man in the original, they might have noticed it in the short period of time.) Once the shot was frozen, it seems someone pawed through every last detail in order to make sure it sounded worst than it looked. Not changing the hand color saved money in editing.
I am almost annoyed with myself for defending the innocence of this modification. Sure, it’s a marketing move, but the underlying message is that someone thought that a body of people wouldn’t purchase something because of the skin color of the person advertising it. And someone else believed them. And the worst part is, it’s probably true. So why is it that we are comfortable only in our skin? As anti-racist as I think I am, there is definitely some hesitation when things get down to it. I subconsciously feel that if I’m with a group of white people, I’m in a more controlled environment. White people are easily predictable to me. Whereas if I’m with a mixed group, I feel like I’m not quite in control of my situation and it scares me a bit. But that’s no reason for me to stop hanging around diverse people. In fact, it’s more of a reason because I have something to work on.
All in all, it’s just like having Vanessa Hudgens with her clear as day skin advertising for Neutrogena’s latest face wash. Microsoft picked a guy that was good for the part. And then when the demographic changed, they changed their pick. I would be interested to see how the sales would have been affected had the switch not been made.
When I first read this article, I wasn’t really that surprised by the color switcheroo. One of the main purposes of our multi-billion dollar advertising industry is to compile demographic statistics and create slogans, advertisements and television commercials to appeal to those demographics. Because this advertisement was slated to run in Poland, which as Sam said is predominantly white, it makes sense to direct the advertisement towards white people. It’s completely possible that having a black guy in an ad in Poland would negatively affect their sales, I really don’t know much about Polish people, so for all I know anti-black sentiment could be running rampant. In my town the only non-whites are people who clean houses, cut lawns, and nanny, so I know for a fact that an advertisement featuring minorities would alarm the openly racist whiteys in the quaint community of Cold Spring Harbor. A class mom once told a frightful story about seeing a black man walking down the street, she promptly called the cops, I somehow don’t think an ad featuring a colorful selection of people would really appeal to her.
Americans, and American imports in particular are all too fast to take offense to things, obese people are mad when they have to buy an extra plane ticket to make sure their arm rolls don’t squish the person next to them, Jews were up-in-arms about a Family Guy episode featuring a Jewish accountant, Chinese people get angry when people assume they subscribe to the Suzuki method, and doctors get mad when they’re considered pompous. It is completely ridiculous. This ad does what all ads do, advertises to its specific market. I honestly think if it was the other way around, if a white guy was replaced by a black guy, way more people would be up in arms. The religious right would be having a field day. It would be even more of an issue if a white guy was replaced by say, a Mexican, since soon enough whites are going to be the minority in America. The issue here isn’t really that a black guy was replaced by a white guy; the issue is that I have enough thoughts and time, that a class of four hundred people has enough thoughts and time, to write four-hundred and fifty words about it. Don’t we have more important things to worry about? Maybe the genocide in Darfur? Perhaps the excessive amount of power given to shmucks like Bill O’Reilly and Carl Rove? Perhaps the blatant civil rights violations going on in our military prisons all over the world? Even if we were using this to analyze the relations between black people and white people in our country, I think it’s a little hasty to say that an ad created by pasty white men in ill fitting suits is a tell-all about racism in America.
It is surprising to observe how companies respond when they receive flack for a decision they made that not everyone sees as proper social etiquette. But it is not surprising to see how companies alter ads to ultimately hit their target audience and eventually make a profit. There is no way Microsoft did not know there would be changes to the ad that ran in Poland. Someone had to sign off on this before it was changed and printed. Companies spend millions of dollars and endless amounts of time researching their target customers. Microsoft’s research probably led them to the fact that Poland customers are mostly white therefore they would be more likely to relate and be willing to buy a product with white people in it than black. It was probably a mistake that was not caught onto that just the head was photo shopped in, but the hand remained the same. Or the creators didn’t think the customers in Poland would notice that the white man had a black hand. Regardless if Microsoft knew or didn’t know I don’t think it was to create “interrational harmony” or please everyone by having a white mans head on a black mans hand. I don’t think this is racist because I think they would have photo shopped a white man for the Asian man on the left side or they would have run the ad the way they were running it in Poland in the United States. What also makes me think is that the people that were working on this ad probably were not all white; I wonder what their input was in changing the ad probably a positive one to change it or else it would have remained the same. What I find offensive about the ad is that Microsoft didn’t reshoot the ad or recreate an entirely new ad instead they merely photo shopped a white mans face. Microsoft is a huge corporation they have the money and power to reshoot the ad I think they were trying to save money and time by simply photo shopping and it backfired on them because the public did not take this so well. I agree that the United States in very cautious about selecting every race and gender in advertisements to appeal to the majority of people because they are their target audience. But other countries are not as diverse as ours so why should they feel the need to please everyone in the world if that’s not their consumer? The word racist is a very strong word that is used often so the significance of the word as decreased. No one wants to be called a racist so people are very considerate to do everything in their power to appease everyone. Do I think Microsoft is being racist? No. Do I think they could have done a better job with their advertising? Yes.
Wow this is too good to be true. A top notch company like Microsoft would screwed up this bad. Although I don’t know much on the advertisement side, I can speak for the consumer side. Okay, let’s be honest here. Although I’m not a racist person (or at least I hope not), ads that have a variety of races (especially mine) are more appealing to me. I don’t think that any of us would purposely look for advertisements with our own race in it and only buy those products. However, I do think that some of us (myself included) subconsciously do it.
I think that even though people do not admit this, most of us know that there are invisible barriers between different races. If there are no barriers then why do people get offended when their race is mention is a negative way? If there are no barriers then people would all be the same and there would not be any controversial issues about races. I always get a good laugh when people said that they are not discriminative or racist in anyway but then get really heated when their races are put down in a condescending way. The bottom line is that the situation will not be fixing if people do not admit to the fact that all of us are born with a little bit of a racist mentality.
Back to the ad situation, I am really surprise that Microsoft did not take the time to just look at the picture before publishing it. I think that this is just a careless act on the company’s part and really have nothing to do with any racial issues. Microsoft has different ways of advertising to different types of people and I don’t have anything against that. However, I do think that the black guy in the ad should be offended, not because of the race issue, but because they covered up his face. Microsoft totally made the wrong move of fixing up this picture; they should off just take another photo.
Overall, I really think that this is just the typical “another ad gone badly” sort of ordeal. I think that people chose to be offended; thus, making this little incident seems greater than what it really is. I’m not on the Microsoft team or anything but I do think that it was an honest mistake and should not be blown out of proportion.
I feel that there are some racism in this whole article is that black man’s head was replaced a white guy head. This is one of the biggest mistake that public should be aware of and need to really careful with what they have on TV commercials because I’m really sure none of us will realize that was the black guy head’s that got replaced by a white guy head. The picture isn’t a very clear and it’s small. The first picture with the black man head we can tell it’s a real picture of him but the second with the white guy head we also can tell it’s a photo shoot. I think that there will be more conflicts if the white guy got replaced by an African American guy because they will think that as a white person they have more rights in general than an African American guy. One of the reason why they replaced the head from black to white because they think they will get a lot of attention from the consumers by doing this Ads, like a quote “There’s nothing to lose but always to gain” but that’s not always true. Race is not just about being white and you are more capable of doing things but also they need to respect black people because they are also part of our community even though, back then they were slaves. At the same time I found that this is interesting that it is such as a shamed on whoever changed the black guy to a white guy and also they might just trying to get more attentions from people so they can make money from this Ads. In the article it said “The white head and black hand actually symbolize interracial harmony. It is supposed to show that a person can be white and black, old and young at the same time, “said one blogger on the Photoshop Disasters blog.” This argument actually is not strong to support this Ads by being young and old at the same time with 2 different people black and white so Is this a way of making more money by just switch from person to another person ? I feel that is sick in way of thinking about technology nowadays people just can do anything with it so I think they should do 2 different commercials and actually this will be one of the most significant things to achieve later on with whatever the consumers looking for to purchase and get more attention from them. The purpose of this article totally can be very politics and the company is surely can make this product more supportive to the white man. I hope that next time they won’t come up with something like this ever again.
When I first read the article “Microsoft in a web of photo racism row” on BBC.com I was completely shocked! I was shocked that such an influential and successful company, such as Microsoft, could make such an obvious and careless mistake in one of their advertisement. It is very rare that a company of this size and magnitude could have missed such a simple and careless mistake in their Polish ad campaign. Their careless mistake with this advertisement has now caused a backlash from viewers and customers. The first concern I have with this simple mistake- Does Microsoft consider only lighter races to be their target audiences? Although, Internet bloggers are supplying positive or negative press for this incident I can only see this as a negative incident. I do not believe Microsoft would make this change to show “the white head and black hands actually symbolize interracial harmony. Its supposed to show that a person can be white and black, old and young at the same time”, as one blogger posted. It was just a major error on Microsoft’s part. I believe Microsoft was taking into account their Polish demographics but the company had failed execute their ad campaign correctly. By choosing to replace a black man with a white man, Microsoft is sending the message that they only target white men. Which was the target they were aiming for in Poland but by having this careless mistake surface in their advertisement they managed to isolate their product from a larger target audiences that includes black men and women. Just because Microsoft may be targeting a predominantly white target audience does not mean they should ostracize all other races from being displayed in their advertisements. In today’s world, the media targets and includes all types of races and why a company would choose to only target a single race is puzzling to me. To me, it then seems as if the product is aimed towards a niche market and is not for everyone, which limits Microsoft’s profits. After all, Microsoft’s purpose is to sell products. Also, I am confused why Microsoft’s marketing and advertising teams would choose to replace a black businessman with a white businessman? Did their marketing and advertising teams believe a single black man in Microsoft’s advertisement would negatively affect their revenues so drastically that they should have him replaced with a white man? Even if the marketing and advertising teams believed the black man would have harsh implications on their sales, why wouldn’t they take the time and effort to display the correct the Microsoft advertisement? After all the millions and millions of dollars Microsoft spends on advertisements, you would think they would hire an advertisement company that would pay attention to detail and deliver them great advertisements, not advertisements that raise the question, is the company racist?
After reading some of the articles and responses to the blog about this advertisement from Microsoft, I still sort of don’t know how I feel about it. Obviously a business needs to direct its advertisements towards the market it is selling its product to. I don’t understand why people are so bent out of shape about the fact that a company changed its advertisement in a way it thought would maximize its appeal to a group of consumers. It’s an advertising technique used by all companies, not only with regards to race, but you’re not going to sell a little girls dollhouse with middle-aged male models. Whether its conscious or not, people definitely look for advertisements that they can relate with, because of the comfort it brings them or because they can picture themselves in the same situation or whatever reason. Poland is an overwhelmingly white population so why would they keep a black mans picture in the advertisement. On the other hand, Microsoft is no small company and it did a pretty poor job of editing. They could have easily avoided such an uproar by taking a second look at the picture and it’s really surprising that someone along the line, in a company with the budgets and personnel that Microsoft surely has, didn’t pick up on the discrepancy.
Although, I don’t really understand why everyone is so upset that they did a poor photoshop job when it would seem like the real issue would be that they photoshopped at all. It seems silly that people are so concerned that the white man has black hands instead of the fact that Microsoft felt the need to edit the ad. Would the problem really have gone away if the color of the hands matched that of the face? I know people are talking about both, but so much of the focus seems to be in the wrong place.
The thing about THON is actually something I have discussed with my friends and I don’t understand the problem actually. Its not like anyone is excluded from THON. Organizations have the same opportunity to participate, its up to them to actually be involved with it. And Hershey Medical Center offers help to all families through the Four Diamonds fund so its not like they’re turning people away just because of the color of they’re skin. Why is it my responsibility, or anyone else’s, to specifically target other groups to participate in such a large, publicized event at Penn State? If certain groups feel like they are being underrepresented then they should take the initiative to become involved. There are so many individual and group ways to be involved in THON that I don’t feel it should be on me to get you involved.
At first, when read about what Microsoft did, I was shocked! How can a global company change its advertisements from one country to another and think it’s morally acceptable? Microsoft is an American company, meaning that Microsoft is supposed to have and promote equality among its employees and customers and be appealing to everyone. That is the American way to treat people in its society. But when I really thought about it, although an American company, Microsoft is known worldwide, which means it advertises its products in several different countries and cultures.
I think it is completely understandable for Microsoft to alternate a photo that has a black man in one country to have a white man in the same photo in another country. Although it is taboo in America to talk about the difference between black and white people, (and clearly there are differences and there is still segregation, but in a level where it’s not forced but preferred by each race to just have relations with their own people), most countries in the world still have social forced and/or accepted segregation between races.
Some people think this is an outrage because we are in the twenty-first century and society, (mostly in developed or first world countries), has come such a long way when it comes to the matter of race, but there are still countries where it is not socially acceptable for whites and blacks to mix or even men and woman to mix, so my question is: What if Microsoft was trying to sell a product in a country where women are not allowed to be in the workforce? Would the woman in that same photo been covered over with the head of a man for social acceptable reasons in that country? Absolutely! And is that much different then what Microsoft did with the photo of the black guy in its advertisement in Poland? I don’t think so.
I think Microsoft is smart. It knows its target consumers in different countries and clearly did its homework on what would be more appealing to the customers in Poland. I fully support Microsoft’s decision to alter the photo and I don’t think Microsoft should be punished for it because it was just doing the right marketing for that country. If photos need to be altered to be more socially acceptable, then be it. Even if that means not acting in an acceptable way in one country, but is still pleasing the people in another country. It’s a dog eat dog world out there and if Microsoft tries to please everyone in the world, it will fail. Different countries have different beliefs, laws and social acceptances. Microsoft is just doing what it needs to do to keep competitive in Poland, that’s all.
Microsoft has a product and the way to sell a product is through advertisement. The point of advertisement is to attract a particular audience to the product. Whether this product is designed for children, pet owners, hunters, women, or jugglers, the advertisement is going to connect with the consumer. Take for example hair dye. You will never see a bald person using a hair dye product in a magazine advertisement. Why? Simply because anyone interested in a hair dye product cannot connect on a direct level with a bald person when it comes to their hair. If we replaced the bald person with a full head of hair, we would understand. Also and more importantly, bald people would understand as well. They would not feel like they were being discriminated against.
The flat-out bad edit job is very obvious and I would imagine there would be angered people from it; however, if they stepped back to look at the whole picture, they would understand that it wasn’t a stab at their race. Polish people are dominantly white. In order for them to connect to the product being advertised, the people in the picture should look like one of them. It’s been studied for many years that people can connect faster with people who have the similar features as themselves rather than someone of another race or ethnicity. In the very first instances of meeting someone new, the human brain tries to categorize the person in order to retain memory and understanding of this new information being streamed in. The brain analyzes the visual presence with past stored information to create an outline of the person standing in front of you (regardless of how accurate it might be). For example, if I saw a tall, muscular young man wearing athletic shorts and carrying a gym bag, I might assume he plays sports because past experiences call me to this conclusion. When you encounter someone different than you, your brain doesn’t have as much information to process from past experience to create a reasonable outline for this person; thus, making it much more difficult to find similarities and a deeper connection to the person.
Using a white man instead of a black man in the advertisement is not a race issue, but rather about making as much money as possible. People don’t realize how little details in marketing can affect the consumer. Using beautiful people in ads have been known to increase sales. And why shouldn’t they? If I saw a pretty girl with the perfect body eating a hamburger, I wouldn’t think twice about ordering up for cheeseburger number two or three. The woman in the advertisement still has a skinny body, why shouldn’t I after I consume the same product? It comes down to connecting to the audience on a subconscious level only for a few seconds at that moment. If everyone could stand analyzing a billboard with someone of another race for ten minutes and could come to the conclusion that the man of another race could also represent themselves we wouldn’t have a problem. However, no one has this much time and energy to waste thinking about an advertisement, so companies do what works.
I personally am surprised that a corporation like Microsoft would let something like this slip by. Such a mistake should be caught before that happens. This will also be a very hard situation to fix. Replacing a black man’s head with a white man’s head is going to become a situation of racism whether or not that is what they meant by it. I see how this could have been a marketing change for an advertisement but if they truly wanted this change for the reason they are saying, they should have just taken a different picture with different people in it.
I also read the BCC article. I think the views from the bloggers are a little off. Someone from Microsoft made a mistake and are hopefully sorry for the mistake they made. I do not believe Microsoft was trying the “symbolize interracial harmony”. That is a nice thought but if they were trying to accomplish that, they could have done it in different ways. I do agree with the end of the article which says that the ethnic make-up of the Polish community had something to do with changing the man’s face. That is not saying that I agree with what happened but I get where they were going with it. It should not be taken as a personal matter but it is such a sticky situation, that it is going to be taken personally.
I do not believe that companies change their appeal to be racist in any way. It is simply for advertisement and what is going to appeal to the most people where the advertising is being done. However, the truth of it is, is that some cases might turn out to seem racist. This is where Microsoft should have seen their mistake and changed it before it happened.
I am also not sure if the changing of the picture would have really made that big of a difference. I feel like we are in a world now where people aren’t as sheltered as the used to be. I know the United States is very much like a melting pot but I also know people aren’t as naïve as they used to be. I know that making the people in the advertisement the same as the target population and target audience is a marketing tool but I also think diversity should be added.
What it comes down to in the end are people are too worried about stepping on someone’s toes that they end up doing exactly that in the end. In my opinion, race is as real as we are going to make it. And it will also be as big a deal as we are going to make it. The picture should have stayed as-is or a different picture should have been taken.
It’s unfortunate that Microsoft is even in this situation because it’s due to careless advertising. If the team of advertisers had taken the time to completely alter the image by changing the hands to white then this problem could have been avoided. As a result, they have gotten themselves in trouble with the public and the media. The negative effects of this image paint Microsoft as a racist company but I don’t believe that is their intent at all. Poland is a predominantly white country so the advertisement was directed for the correct audience the only mistake was they neglected to change the color of the hands. The marketing strategy was correct and its unfortunate Microsoft is going to take heat for this because it’s an effective strategy to market ads to the consumers. In America, this would have been so far blown out of proportion we’re lucky they made the mistake in Poland. Regardless, the man or woman who made the mistake should be dealt with accordingly. Any time advertisements are designed the team working on them is always focusing on how they can direct the ad towards the intended audience. That means that in Poland where the majority of businessmen are white, Microsoft would be smart to include a conference table surrounded with white people. In the United States, Microsoft would have had a table filled with women, black, white, Asian and everything in between. This kind of advertising would not be tolerated in the United States but globally the expectations around race and ethical issues are much different. Microsoft obviously intended no harm by doing this just some advertiser made a stupid mistake that may cost them their job. It is unfortunate that we still have to deal with racism around the world but I do not blame Microsoft for trying to target a white audience, which would result in financial gains. It’s an easy business decision. The blogger from the BBC that said the white head and black body was intended to show interracial harmony and diversity is absolutely ridiculous. It’s absurd to think that anyone could find that to be a rational strategy because it’s a simple mistake that was overlooked. The original advertisement was perfect and it’s a shame that they would even consider having to photo shop it. A picture containing a white woman and a black and Asian man is perfect for showing diversity so it makes no sense to try and encompass three different races in one person when you can do picture three different races with three different people.
An advertiser made a simple mistake that ended up creating much unwanted attention for Microsoft. It’s too bad because no harm was intended, someone just overlooked the advertisement and it ended up giving the media something to stir about. Microsoft would make the exact same decision for the ad again but I don’t think they would be so sloppy.
After reading the article and accompanied photo of the Microsoft racism scandal, I was first and foremost shocked that the photo was even able to produced. With all of the technology available and the power of the Internet, I am not sure why Microsoft would place themselves in this situation. Being a notable company worldwide and its creator a global philanthropist who often addresses race issues, I find myself questioning how they thought no one would notice this poorly reproduced ad and not speak up about it. I think that people are more outraged of how obvious the change is, failing to even match the black hands to the white head, more than its racist implications. Generally the ad is noticeably politically correct showing an Asian man, Woman , and a Black man, virtually shoving equality down our throats, and to me that is more of an insult than anything else. I am always confused as to why advertisements feel the need to tell consumers who uses their products; just because I only see a white or black person featured in an ad does not mean that I automatically believe that only that race or gender will buy the product or service. We all know that people of both genders and different races work in the corporate world, so why should it matter who is featured in the ad? I think that the fear of insulting people and making sure everyone is equally represented allows for unwise decisions, like this ad, to be made. I do not agree with the statement made by one blogger mentioned in the article claiming "The white head and black hand actually symbolize interracial harmony. It is supposed to show that a person can be white and black, old and young at the same time,” personally I think that made be reading a little too much into this issue. It was not an effort to unify and harmonize, it was a poor mistake on the part of Microsoft.
One of the major driving forces behind advertising is psychology, making sure that the product reaches the intended customer and the appeal that would be the most profitable for the company. In this sense there are times when the race and gender in the ad corresponds to the product, for example having a white male on the box of hair dye for women doesn’t really make much sense. However, the difference between this ad and the Microsoft ad is that the product is not gender or race based.
I understand that Poland is an overwhelmingly white country and why having an ad depicting a white male would be better for that demographic, but Microsoft, a billion dollar company, should have probably sprung for a new ad instead of the poor attempt to photoshop in a white head on a black mans body.
I don’t think Microsoft was trying to be racist in this case. If Microsoft was really trying to be racist, they wouldn’t have had that advertisement with an Asian and a Black man run on the U.S website to begin with. The fact that Microsoft did a terrible job editing the ad to target their Polish consumers is now understandably offensive because we all know that they photo shopped the black man out. If they just retook the picture and never had a black man in the photo to begin with, they would have never seemed racist. The company obviously just wanted to better target to its audience in Poland, so I guess after they did some market research about their audience there, they might have found the population of Poland to be mainly Caucasians. Yes there’s probably black people living in Poland, but maybe (and I don’t know any racial statistics of Poland’s population) the black population in Poland is very minimal. I think Microsoft was trying to direct their ad to what they found was the main audiences of Poland. Also, society and the community of whatever country an ad is running influences the advertisements in that country. Maybe in Poland, the advertisements like billboards, T.V ads/shows, magazines, newspapers, etc. all feature mainly white people and hardly and never any black people. If Microsoft found this to be true, they then would most likely think to run ads that feature all white people or minimal black people in Poland. Overall, I don’t believe Microsoft was trying to be racist in this case but in the end, it is easy to argue that this was a racist act. To argue how Microsoft was acting in a racist manner, they should want to diversify their advertisements with different races in order to attract all populations. Even if Poland doesn’t have many black people living in their country or if the black population is not widely accepted (who knows) Microsoft should still run their ad with a black man in order to show that the company accepts everyone. Also, how about for all the black people who live in Poland, how would they feel about this advertisement?
This topic is actually challenging to discuss. A country/region supporting or not supporting certain racial groups negatively influences the advertisements that run in that region heavily, however advertisements depicting certain types of people (like the Microsoft one) can negatively influence society too because it illustrates non-diversity. So, who is to blame? Marketers and advertisers need to find the perfect campaigns to run in certain places, for examples, compare Coke commercials that run in the U.S, Philippines, and in Africa. The race of the people in the commercials are different from each other, the commercials ran in the U.S probably show a racially diverse group of actors, the actors in the commercials for Africa are mainly black, and the actors in the Philippines commercial are mainly Asian. It’s not racist that these commercials only depict one racial group; it just represents the best picture of people living those three countries.
“The Great Beer Summit” blog brings up some interesting and complex questions, but it misses what the main focus should be. Why is our president having two men over for a beer? Is it just because they are of different races and they seemed to have a misunderstanding? Well people of different races have misunderstandings everyday, but it does not mean they should open a cold one with the President of the United States. Furthermore, even if Obama sat both the Harvard professor and the law enforcement officer down, and they discussed their thoughts in depth without sparing any feelings the issue would still only be solved between those two men. Two men do not change the world’s discrimination issues over night.
First off, who is getting paid the big bucks? It looks like someone does not deserve their paycheck that week. As they are working for Microsoft I am sure they are receiving a pretty decent salary. Ok, I’ll put that aside for now and go with the simple motto “everyone makes mistakes” (although I must say that is a first). I am no business major but I do understand the importance of targeting and marketing products to the right and most reasonable audience. We see it everyday from our small communities to nation wide. We saw it in the election this past year. Why would the candidates spend time campaigning in states such as Delaware when there are a measly amount of electoral votes rather they spend time in states such as Pennsylvania which will have a greater impact with the electoral college. But shouldn’t the president want to represent ALL of America? Down the stretch it all is going to come down to what will get them to win the race and end up in the White House. Now on a less nation wide scale then things such as the presidential campaign, Microsoft was thinking with the same strategy, what will most appeal to this group of people, which in their case was the Polish population in Poland. An advertisers mind has to come up with ways in which their product will best sell, they have to be smart enough for the population in which they are dealing with (some are better than others). In most cases they strive to outsmart the general population. Unfortunately I have not had the chance to travel to Poland but I will take your word for it being the “whitest locale” you have ever visited. Although some will say a comment like that was racist it is true and nothing is clearer than the truth. I see it as a potential good business tactic by Microsoft. They were trying to target Poland in the greatest way the majority of Polish would relate to it. Just as Asians are on buses in San Fran or Hispanics are used for advertising down in Miami, Whites are being used in Poland. I can not say it is necessarily racist because that is what a majority of their population is. If I were to call the buses in San Fran or the advertising down in Miami racist it is like me saying that those races are not good enough and in my opinion that is where the racism comes to light. If an advertisement to the LGBT community consisted of straight couples, wouldn’t that be offensive? Would it be sending an underlying message that is unnecessary? I may not be correct and I will admit I am narrow minded and “sheltered” when it comes to these issues. I do believe it would not have come to light if the simple mistake was corrected or was it meant to spark controversy? That would be a whole other debate to tackle though. I think this was a smart move when people are thinking about the best way to make profits for their business or large corporations because even if people don’t like to admit it, appearance is a big part in advertising. People will not be able to please everyone and somebody will always have something to say but I think this is just a big technical mistake on Microsoft’s part and unfortunately created an easy target for the race argument to come up.
Well, after reading the article and seeing some of the responses of the others I guess I can say that I have made a determination on the whole issue. I really do not believe that Microsoft intended any true racist act to be suspected. However, Microsoft should have been a bit more "clean" in doing the job efficiently if so. I am by no means racist or prejudice, but appealing to a specific audience is definitely something that is very important when attempting to sell a product or even an idea from a business aspect. Also, being that the advertisement was ran in Europe, we have to realize that as "Americans" are the most culturally accepting of groups of people in the world. Face the fact that we are types of every race or color. We see people for clearly what they are, just normal average every day people. Europeans I feel are becoming just as diverse as the United States, but there are also many traditional thought processes and values that have been integrated into the families from past generations. Regardless of the thought process of Microsoft concerning the “person swap” or “color change” which everyone seems to believe that the latter is the truth, the color apparently matters and not just the person according to this community. Microsoft was a bit too conscious of their target which can also be a problem. They appeared to be a bit racist, but I do not believe that it was intentional. Honestly, you are a computer-based company aren’t you? I’m more than sure you could have fixed the hand issue in less than five minutes and avoided the problem all together. Then again, I guess I’m not the marketing supervisor. In terms of effectiveness versus political correctness, why would it be wrong for Microsoft to only have polish people in an advertisement released in Poland? Could Microsoft have a Polish company come to the United States and write an entire billboard or advertisement in the Polish language and expect Americans to buy their product? Speak English, We’re Americans? Horrible thought process. Diversity is the key to being effective in a marketplace and people here in the United States would probably not buy the product if only polish people understood it. The whole issue in itself is utterly ridiculous and I think it’s truly a waste of time to make sure that there is a woman in every ad, an asian, a white man, and a black man. Oops, I guess I wasn’t being politically correct when I said black or white…but who cares that’s what we are people! Not all blacks are “African Americans” and not all whites are completely “Caucasian”. Microsoft was trying to give a visual impression of their company and they just completely screwed up the whole thing. Then Bill Gates wonders why the MACs are becoming so much more popular? Simply because, the only thing that they ever truly have to show in their advertisements is simply an apple.
Well, after reading the article and seeing some of the responses of the others I guess I can say that I have made a determination on the whole issue. I really do not believe that Microsoft intended any true racist act to be suspected. However, Microsoft should have been a bit more "clean" in doing the job efficiently if so. I am by no means racist or prejudice, but appealing to a specific audience is definitely something that is very important when attempting to sell a product or even an idea from a business aspect. Also, being that the advertisement was ran in Europe, we have to realize that as "Americans" are the most culturally accepting of groups of people in the world. Face the fact that we are types of every race or color. We see people for clearly what they are, just normal average every day people. Europeans I feel are becoming just as diverse as the United States, but there are also many traditional thought processes and values that have been integrated into the families from past generations. Regardless of the thought process of Microsoft concerning the “person swap” or “color change” which everyone seems to believe that the latter is the truth, the color apparently matters and not just the person according to this community. Microsoft was a bit too conscious of their target which can also be a problem. They appeared to be a bit racist, but I do not believe that it was intentional. Honestly, you are a computer-based company aren’t you? I’m more than sure you could have fixed the hand issue in less than five minutes and avoided the problem all together. Then again, I guess I’m not the marketing supervisor. In terms of effectiveness versus political correctness, why would it be wrong for Microsoft to only have polish people in an advertisement released in Poland? Could Microsoft have a Polish company come to the United States and write an entire billboard or advertisement in the Polish language and expect Americans to buy their product? Speak English, We’re Americans? Horrible thought process. Diversity is the key to being effective in a marketplace and people here in the United States would probably not buy the product if only polish people understood it. The whole issue in itself is utterly ridiculous and I think it’s truly a waste of time to make sure that there is a woman in every ad, an asian, a white man, and a black man. Oops, I guess I wasn’t being politically correct when I said black or white…but who cares that’s what we are people! Not all blacks are “African Americans” and not all whites are completely “Caucasian”. Microsoft was trying to give a visual impression of their company and they just completely screwed up the whole thing. Then Bill Gates wonders why the MACs are becoming so much more popular? Simply because, the only thing that they ever truly have to show in their advertisements is simply an apple.
What if the photograph included on the Polish advertisements had actually been the original and the one meant for English audiences had been doctored to include a black man? Would there have been similar uproar – or would Microsoft have been praised for its cultural sensitivity, despite its terrible graphic alteration skills? It’s a difficult hypothetical to answer; however, I believe that Microsoft would not be in the same position of concession and embarrassment as it is in now because of its ad mishap. I think the incident would have passed quietly and Microsoft no less or better off in terms of public perception.
This is the problem with cultural sensitivity in America: for the most part, it is only sensitivity to racial minority cultures that matters. Even if white people took offense to their fellow white male’s digital transformation into a black male for a new advertisement, who would have dared to say something about it? Yet, this Microsoft issue becomes blog fodder and stories on BBC and CNN, and whites and blacks alike (and even those who are neither white nor black – I first read about this “scandal” on angryasianman.com) are condemning the company for its racism. As a person of color, I understand why people would take offense, but this whole, naïve, “I am appalled that in this day and age, the world is not color blind” charade is ridiculous. Of course the world isn’t color blind. And of course Microsoft, a global for-profit organization, is going to want to cater to its markets. Its bottom line is money, not diversity, racial harmony, or peace on earth.
Did it go about its advertising in the wrong way? Absolutely. The least the company could have done was hire a different model and take the whole picture again for the Polish audience, especially so that the skin tone for the hands could actually match. The error in judgment on Microsoft’s part was digitally – and carelessly – replacing one model of one race for another of another race; I don’t believe it was an error to envision differently-colored people for ads geared toward different audiences. The fact may be that there are only a handful of black people in Poland – why should an ad reflect ethnic diversity where there is little or none in the community it targets? In fact, running such an ad could even be counterproductive: 1) the society could be xenophobic and reject a company promoting diversity; 2) the audience could be led to believe that the product is not for them, because they have not had such diverse experiences as the people in the ad; 3) the company could face the opposite backlash as Microsoft is facing now – people could criticize them for trying too hard to be politically correct, at the expense of logical marketing.
It is better for any company’s ads to reflect the demographics of its consumer base, because its potential customers will feel a kinship to the people it sees and associates with the brand. Corporations like Microsoft have no moral obligation to foster understanding of other races in America or any other country, and we shouldn’t expect them to.
When I saw the original picture and the photoshopped altered picture, I laughed at how ridiculous the change was. First of all, Microsoft should know better than to modify a picture once it has already been released. Once an ad like that is published, it’s out there for the entire world to see. Therefore, you should know that even changing the background or, I don’t know, maybe the race of one of the promotional models, someone is going to catch on and call you out on it. It was such a blatantly racist move, whether or not the demography of Poland is predominantly white. Why didn’t they change the Asian guy’s race as well? Though I see that since they are trying to “empower people with the IT tools they need” by displaying the supposed smartest race on the planet, I doubt that the Asian to White ratio is equal in Poland. Why all the controversy then if there’s a black person in the ad? I’m sure there are some black people in Poland who would appreciate the fact that there’s a different race for all the country to see in their country. It’s a funny thing how people have still not accepted that all of our cultures are starting to mix and intertwine, except for that blogger’s statement on how this symbolizes racial harmony by placing a white man’s head on a black man’s body. It’s hilarious the things people are willing to say just to avoid the real issue. Real harmony would have been two dudes of completely different races hugging it out or something, not trying to make a fake person from different body parts. What bothers me the most is that Microsoft has SO much money and they couldn’t shell any of it out to just make a completely new ad for Poland! If it’s that big of a deal, just do a re-shoot and put all white people up there if that’s the only race you’re trying to appeal to, but then don’t try and cover it up by replacing their heads with people of different races when you try and appeal to diverse countries about your products. I understand how advertising works; you target areas where people are most likely to buy your products and then you appeal to their nature by showing them that people that look like them or come from the same background are enjoying and embracing your merchandise, so they should buy it too. However, you don’t keep photoshopping your ads every time you want to reach out to a different group of people. But I must say that the most ridiculous part of the ad is how much the white guy sticks out. He is completely out of sync with the other two and his head is severely disproportionate to his body. The least Microsoft could have done was a better job of photoshopping the dude! I mean, they are Microsoft after all. Spell check this: Fail.
I can defiantly see how at first anyone would find this act an act of racism. But personally I kind of understand why Microsoft decided to change this ad. I am an advertising major and for the past couple of years I have been learning many aspects of the adverting world. I know how much money goes into this industry and it’s a disgusting amount. Companies want their ad’s to be as effective as possible and get as much bang for their buck. You said yourself you have been to Poland and emphasized on how white of a community it is. So why would Microsoft go waste tons of money when it is not even going to affect the target audience they desire to effect with this advertisement. The people of Poland may not have even looked at this ad more than once because they would not be able to identify with the people in it. There are a bunch of different psychological reasons that can go into advertisements so once again I agree with why the change was made. I do not think it was done as a racist act, I think it was done as a marketing move to get more coverage with this advertisement out of the community. This is what the Polish community is used to, a culture of a lot of white people. There are also a lot of other regions in the world that unfortunately do not have contact with other cultures as well. This is unlucky but not everyone can control where they are born and who raised them. I was abroad last semester and I can truly say what I enjoyed most was seeing how people of different cultures went about their life.
I do not condone manipulation to photos, honesty is important, but this is not the first time a photo has been manipulated. Throughout history photos have been altered to stir propaganda and distort people’s views. This is an industry where millions are spent every year; people in charge of this business do not want the money to go to waste. In the advertising world you want to hit your target audience so you are obviously going to alter photos in different geographical areas with different demographics so the people within that community can identify with the ad. You are probably right about the part if this ad was to be changed in the United States that this man would have remained black. Of course these ideas of who should be in the ad run through the creators of the advertisement everyday. They do not just want to reach a white audience and they want the population to be accounted for. Our population is a little more diverse than that of Poland so the original ad would have been more acceptable within our society.
Personally, I am not the least bit shocked that Microsoft would digitally alter one of their advertisements. Companies gear their advertisements toward their audiences every day. Even institutions cannot deny they put certain teenagers of different races to gain minority support. For example, I remember when I was a prospective student looking for a college home and receiving different booklets and brochures. Since I’m a minority student, many brochures contained pictures of Asians, Blacks, Whites, etc- all of different colors of the spectrum, urging me to accept their university, promising me that I would fit in to their perfect world. It was not until you glanced at the facts that you saw the hidden advertising. I, for one, never had a problem being the only minority student in a classroom or being the only minority adult at a sporting event. You could say I was raised in that kind of environment. People tend to migrate to things that they have in common. No one wants to be alone, in any shape or form. I feel like Microsoft was just falling into that logic, and advertising to their audience. Is this racist? I cannot really say. Another prime example of targeting advertisements to their audience is commercials. I cannot give you a rough estimate of how many commercials I’ve seen with different people on different channels advertising the same product. Is that racist? An African American, a red headed female, and a brunette jump on the TV with one makeup product on one channel. Then change the channel and there is the same commercial, only this time it’s with a blonde, red head, and brunette. Same product, same message, and different people: Use my product.
I am against the logic that you have to gear your product toward a certain race. I find that Microsoft made a grave mistake on the release on that advertisement and I fear they will gravely pay for it. But they are not the only company to perform this act and they are only the first ones to pay for it. I am disappointed that they found the need to digitally alter someone and then to make matters worse, leave evidence of a Black hand. Now I am not a Photoshop expert, but there is no way that I can believe that someone did not see that “error” before releasing the picture. It had to have gotten approval before a national release. Therefore, Microsoft was not the only ones to see that advertisement. I do not know if that was on purpose, and I do not know if it was a mistake, however I find it offensive and fear Microsoft has more explaining to do in the future to correct their “error”.
After reading this article it became evident to me that racism still exists in the world. I was disappointed after reading about the actions of such a high ranking company such as Microsoft. Being that they are a well known company and respected, I would like to believe that this was an accident, but I know better than that. Although racial barriers still exist today, it is the job of every individual not to succumb but to work together and overcome.
I personally don’t feel that companies should have to shift their advertisements to please the closed-minded individuals who walk this earth. By catering to their needs, companies are prolonging racism and if America is “Land of the Free,” racism should no longer be an issue. Although this incident did not take place in America, we have a great amount of influence on other countries. It is our duty as Americans to lead by example and we can start by focusing on appealing to all audiences. Certain races should not be targeted by switching the models for advertisements, but should show diversity by using numerous models from different races. Diversity is the first step towards expanding the horizons of every individual in the world. People tend to take interest to things that they are unfamiliar with or do not understand. For example, the blog asked “would you use photos of straight couples in LGBT magazines?” My answer is yes I would just to show both views. Everybody knows that there are two sides to every coin so why not display both sides.
In my opinion the actions of Microsoft illustrated blatant racism and degraded African Americans. Why is it ok to use the hands of a black man but not his face? I am almost certain that there was no commotion after they changed the head of a black man to a white man, but if the story were vice versa, I am sure it would have made the front page of every newspaper and magazine across the world. The thought of this angers me because African Americans are still looked down upon and always get the worst end of the bargain. Degrading individuals is never ok. We have to stop feeding into the media and allowing it to manipulate us.
Consequently, this article reminded me how divided we are as a country. “United we stand and divided we fall.” Obviously we have still not learned the definition of this phrase. I find it ironic that the only time race may cease is when we are facing a crisis. This is a sad thought. Due to the fact that this is true, I have lost all hope that we will ever unite as one and live in harmony.
Snow Bunny :)
To be honest, I was not really surprised that Microsoft would do something like this. Since our current society is driven by money and success, I think any large company would do anything, even if its in bad taste, to make more money. I think Microsoft was simply just trying to appeal to the audience at hand. Since Poland is made up of mostly white people and has very little diversity, I think it had to be done in order to reach their goal of appealing to their audience and raising awareness about their company. Microsoft probably thought the photo shopping had to be done and chose to do it by seeing it from a professional and corporeal perspective, not a personal perspective.
Obviously, people who live in the United States saw it as an awful and racist advertisement, which is completely understandable, but they need to realize that each country has different ideas of racism and prejudice. We would think that the change in the advertisement is racist because we were raised in a multicultural society. We are use to seeing people of every color. That may not be the case everywhere in the United States, but mostly. Racism is everywhere, even in the United States. Even though we are the most diverse countries in the world, we still continue to be hypocrites and judge people based on their skin color. Since Polish natives are not use to such cultural diversity, they would find the advertisement out of place and odd if it had a black person in it. They would most likely disapprove of the advertisement and find it unappealing. Since everyone is driven by the greed for money, Microsoft saw the photo shopping as something that would be more culturally comfortable with the Polish people in hopes that their company would make more profit.
In my opinion, racism is wrong and will probably still continue till we all have the same skin color, which is bound to happen sometime in the future since interracial couples is becoming more and more prominent. However, I do understand why Microsoft is looking at the advertisement change as something that will be beneficial to them because, by nature, humans are very selfish and want what is best for them. Microsoft had to make the change to appeal to their universal buyers. On the other hand, I also do agree with what others are saying about how conceited and racist the advertisement is. I think that multicultural advertisements should be used more often around the world to show that all different colored people can eventually co-exist comfortably without the racism. We need to start somewhere in the extermination of racism and advertisement may be a good start. Since, most people live their whole lives surrounded by the persuasive effects of advertisements. By simply seeing the co-existence of different races everywhere through advertisements, hopefully, people can slowly be persuaded out of being racist.
You know, I’m not exactly sure what to think about this photo. I think a couple of ideas come to mind when I see it.
Firstly, I’d have to agree that the media is blowing this whole thing out of proportion. If the demographic makeup of Poland is predominantly white, I don’t think it’s a bad thing to change the demographic makeup of the people shown in the ad. It’s a marketing technique. You want to sell your product to a target audience, and to do so, it’s a marketer’s job to create an ad that will lure that audience. If you want to sell the latest video game to teens, you don’t create an ad featuring a group of 60-year olds rocking out to guitar hero from their wheelchairs (as funny as that may be for some.) Similarly, as Sam said in his entry, if the country of Poland is one of the “whitest” places on the face of the Earth, including black people in may not be the most effective way to relate to Polish viewers. I don’t think that Microsoft’s intention was to be malicious – I think its intention is to make the most money that it possibly can by producing effective ads.
That being said, I don’t think that they went around altering this ad in the correct way. I think it would have been a completely separate issue had the company taken two separate pictures – the U.S. version, including the black person, and then a “Polish” version, with a white person (hands included). If they had done so, I don’t think this would be an issue at all. People don’t watch TV commercials, or look at a magazine flyer and go, “Yo, where’s the black dude? Why isn’t there an Arab in this picture? These racists only put two Asians in an ad?” The only reason that this edit to the ad was an issue is because they did a half-ass job of making the switch and left the black man’s hands in the picture. Maybe they did it to cut costs. Maybe some new guy doesn’t know how to quite work photoshop. Maybe they are blatant racists for all I know, and maybe it is just a huge cover up – but, I have a feeling this isn’t the case.
I’m not sure if this is relevant or not, but I’m wondering why the media is assuming this is a racist act in the first place? Are we assuming that everyone who works at Microsoft is a racist white person? Are we assuming that the person who pasted the white person’s head into the photo is in fact a white person? Here’s a thought - would the media consider this act racist if they knew that the person who made the physical switch on Photoshop was a black man? If a black person replaced one of his own kind with a picture of a white man, is that racist of him? Just a parting thought.
I was a little bit impressed when I saw this article for the first time. I think is ridiculous and it has no excuse, to alter a picture by replacing a black man’s head for a white man’s head just to capture the attention of public from distinct races. In my opinion, whoever edited the photo should be punished, because there is no need to change the color of skin of a person to get the attention or advertise something to another group of people who shared a different culture.
Obviously, the modification of this advertisement shows racism, because, if all men are created equal and have the same rights, the substitution of the heads was unnecessary and pointless. And for me a man with a white face and Black Hand does not represent interracial harmony. From my point of view they just made a mess, and if you don’t see and compare both of the pictures (I mean if you only see one picture at the time), you would think everything appears normal, and might assume that there is nothing wrong with the white man’s hand, but when examining the two pictures at the same time, it is easier to find the color contrast of the white man’s hand.
May be the replacement of the heads is suggesting, the white race, the predominant is Poland or they are trying to relate the public with their product, because that is what advertisements like these always do.
Taking a look at the picture, I ask myself, “Why did not they change the head of the Asian guy instead of the black man’s head? Are they trying to say that a black person does not belong to the business world in Poland? Why the Polish version of the announcement eliminated the black race? It does not make sense to me, especially, because this commercial is trying to attract deferent kind of audience. Including and excluding a race from the same advertisement is only going to provoke controversy, as in this case.
Perhaps, the Polish media believes that having a black man in a business advertisement, it is going to affect the public opinion or their financial sales. However, if I was a person from the black community, I would be so pissed. From my perspective the attempt to please all markets with out exception failed.
What seems strange to me, how come they do not have any idea who this did this, to such a prestigious and powerful company like Microsoft. I seriously doubt that Microsoft has something to do with this nonsense. I believe racism still existing in our world, mind and heart, although we try to deny it. We always judge people by the way they dress, religion, skin color or nationality.
After reading a couple of the responses to the Microsoft article, I can clearly see both view points. Microsoft sure got themselves into a pickle with their apparent last minute change from a black businessman to a white businessman. It is no secret that companies study their target market. Companies spend millions on research to determine what ads their target market will best respond to. Microsoft is no exception to that. I believe it is possible that Microsoft made two quick versions of the ad (one with a black man and one simply with the face of a white man) to see which ad the Microsoft market of Poland would respond best to. The error on Microsoft’s part of not fully changing the ad over reflects human error. The ad with the white man inevitably got more positive feedback so Microsoft ran the advertising campaign.
Photoshop is nothing new to companies or consumers. Magazines photoshop their models to be unrealistically thin, calendars photoshop their background pictures to make the colors more vibrant, and my friends photoshop their facebook pictures to make themselves look better. Everyone uses photoshop and I don’t think this issue is the big deal that the press is making it out to be. It’s a marketer’s job to attract new customers to the company and inform existing customers of new developments. While I’m pretty sure this was an oversight on Microsoft’s behalf, it sure proved to get a lot of attention. I doubt Microsoft could have imagined how far this single ad would reach. As the saying goes, no publicity is bad publicity.
In my opinion, this is just an example of Microsoft trying to better advertise in a target market and making a slight mistake. Replacing a black businessman with a white businessman’s head is not racist. Microsoft is in the business of making money. They would never intentionally label themselves as racists. I wonder if Microsoft had made the opposite mistake, would there be such controversy? Had a white businessman been photoshoped into a black businessman, I don’t think people would be accusing Microsoft of being a racist company. Microsoft would clearly be seen as a careless company for not catching that the hands color tone did not match the faces color tone. I think more people would be able to see that the color of the person representing Microsoft in the ad campaign was specifically chosen for the target demographic.
A previous post argued that Microsoft should take a position in the world and promote diversity. That is a very noble thought, but the computer industry is cut-throat. Since Poland is a country whose residents are predominantly white, it only makes sense for Microsoft to focus their advertisement on a white businessman.
Honestly I was surprised when I saw the headline “Microsoft in web photo racism row”. What I know about Microsoft it is a worldwide company which provides its services for every race, so they will never differentiate between colors. “Replacing a black man for a white man makes the company seem like they support white people more or find white people more important.”( The Law ) I like the way he/she considered the color change, but I thought in a different way. For couple minutes I stopped to think about the two photos. One point popped up on my mind. There is more diversity in the USA, than any place in the world, white people, Asian, Middle Eastern, and African. The change of race might make them change the picture from 2 white and one Asian to white, Asian, and black. That’s why you can see black is considered within the picture to people from different race accept the idea. On the other hand, Polish people do not have that diversity, so they would prefer to put all white. That’s why they replaced the black head to white to send the idea to the white race they have in Poland.
I can see this in my country. Whenever there is an advertisement in Arabic they add a woman who wear our traditional dress, but if the advertisement in English they bring a white woman. Maybe they have these changes also to be sent to the whole community because there are many races in my country.
After reading the blog post ‘Political Correctness or Blatant Racism’ a few opinions were triggered. At the forefront, as a business student myself, I see the changing of the black man with a white man as a good marketing move. The actual execution of the process, however, was poorly done. Obviously, they should of used different people in the picture. Blatantly photoshopping a man’s face onto a man of a different race is just a PR nightmare. But at the root of the problem was the fact that they actually changed what race was in the picture. From a sociology point of view it is sad that changing the race of a man in a picture can actually help advertising, but it is anything but surprising. Although I’m not sure you can call it racism, it is easily noticeable that people today don’t see themselves as a different race. When a white man looks at an advertisement with a bunch of black people, they don’t really see themselves in that ad and I’m sure it works both ways. When the man at Microsoft decided change the race of man I really doubt he expected this to happen he was just trying to sell the product, but you can’t blame him, can you? He has a job, and his job is to sell a product the best way he can. Some companies want to sell their product in anyway possible, and many companies want to produce their product anyway possible. So the question to ask yourself in business is, at what point are you crossing the ethical line when it comes to selling a product? I think it is fair to say you are crossing the ethical line when it comes to photoshopping a man into a different race. If there was two different actual men in the advertisement I believe that is fine, because, although sad, it how the world works at this point in time. A white man relates to a white guy, and a black man with black guy. I would be curious what the actual black man in the advertisement thinks. Did he sign away his right to be black? Did Microsoft even tell him that he was actually white in Poland? If he allowed Microsoft to change his race, I think that is the main story in this situation. In order for a race to be respected, it must first respect itself. In my opinion, I doubt this man was notified that he was actually a white man in Poland, but do you think he would of stopped it from happening if it meant him not getting the modeling job? I really don’t think so. I know I wouldn’t have stopped it. I would love to get some quotes from the actual man in the picture to further answer those questions. In the end, I believe the move of changing a black man and white man was a good marketing move, but the execution was extremely harsh.
Normally I’d agree that forcing a person to leave a table based on their race is a racist thing to do. It’s textbook racism. But in this case it’s different. During the civil rights movement, and all the time preceding that period of our history, people of color were refused service at restaurants, forced to sit at the back of the bus, and deprived of opportunities that were instead given to white people. They weren’t allowed to dine in certain places, had to use separate water fountains and were impacted negatively constantly in their everyday life. I think it’s different in the case of this Microsoft commercial, however.
This man wasn’t kicked out of someone’s home because they refused to eat with him. He wasn’t forced to drink from a separate water fountain or sit in a different waiting room than the white actors. One could obviously argue that this man was deprived of a job opportunity based on his race, which he obviously was. However, Microsoft is paying for this commercial and the actors are required to have certain qualifications. Unfortunately, one of these qualifications is appealing to their target audience and they clearly chose to target solely white people with this ad. That said, I don’t condone their reasoning, and I agree with Dr. Richards in that diversity should be promoted; but I can understand why they made the decision. I’d also like to point out that had the white actor been chosen first and not as a replacement for the black actor there would never have been a commotion in the first place.
It does seem highly irregular to me, however, that Microsoft would do such a thing. Unless Poland is very much different from the United States with regard to the public’s opinion on diversity (which I highly doubt), I should think that they wouldn’t have a problem seeing a person of color in a commercial promoting software. After all, it’s not like there’s a specific race that uses Microsoft products; people make use of their software in every industrialized nation in the world.
It’s kind of sad that things like this still happen. I mean, while it is still Microsoft’s prerogative to decide who and what goes into their commercial and how the final product looks, I don’t believe that they made the best decision, particularly since they made this decision after they had already placed the black actor in the commercial and later decided to remove him. Then again, maybe it’s like Dr. Richards said and the folks at Microsoft know something that the rest of us don’t. Maybe if the black actor had remained in the shot for the extra two seconds or whatever it was it would have cost them thousands or perhaps millions of dollars. Maybe.
To be completely honest, I was not surprised at all while I was reading this article. Everything in our society today seems to be so simple and we never seem to read between the lines, but there is so much more to every advertisement, commercial, movie, TV show, and I could go on and on. I mean, is it really just chance that a commercial for preppy clothes such as Abercrombie and Fitch has mainly white actors/models in it and those commercials for the new Reeboks or Ecko/Baby Phat clothes has both white and black actors/models in it. Coincidence? I think not! Commercials and advertisements have one goal: to get you to buy from their company or to support their organization, and if you are of the same race/cultural background, you are more likely to support them and/or buy from their company. However, when I read the comment that “Microsoft was attempting to please all markets by having a man with both a white face and a black hand,” I was completely shocked. This is a completely rhetorical comment because it is not genetically possible (unless there is some kind of deformity) to have a white man who happens to have black hands. This is clearly just an excuse where the company is trying to cover up for their mistake of forgetting to change the color of the man’s hands. Although it is racist to change the advertisement from having a black man to a white man, it is understandable why the company in Poland did so because they are trying to convince the citizens of their country to buy from their company, and if the majority (if not all) of the country is white, statistics will most likely show that they will buy from the company if the advertisement has more people of their own skin color in it (because they are more comfortable/familiar with them). Racist, it is, but in the end, business is business and if the changing of one person in an advertisement will be beneficial for the company in the long run, then they will do whatever they can to see that go through. When I read that a blogger said “The white head and black hand actually symbolize interracial harmony. It is supposed to show that a person can be white and black, old and young at the same time” I was speechless. If they are trying to show interracial harmony, why not go all out? Why not have the left side of the man be black, and the right side be white (or vise versa)? That way there will be a clear message to the consumers that they support interracial harmony at all costs, even if the focus of their ad is switched from ‘you should buy from Microsoft’ to ‘Microsoft supports interracial harmony’? Yea, I don’t think that is very likely to happen either. In conclusion, I just wanted to say that although Microsoft was being completely racist by changing the black man to a white man, they were doing so in order to appeal to their consumer audience, and when we’re dealing with money, we all know that people will do anything, moral or not!
Personally, I have no problem with a company making a business decision to appeal to their market. If this was an insurance company using racist underwriting methods than we would have an extreme problem, but that’s not the case. A Polish company using Polish actors to sell a product is basic advertising, and any attempt to call this racist is just someone trying to stir the pot.
But, if it has become paramount in our society that someone needs to be held accountable for this commercial decision, lets blame the consumers (or more obviously society). I am aware that this is the easy answer but all of these companies would not be making these decisions unless they were yielding results. Consumers consistently buy products that they trust and we tend to trust products sold by people like ourselves. If I am going to spend my money on a product sold by an American or a foreigner (with no other obvious distinctions), I am going to go for Mr. White guys product every time. Maybe that is racist but who’s word are you going to trust, the one who you have a relationship with and you can predict what you’re getting or go for the path less chosen. This is where racism begins to get gray for me.
It is human nature toward avoiding change and trusting what you know, even if you are aware of it’s flaws. This inclination ultimately results in what we have called racism. Certainly this doesn’t justify violent and other forms of racism, but catering to human nature’s inclination to trust familiar people does not seem racist to me. No one is hurt by this act, and as pointed out in the blog, every race participates in this behavior.
On the other hand, if we were to take aggressive action to prevent this kind of incident to ever happening again, what would result? Are we going to put business regulations in place to set racial quotas in their advertising? That does not make a whole lot of sense. I guarantee you if I see a commercial with one white guy, one black guy, an Asian, a Mexican, and an Indian, I am not going to take that product serious. The sensitive intentions there would be so obvious that it would distract from the marketing goals. So please can we stick with what works, advertise to white people with whatever will get white people to buy the product and do the same for every one else. We have much bigger problems with racism to be handled before we deal with subtle intentions of our businesses’ advertising rationale.
I’m not going to go on record and say that I agree with what Microsoft has done with this ad. In the article they say that they would investigate the situation and figured out who made the mistake in changing the ad. Bullshit. They made an advertising move that they thought would be effective in a foreign market, and because somebody just happened to notice, then they have to say they had nothing to do with it. I don’t agree with what Microsoft has done here but sadly it may have been the smartest marketing move in this situation. We all know that there are different cultural norms in different societies that need to be taken into account in international advertising. What is considered standard in one country (multi-racial ads in the U.S.) may not be in a foreign country. Now I won’t claim to know anything about the ad preferences of the Polish, but with a company as large and successful as Microsoft, I’m sure they’ve done their fair amount of market research. If they felt that the black man should be replaced with a white guy in the ad, I’m sure they had their reasons for it. In a great utopian world we wouldn’t have to deal with these issues of what types of people need to be strategically added into advertisements, but that just isn’t the case. If Poland is as white as this blog claims it to be, then having a black man in the ad may be viewed as abnormal. Now I’d like to think that the polish people have more sense than to completely ignore an ad just because a person of color is in it, but that might just be the way they are. It might not be right but often times the main concern of a firm is its bottom line. If a company feels that the best way to promote its product is to keep its ad in all one color, then it is unfortunately their right to do so.
As for the media attention, I definitely think that these types of situations deserve attention. While I did say before that companies do unfortunately have the right to advertise as they please, the general population should be made aware of these situations. I’m sure this happens all the time in the world of business but you don’t ever really seem to hear about it. Now I personally am not one of those people who goes out and boycotts a specific company on little things like this, but there are people who would. Making these people aware of certain racial changes that get made in the international market could probably influence some peoples buying patterns.
Well some say that Microsoft made a mistake. I, on the other hand, would beg to differ. It’s a marketing strategy. It’s not really 100% racist. You see, this picture was the product of photoshop. I would consider this to be racist if they actually took two separate pictures and had the black person give up his seat to the white guy. However, this did not happen. Therefore, I would consider this incident to be slightly racist. Furthermore, Microsoft is a business, so they think like a business. Is it really economically efficient to have a black person’s picture in an ad that will be displayed to a vastly white venue? Poland is mostly full of white people. Unfortunately, some of them may feel uncomfortable seeing a black person representing a product they may use. This is coming from a Polish blogger, “In Poland see black people is like see ghost .” This is why Microsoft probably replaced the black guy with the white guy. It would be a totally different story here in America. I would blame Microsoft for being a bit presumptuous in this case. In the US, we have been acclimated to all sorts of races and ethnicities, so it really doesn’t make a difference if it’s a black, brown, yellow, white, or red person in the advertisement.
I suppose Microsoft could have a done a better job editing the picture by at least changing his hands to match the color of his face. But, nevertheless, people aren’t going get over racial schisms that exist if they refuse to take the higher road and dismiss these small racial incidents. What Microsoft did was an extremely ballsy move. But they were just trying to attract as many customers as they could. I still think they could have been a bit more astute about it. If you look closely the laptop the middle guy is using is clearly an Apple computer. They just covered up the logo. So I guess Microsoft was somewhat racist and lazy in the picture. But they were just trying to make a buck, and who could blame them. After all that is what we are all here to do. I think many people are assuming things like Polish people don’t like black people so Microsoft took the black person out. However, if you look at this situation from a business standpoint, it makes more sense. You could also make the point, that the Microsoft USA division should be blamed for not including an Indian, Eskimo, Pilipino, Hispanic, or a representative or LGBT. All this political correctness sometimes gets the better of us. I don’t think this a major racial issue. I guess how I can see the some people may be pissed off, but I don’t think it’s very controversial.
The first time that I saw this advertisement I took it as a joke. I thought that it was some smartass making fun of people in Poland and that was their way of “bashing” on the Polish. I then ran across an article on Google news and they were talking about how the Asian man and the woman survived the cut and ended up not being Photoshopped.
I don't really know what to say about that, it is just incredible how some things get really blown out of proportions sometimes. I understand that some people might frown upon what Microsoft's advertisement department did, but honestly if you are trying to sell a product to a certain audience you are supposed to know what your audience is like. Your audience might be solely white, so if they see colored people on the advertisement they might think that it's not geared towards them. There are many other ways that Microsoft could have gone about changing the advertisement. Obviously the first thing that comes to mind is that they should have done a MUCH better job with their photoshopping. It would have been just as easy to Photoshop a whole different person into the advertisement as it was to change just the head. A more costly way of going about this would have been to scrap the advertisement that was already in place and to create a completely new one geared towards the audience they wanted to attract.
It might seem racist for Microsoft to change the race of the people on the table, but in reality, in the end it all comes down to business. As racist as that may seem, products need to be sold. There are always target groups that advertisers try to reach to make sure that they can sell their product with the most profit. The media can talk about this all they want, but this is not that first time that this has happened and it certainly will not be the last time either. Microsoft definitely slipped up this time, but they are not the only corporation that is doing it. As Sam stated, there are companies that do it all the time depending on where they are advertising. It might be changing the gender of the person in the advertisement; it could also just be the age of the people in the ad. This was made a big deal of because it dealt with race, and in my opinion, that is racist in itself. It is somewhat unfair that Microsoft was put in the spotlight the way it was, but it is their own fault for slipping up the way they did, in the future Microsoft should be much more careful in the way that they deal with advertisements and it isn’t always bad to spend a little more to avoid being put in the media as racist.
Being a business student, this story about Microsoft appeals to me in a few different aspects. Marketing is an essential part of business operations. In any successful company marketing plays an enormous role. Things such as target marketing, and appeal to audience are definitely important, however the subject can get extremely “touchy” when race and even gender are brought into play. Why, I’m not really sure. Is Microsoft, one of the biggest computer companies in the world, still relying on the color of people’s skin to sell their products in some places around our world? I guess the world is truly a different place than what I imagine.
I feel that Microsoft, from a business standpoint, had good intentions (meaning selling more operating systems or whatever else they were selling) when they replaced the black man’s head with a white man’s head, but my question is why? I assume, like most people, it is because the fact that Poland is predominately a nation of “white” people and that this ad would be more appealing if white people appeared in it. Then, the next question I would have to ask is why would it matter? When I thought about this question, I couldn’t come up with a good answer other than “racism.” In fact, I think this is the only answer. Microsoft assumed that the white people of Poland would not want to see a black man in their ad. This assumption is quite complicated however because it raises the question, “Is Microsoft being racist, or only adjusting to provide the wants of the “white” Polish people? I believe that the answer lies somewhere in the middle between both parties. I would love to think that Microsoft would sell just as many operating systems or whatever else they were going to sell in Poland whether they made this change or not. Obviously, however Microsoft felt that if they changed the black man to a white man they would get better feedback thinking that this would be what the Polish people “wanted” to see. So therefore they are deemed the “racist” ones, however if they had not made the change and their sales in Poland had dropped off then we would assume it is because the black man was in their advertisement and the Polish people did not like this.
My opinion may be because I am a white kid from America. I have been taught and have learned that color means nothing. I am a trained individual. In every advertisement in America we see people of color. Just like in this ad that Microsoft released in America with the picture of the black man. To me, color is truly meaningless. However, I guess the world is a different place. So my final question still remains, “Is Microsoft the really the victim?” This company sells products around the world, and so instead of using completely different people they used a program, Photoshop, to cut back on some costs and save some money. Is this a crime? I don’t know the answer, but I do know that “racism” will always play a part of the world that we live in. In every situation, one party or the other will be deemed “racist” so if you were in charge of this ad, would you change the color of the man’s face from black to white and bring in more profit, or would you leave the black man’s face and allow your customer, in this case the white people from Poland to feel as if the ad does not target them? Seems like a lose lose situation to me.
By no means is the advertisement a racist act. It’s merely a poor marketing strategy to try to save money. Of course it was not the smartest decision to photo shop the picture (and leave the hand the same), but it is not a white versus black thing. It’s the goal of marketing to promote one’s product to the specific segment desired. If Poland is predominately white, then it makes sense to have Caucasians in the picture. This is a common occurrence in marketing that should not necessarily be frowned upon. Professor Richards said something in class the other day about how he is used to seeing white people. People generally like to see themselves. Commercials and ads in Spain have Spanish looking and speaking people just as Japan has Japanese people and the same around the world. Red Stripe is a Jamaican beer that is trying to expand sales into the United States, so they depict a Jamaican man giving a white male a beer and saying “helping our white friends dance for over 70 years.” I would perceive that ad as a cultural thing rather than a racist remark. But in Jamaica the commercials have only Jamaican people in them. State College commercials as opposed to Philadelphia commercials are polar opposites. I don’t think Microsoft is necessarily saying that the black man has to “relinquish” his seat from the table or that the ad is racist. It’s merely poor marketing. I think only Americans are crazed over the Microsoft mistake because we are a multicultural and diverse country. Americans are very quick to throw around the racism card. For instance, I spent the summer in Los Angeles which has a large Hispanic population, so some of the commercials and advertisements are in Spanish. This is not racist, but simply target marketing. Let’s be honest, there are certain products all over that certain cultures use. The goal of marketing is to identify those segments and persuade them to use their product. That is not profiling, it’s business.
On the other hand this ad is kind of funny. The genius that decided to photo shop just the man’s head but leave his hand alone is probably fired by now. I would like to know what the two men that were being photo shopped thought about this decision. But one person said “I can imagine that Microsoft didn’t want to spend the money to shoot another advertisement,” but is it really worth all the bad press it has received in exchange for greater marketing costs? I don’t think so. Personally, I would like to think that if I were the head of advertising and that decision was left up to me I would have chosen two pictures (or however many).
The thought of a fortune five hundred company like Microsoft photo shopping an advertisement seems very strange to me. Was Microsoft afraid that a black man appearing in a predominantly white country like Poland would turn away customers? In my opinion, the thought process in changing this ad is not only unnecessary but also offensive. There is nothing wrong with the original advertisement; it clearly depicts a well-established office room. In addition, the employees photographed in the ad represent three very different racial groups: white, Asian and African-American. This makes photo shopping the ad even more offensive because Microsoft only singled out the black employee not the Asian employee. The goal was not to make all the persons in the ad white but solely to cover up the appearance of a black man. This exposes the idea that Microsoft was only worried about the black man appearing in the advertisement. I highly doubt Microsoft was trying to be racist when changing the advertisement, there had to be some research or reasoning of why the black man was covered up. In America having a black man in your ad is perfectly acceptable and would probably be looked upon as racist if there wasn’t diversity shown in the advertisement. I get the impression that In Poland things are looked upon differently and the more white people the better. I have never been to Poland, but I am sure not everyone there would be offended if they saw a black man, especially one with a job being productive in an office. This ad not only makes Microsoft look racist but also the neutral party Poland. By Microsoft covering up only the black man in the polish version of the ad makes it look like all Polish people are racist towards blacks.
There is no logical explanation or conclusion that I can come to for the reasons behind changing this advertisement. The reason behind the decision was such a spur of the moment thing that the editors didn’t even change the color of the black employee’s hands. What logic was the marketing department using when they came to this unacceptable racial decision? I guess a company will do whatever they think is right to make money, even if this means covering up a black man’s face in one of their ads. The reasons for changing this advertisement was a question of money and a question of what groups of people are racist towards each other. In Microsoft’s eyes the Polish are racist towards the blacks at least, this is what I saw when I looked at both advertisements side by side. It is sad that we live in a world where marketing departments have to worry about certain groups of people becoming offended when they see certain racial groups photographed in an advertisement. The whole thought process just doesn’t seem right to me.
The idea of using certain ethnicities in adds around certain places is more of a business strategy at times, but what Microsoft did in this add in Poland was blatantly racist. They didn’t even bother to hire another person to replace the black man, they just photo shopped someone else’s head in over his instead. Even placing an ad somewhere where every person is of one ethnicity is racist by today’s standards. This is surprising coming from a company as large as Microsoft, where it seems like they have every different person you can think of in their ads.
For some circumstances, it is acceptable to have a person with a certain ethnicity in ads in certain places. For example, like the article mentioned, a black person would usually appear in an ad in Memphis, or maybe an Asian in an ad in San Francisco. It seems like an effective marketing strategy that lets the consumers in a particular area relate to the product better. I think that Microsoft could have gone about creating this ad in a little more subtle of a way, rather than just photo shopping someone else in the picture.
I have mixed opinions about the Microsoft ad. I am by no means racist, but on one hand I do understand the mind of advertisers. They want to do what they think will sell the most of their product. Advertisers try to give the product that they are selling the best possible image. They use what they know about the consumers to try and sway them in the direction of their product over another product so I do understand that they wanted to project the best possible ad to their consumers. If they think that having a black man in their ad will prevent people from buying their service than why not fix it to help maximize profits? After all, that is their job. America is known for being such a big democracy and such a diverse country, but we are a little slower in accepting people than some other advanced countries. Many countries have had a woman or a black person in the highest position of power and we just made that break through; however, compared to a lot of countries we are ahead of the curve for accepting different types of people. I do feel like being in a school environment they are always trying to be inclusive of all types of people. I agree that if you just have a white person and a black person, if I were asian I would wonder why I am not valued enough to be represented but at the same time some of the ads are going a little over board. I feel like people who organize some of these advertisements write down all the stereotypes that they need to fill and than go find these people. I understand everyone wants to be represented but at the same time, doesn’t having to go out of your way to include every minority make it seem like your taking something away from the natural pull of people? People tend to gravitate towards people who are like them. I personally am Jewish and most of my best friends happen to be Jewish or come from an area with a strong Jewish population. I don’t purposefully go out searching for Jewish friends but that’s just how it happens to work out a lot of the time. So if I saw an ad for a product that I wanted and they made it look like someone who has a lot in common with me would get a lot of use out of, than I would be more inclined to go and buy that product. I do think that photoshopping a black person out of a photo would seem very messed up to me if I was black, but everyone just tries to get ahead in their business and does what they need to do to get a leg up.
By the time I finished reading this article, my thoughts on the issue had changed. Though it appears, at first, that Microsoft was making an oh-so-huge mistake, offending a vast majority of its users, in a second glance my mind took a different spin on the subject. Yes, Microsoft purposely transformed the picture, but from the aspect reason it was in their best interest, and presumptuously in the best interest of the public that was going to see it. Though to our society where the image change is seen as vulgar and “a hate crime” the change only appears as a violent discriminatory gesture. The fact is, it’s pure business! Any company who knows their public would do the best of their ability to advertise to them, in full. A company which would rather make people happy would not succeed. If you take a spin on the whole issue, the only reason the ad contained a black guy in the first place is because it was running in america. So, if the ad began in Poland, with all white people, and then hypothetically they were to change a white guy into a black guy (instead of the way it is perceived now) would it be as big of a deal? Probably not. If anything that would have been seen as a good gesture. The fact of the matter is that Microsoft, as would any good company, is looking out for their best interest, and in that involves catering to their public to get the greatest overall response. Furthermore, I feel that this has to do with an overall national problem we have with race. Racism is something that I feel we do more to create and heighten then to relieve. If really everyone wants to be treated the same and “no one is different, no matter their race” then why are people coming at this issue as a racial blasphemy rather than merely a photoshop edit? Though I understand that seeing a mix of races in an ad in America seems smart and obvious, when will it ever be enough? As we discussed in class, there are SO many types of ethnicities that make up America, and the world for that matter, that they really shouldn’t even be grouped as “black, white, yellow, red.” Speaking of that, I didn’t see a native american “red” colored skin person in the picture, but I don’t hear any press release “sorry”s about that. People continue to expect that companies and businesses will cater to every race here, and yes they will do that, but when is enough going to be enough for the mere advertising of a product?! Either people need to stop criticizing the equal race in advertisements, or we’re going to have to start making much bigger billboards to fit everyone.
This article brings up some interesting issues on Marketing. In my personal opinion, the change of the black man into a white man was not that great of an issue. Although the company could have easily just taken another photograph for the new advertisement, it seems that it was purely for marketing purposes. It seems natural for a company to direct its advertising towards its specific audience. As Sam mentioned American companies often place minorities in their photographs deliberately, to show that they have diversity.
Another underlying possibility would be that they replaced the black man because he was older. In turn they put a younger and more youthful looking man. This is quite a stretch; however, companies tend to pick younger people for their pictures because it adds a subtle message that they are quicker, more aggressive, and more friendly.
The one defense for this alter seemed absurd; to say that they wanted to keep the hands of the black man, but change the face to that of a white man. That response was trying to say that it was a mix of black and white race, and old and young age. If that was the message that Microsoft was actually trying to convey, they could have easily included the intended members.
An interesting point in this picture is that the woman seems to be taking the leading role. This may be similar to America's intention of placing minorities in their advertisement. It may show that the company allows for opportunity.
This method of advertising seems to be a good approach, because it targets every facet of their ad to their directed audience. The only fault is that once members are added or removed, it brings up the issue of whether it was possibility a discriminatory action. The one point to be learned from this would be, when in doubt, of whether or not it will stir up controversy, just create a new advertisement.
Another thing that is interesting is that the Asian man was untouched, by photoshop. If this advertisement was directed towards a Polish audience, where there is less diversity and is predominately white, why would the Asian man not be replaced at the same time as the black man.
I would stand by my conclusion that the advertisement was not changed with a racist intent. This picture was altered purely for marketing reasons.
Microsoft spends millions on advertisement and they forget to change the skin color of the person’s hands? That was a huge blunder and is what began this who debacle. Microsoft tried to Photoshop in a white person to make it more appealing to Polish people, who are almost entirely a white race. It was a good advertising strategy but at the same time it can also be considered racist. This action of Microsoft makes the company look like it is run by racists. That is definitely not what they should want there company image to be. With that being said, I’m sure that not changing the skin color of the hands was an accident. However, a major corporation needs to be more careful with its advertisements because it can end up in numerous sticky situations in the future. I agree with the fact that it is wrong what Microsoft did in its advertising, but I see why they would do it. The population of Poland is mostly white so it does make sense to have people they relate to in the advertisement aimed to sell them products. Although the population is white I'm pretty confident Polish people would still buy the product even if there was a black person in the ad. Microsoft uses advertising strategies with the goal of selling their products. I can somewhat see why they would do this. Microsoft would not want to pour a large amount of money into advertising to people they do not like or relate to what’s going on in the advertisement. I’m not trying to lobby for Microsoft here, but I’m pretty confident they were not trying to offend anyone in the process of making this ad. They need to be a little more careful in the future so they do not hurt anymore feelings. Microsoft needs to check its advertisements before it makes them available to the public. They spend millions on commercials and other forms of advertisement, I’m sure they can afford a little extra money to make sure their ad is error free. This will keep Microsoft out of the spotlight of criticism. I also believe the public overreacted on the whole issue. Microsoft should not have done this but I do believe the public shouldn’t have jumped on Microsoft the way they did. The public is constantly looking to criticize people and companies. Here is just another prime example of the public looking to start something. I am a white person and I personally would not take offence to the ad if it was reversed I know it is just advertising. In the future, Microsoft should spend the extra money and make sure the ad or project is done tastefully.
In my opinion, this whole issue was blown out of proportion by the media. The original commercial would have been great for the United States because we are a very diverse culture that respects people of different races in commercials. However, this issue stemmed from a marketing scheme from one of the richest companies in the world. In order to make the company appealing to Polish people, Microsoft’s advertising sector correctly realized that Poland is a predominantly ‘white’ country. So why not make all of the people in the scene white? Microsoft is simply advertising in a smart way because most people are interested in things that are similar to them, and the white people in the ad are most similar to the Polish population. And honestly, if Microsoft was so concerned about the race of the people in the advertisement, why didn’t they replace the Asian gentleman with a white person’s face?
However, when someone caught the poor photo-shopping ability of Microsoft’s advertising sector, the whole racism idea came into play. Since America is such a diverse country, companies appropriately use all kinds of different races when they advertise for their business or a product. Advertising itself is a scheme to distort the truth about something in order to get the readers to buy into the idea or product. Think about beer commercials, they usually portray young adults drinking with their friends at a party while enjoying their product, because the company wants to target the young adult age group. Microsoft changed the face of the black gentleman as a way to target Polish people. Honestly, when I think of Poland, I do not think of black people living there, even though some probably do. However, if I was in Poland and saw the advertisement with the black man in it I would have thought nothing of it because I am used to the diverse nature associated with the United States. Poland may not be as a diverse country as the United States, so Microsoft decided to keep all of the people in the picture white. Also, the business world is a world where most do anything to try and earn money, and this includes photo-shopping an advertisement that is intended to target a certain population.
I disagree that this issue is fueled by racism, because if you ask around, most people would probably associate Poland with a relatively all white population. I think this advertisement is an honest mistake made by Microsoft, as they were only trying to advertise in a way that benefits the company. This same issue could be made if Microsoft was advertising in China. The best possible advertising method would include Asian people in the advertisement instead of having a black individual and a white individual. The way Microsoft advertises most likely will try and match the culture and population of the country they are targeting.
To say right off-the-bat that Microsoft is racist for this advertising debacle would be unfair. However, it is without a doubt surprising that a giant corporation such as Microsoft would be so careless as to run such a clearly doctored advertisement. I mean a white head with black hands!? And don’t give me that “it symbolizes racial integration” crap. No, it symbolizes a lazy photo-shop job. Either way, the actual photo-shop is not the real problem here. The real problem is the fact that Microsoft felt it necessary to change the black man in the American ad to a white man for their Polish advertisement. I don’t know much about Poland, but did Microsoft seriously believe that having a black man sitting at the table would take away from sales? If that is true, then maybe it’s the Polish people who should be at fault here. With that said, Microsoft is an American company and people are smart enough to know that the United States prides itself on being a melting pot of races and ethnicities. If anything, Microsoft should support that idea and promote it. But then again, business is business and in the end it’s all about the profit. That is what my biggest problem is with this situation. As Sam mentioned in the blog, the main fault of this ad is that it exposes the manipulation that goes along with business and advertising. It reveals the ugly side of business, profit before people. So while it is hard to say whether or not it is “racist”, it is certainly manipulative and in my opinion completely unnecessary. It would be the same if they had swapped a black head in for a white head for their advertisements in inner city New York. To me, that is offensive to both white people and black people. If I was from Poland, I would be embarrassed reading this article. Are people there really that intolerant that it might sway their decision to invest in Microsoft because a black man is featured on the ad? I really hope not.
On the other hand, I can understand why Microsoft did this. Companies do it all the time to reach out to certain groups of people. They want advertisements that people can relate to and therefore see themselves buying or investing in. However, I do believe that Microsoft made a very big mistake by simply photo shopping the black man out of the picture. No matter what the motive or reasons behind it, the act alone is undoubtedly offensive to a lot of people. So do I think that Microsoft is racist for this ad? No, I really don’t. With that said, I do believe, however, that it is wrong, unnecessary, and in bad taste.
When I first saw the two pictures without yet reading the article, I immediately thought that is very racist. But then when I found out the one photo was advertised on a Polish website, my thoughts began to change. When I later found out that Poland is a predominantly white country, I began to think of this as more of a marketing decision than a racist one.
However this photo did still shock me though. The main thing that shocked me about this photo was the fact that Microsoft failed to change the whole image of the person. I am very confused on why they would leave the man’s hands black, but change the face. It very well may have been a mistake but I wish there was more of an explanation behind it. One blogger wrote that “it is supposed to show that a person can be white and black”. I find that very hard to believe. Considering that this is an advertisement for Microsoft in web, it is hard for me to believe that the marketing people at Microsoft sat around and thought that the people in Poland would believe that a man can have a white head and black hands. I think it was simply a Photoshop mistake, and a big one at that.
The fact that whoever changed the two pictures just simply put a white man’s head on a black man’s body is just wrong. How hard is it to just get a white man and take the picture again? I agree with Sam when he says it just feels “raw”.
Another question I wonder is why did they only alter the black man’s photo? It says that Poland is a predominately white country. So why did they not change the Asian man’s picture? If their reasoning behind changing the black man’s picture to a white man was because the audience is mostly white, then why not also change the Asian man’s picture to a white man?
I do understand why they did change the picture in terms of marketing. From a marketing standpoint, you need to market to your target audience and research the demographics in the area that you are marketing. If Poland is a predominately white country, then yes it does make sense that there are mostly white people in the picture. This can be said for any product. If you were going to market a product in Lancaster, PA, you would most likely use white people in your advertisement because that is your target audience. But if you were to market a product in Camden, New Jersey which is predominately black people, then you would use black people in your advertisement. I do not necessarily think the people at Microsoft were necessarily being racist, I think they were just looking at what was going to appeal more to the consumers.
I have grown up admiring Microsoft as a company and as a leader in the business world, especially as a Supply Chain major. They are constantly proving that the sky is the limit when it comes to technology; however, I am appalled at the Polish advertising campaign they created. The claim that “the white head and the black hand symbolizes racial harmony”, is a blatant excuse for extreme laziness on Microsoft’s marketing department. Bill Gates should be embarrassed. If they were trying so hard to eliminate the black race when advertising to the Polish, it would be pretty ironic to leave the hand a different color from the rest of the body.
In addition, Microsoft is a worldwide organization, meaning they should be representing people of all races and ethnicities. It makes their company more versatile and accepted by all cultures, and now their credibility has drastically plummeted. It would have been a lot more effective to have a global campaign of the exact same advertisement. If a company can create a campaign that appeals to the whole world, which Microsoft should be able to do, why settle for anything less? They should not feel the need to “photoshop” their advertisement if it is of the highest quality. Microsoft was not only lazy in their lack of attention to detail, but it is also apparent that they were not entirely pleased with their ad to begin with.
By making such a large mistake, Microsoft is also pointing out that the Polish do not have a warm-welcoming culture in their eyes. Yes, they may have a mainly white population, but that does not mean that they wouldn’t buy a product just because a black man is in the picture. Microsoft is basically saying that the United States is the superior country who could handle the depiction of three different races in one picture better than other countries. However, isn’t there a history of slavery in our country? Maybe America should have the advertisement with the two white people then. We are known to be “the land of the free”, but we are also known as being arrogant to other cultures, and Microsoft just proved that point.
The fact that this advertisement is such a scandalous story shows how much we as a culture still focus on the race of others. One would think after the history of our country and of the entire world, that the color of someone’s skin should no longer be a factor. Actually this is something I notice in the media all of the time. By trying to be politically correct, it appears as if they are focusing too much on race. The typical “black family” television shows should be outdated by now. Why can’t they throw in some white people too? Why do there even have to be auditions for shows or movies based on the color of someone’s skin? Shouldn’t everyone have the same opportunity regardless of traits they had no control over? This issue goes way beyond Microsoft, but they just made it easy to point out. In my opinion, the media, and especially the business world, should be at the pinnacle of eliminating racism, not bringing it to the forefront of our news stories.
Maybe the next time Microsoft creates an ad campaign, they should sit through a Sam Richard’s lecture first to discover that 99% of our genes have nothing to do with what we look like! In the end, I think Microsoft owes an apology to their customers, the United States, and the Polish for their immature act of racism.
Political correctness or blatant racism? I really don’t think it’s either, but I’d say, from a marketing sense, it is something more along the lines of trying to reach your target audience…and failing miserably. I understand that the overwhelming majority of the Polish population is white, so having the majority of models in the Polish online ad being people of color doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. My concern with this issue resides, first, with why did they only Photoshop the head and not the hand, and, secondly, why didn’t Microsoft tamper with the Asian guy on the left?
Truthfully, I would say this ad is more discriminatory than racist. According to Dictionary.com, the definitions of racism are as follows:
1.a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2.a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3.hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
Regarding the first definition, the black man’s race and his removal from the picture didn’t reduce his individual achievement (after all he still is featured in the U.S. ad), and I am sure he was still paid as much as the Asian man and the white woman for his work…if he wasn’t, then THAT is racist. Also, his removal from the picture does not signify the supremacy of whites over blacks, the act was simply a question of Microsoft more effectively reaching their target, as I mentioned before. As for the second definition…just no…definitely not. The hatred and intolerance toward other races mentioned in definition 3 is a bit harsh. If Microsoft really hated this guy he wouldn’t be in the ad in the first place right? As we can now determine, the act was clearly not racist.
But was it politically correct? Politically correct would have been to shoot a new photo with different models. And if this was to be done for the Polish website, then why not snap a new photo for every demographic region? That’d be really politically correct! But this method is just too expensive. Microsoft is such a wealthy corporation because they do what most intelligent corporations do, cut costs where costs can be cut. I agree with Microsoft, Photoshopping the white guy into the picture instead of spending valuable funds for a new photo shoot. But seriously, how could they forget to Photoshop the hand?
Maybe it rested on the table with the perfect proportion of masculine elegance that just simply couldn’t be topped. But probably not. Microsoft, if you are going to do the job, do it right...that’s all I ask. And that BS on the link to the article about the symbolization of interracial harmony, old and young, black and white at the same time? Right, right, right... Get over it Photoshop Disasters blogger, Microsoft just f’ed up, that’s all. But while Microsoft was in the Photoshop mood, why didn’t they just cut the cap off the Asian dude too? My guess is that he was just light enough. He and the two other white people (and I guess the black hand), collectively, have just the right amount of melanin for a Polish ad…
As I said before, this ad is more discriminatory than racist. It was just a simple matter of Microsoft reaching their audience in a cost effective manner, they just did it in a horrifyingly sloppy way.
Honestly, if what you say is true about Polish being the whitest group out of the lot then I think Microsoft did the right thing by photoshopping the black man’s head with a white man’s head. All the hype about it really shouldn’t be ‘hyped’. Poland has a different environment than the US or the UK has. We have to see it from their point of view. If a Polish man or woman grows up in a world that doesn’t have much diversity, then I believe he or she would see the ad with a black man on it strange. However, in the US or UK, we, the people (haha, get it?), would think that an ad without a black man or other minority would be slightly offensive because we’ve grown in an environment that shows minorities with the majorities as the norm.
The people who are astonished and (slightly) outraged over this advertisement shouldn’t have taken offense. So what if the black man’s head was photoshopped in an ad? That ad wasn’t shown in the US. Microsoft, in my opinion, did the correct thing in changing the man’s head. They adjusted their marketing to fit the needs of every nation in the world (assuming they are). Other companies (who haven’t done so) should take in Microsoft’s example and follow. People in different nations aren’t the same. (Here’s the American in me coming out), we are all different in some way. In the US, there is a lot of diversity. In Russia, the majority is white. In Kenya, the majority is Africans who are dark colored. In India, the majority is brown. A US based company cannot advertise one of their products using a white man is they are advertising in Egypt; they would use an Egyptian. The same should go for Poland.
Since this news article came from the UK, I would suggest for those bloggers from the UK to butt out of other nation’s problems. Since the same ad shown in the UK was done using a black man, chill out. Your needs are met. Poland seems to need a white man on their ads then so be it. Remember that this world runs round when money is made. However, I will say this: if Microsoft DID order for that ad to change from a black man to a white man (since they’re denying it by saying that plan on finding out who ordered the photoshopping, which I also doubt they will do) then at least photoshop properly. That “white man” still retained a black man’s hand. Now unless you were looking at the photo closely, you really can’t tell that the white dude had a hand with skin color different. But since the article pointed it out, we all can see how shoddy the photoshop was. Really bad quality. Get up on that level, Microsoft.
When I first read this article on BBC.com I was surprised. You would think since Microsoft is such a big company that they would be more careful with their advertising decisions. I understand their advertising techniques, in which they have a specific audience and they are trying to gain the consumers attention, but I believe that race has nothing to do with that. I believe that a company should focus more on the product they are trying to attract the consumers with, not the type of people they are targeting. The moment Microsoft decided to change the black mans face with a white mans face to increase the value of their advertisement in Poland they became racist.
I do not understand why Microsoft felt it was necessary to change the race of the black mans face. They are basically saying that they have no black people working for their company, which is false. It also seems like they were trying to come off as they support white people more, since the majority of people in Poland are white. What confuses me is, Microsoft seemed to thinks it was ok to leave the Asian man alone and only change the black man. How many more Asian people are in Poland than black? If I were working for Microsoft, I would want to come off as a diverse company. Microsoft is a huge corporation that works with many parts of the world, why would they want to hide that?
Not only was this situation unnecessary, but it was also a mess. Microsoft could now lose black customers that may have seen this advertisement change. Also, the advertisers for Microsoft made the change very obvious. They changed the black mans face to a white mans, but they forgot to change the color of the black mans hand to white. So, they have a white man in the ad with a black hand. If a major corporation is so focused on changing their ads for different consumers, they might want to do it correctly. However, some bloggers claimed that Microsoft was trying to look more diverse when they had a white man with a black hand. I think that is ridiculous. That makes no sense at all. It is an obvious mistake that the advertisement party made and the company must now suffer because of it.
In my opinion, I may not agree with Microsoft’s advertisement techniques, but I do not think that they meant any harm. Although, they must take into consideration that some people, blacks in general, were offended. I really think that Microsoft could have just left the ad as was, and avoided this entire mess, now they must suffer the consequences.
Although I do not necessarily agree with the Microsoft decision to pull the black guy it makes sense. Microsoft only decided upon such a maneuver because they believed it would catalyze their profits in the Polish marketplace. The fact that is act was not motivated by racism or prejudice is evidenced by the fact that the advertisement was not manipulated in more racially diverse cultures. In regards to advertising organizations choose to develop methods and strategies, in which they believe will maximize profits. In order to do so, the organizations also develop their targeted demographics. Obviously, in this case their sought after demographic were Polish people, who as the article stated, which are predominantly white. Thusly, by replacing the black person with a white person Microsoft is assuming that such a transfer will permit the polish demographic to better identify with the product being advertised. Instances similar to this example are common throughout advertising. Organizations seek out the intended demographic and then intend to manufacture an advertisement that is geared to it. For instance, most Viagra commercials will depict a man in his 60s or 50s.
By extrapolating from this that Microsoft is racist in my mind is absurd. I am sure Microsoft would be just as eager to accept the dollars and currencies from people of all races, religions of the world. Money knows no color, except green. Instead organizations just do what makes sense. For instance, would it not be a little ridiculous if Gatorade used elderly people to market their product? I believe it would, their intended demographic are people that active in one way or another. This is why they choose to typically put athletes in their commercials. There is nothing wrong with going after an intended demographic. Look at Hooters, although, they employ people of all races they only employ females that are typically in their 20s or thirties. Do they get sexist and age discrimination suits filed against them? Yes, however, they are able to defend themselves on the ground that if they changed, and hired someone out of that particular demographic then their entire business plan, and culture they created would become warped. Organizations rarely discriminate; all they are concerned with is getting money.
I am sure if this same advertisement was aired in the Middle East. The women in it would have been photo shopped out. This would be due to the culture that developed there, and what their views on how woman should operate in the world are. It would not be photo shopped out because, like Poland, that no woman are present there. However, organizations would comit such an altering in the photo if they believe doing so will maximize their profits and by not doing so in one way or another may inflict damage on their profits.
Many comments seem to be suggesting Microsoft dislikes black people, or doesn’t value them in the business world. I would have to disagree with that and instead say that they value revenue over political correctness. Microsoft is less concerned with who is in their ads, than who is reading their ads. For instance, a main priority of the sales industry is to make the customer feel comfortable and part of a group. Now, if everyone in said group buys their products from Microsoft, this customer may be more prone to buy from Microsoft as well. Microsoft is merely changing this group based on region to reflect the prospective customer. I imagine Microsoft’s thought process was that people from a predominantly white society would feel more comfortable in a group of similarly white members. While I think Microsoft deserves a slap in the face for their terrible photoshopping job, I don’t believe they did anything morally outrageous.
At first though, I have conflicting ideas about the “correctness” of the advertisements that are blogged about. On one side, I don’t really have a problem with companies trying to market to a certain group of people a certain way. We see all the time that companies use young people when trying to market a product used by young people, and the same with other age groups. In that case, using an advertisement in a predominately white country featuring just white people would make more sense than the original advertisement. It is simply about the group of people that they are trying to reach. On the other hand, I do think that I have a problem with the company blatantly and obviously “photoshopping” in a white person in place of the black person. In all honestly, it’s the laziness that bothers me more than anything else. This is a multi-billion dollar company that is simply to cheap and lazy to take another picture, something that I wouldn’t really have a problem with. If there had just been two separate ads, I don’t think that there would have been any real backlash to this type of advertisement. However, the thought that someone would that openly change a black person’s face with a white person’s is pretty disturbing.
I think that the bigger issue in play here is how we have to actually talk about if it is okay to market to different types of people, and how much it matters that there is a black person instead of a white person or vice versa. The idea is to market the product, not the random three people sitting at the desk. The most worrying thing to me is that someone actually thinks that it matters what color the person in the advertisement is. I have never looked at an ad and thought, “I’m not going to buy this just because the person in the advertisement is black.” To me, it just doesn’t make any difference what person is in the ad, because it should be all about what they are marketing. The fact that Microsoft went to such bad lengths to change this ad shows that they are not worried about the right things, which should be selling their product. Is it really going to change how much money they make that much, that they should have to feel that a change was even necessary? That is the biggest problem that I have with the advertisement and with Microsoft. The idea that race would make that much of a difference in what they were trying to sell is very surprising and disturbing me. In my opinion, it doesn’t make a difference at all who is in the ad, but what it is saying. And to me, Microsoft is saying that they are just ignorant and maybe a bit racist, but mostly just really dumb.
I believe that this advertisement can be viewed in so many different ways; I really am not sure where to begin. Obviously, the first thing that comes to mind is that it was a racist move by removing a black man and replacing him with a white man. It begs the question, what was wrong with having the black man in the picture? Absolutely nothing, but that doesn’t stop him from being photo shopped over and replaced with the “norm” in Poland.
As mentioned in your comment, Poland is a place with little to no diversity. How do they ever expect to draw in people with specific tools and talents if they are going to feel excluded because of their skin, religion, sexual orientation, or any other variable that makes them different from the white norm that Poland seems to be promoting. With racist thinking like this, similar issues will be affecting Poland for the considerable future. The opposite is completely true in American advertisements. Instead of a black man being photo shopped into the picture, there would be many different ethnic groups besides white males. America has an almost backwards racism problem. White people especially white people with power feel the need to be so politically correct to the point where they are promoting other cultures while not advancing their own. Every time you see a commercial in America you can expect to see numerous ethnic groups as well as different genders and religions. I’m not saying that Poland has the right idea, and America doesn’t have the right idea either. The perfect middle ground would be a combination of Polish and American ideals. Not racist but not to the point where you are discriminating against your own ethnicity to promote other groups.
Another valid argument is that they were simply directing their ad to the people who would be most affected by it. For example, if you’re going to shoot a commercial for Abercrombie and Fitch it doesn’t make sense to use middle-aged actors from Iraq. That stores target audience is white male and female’s in-between the ages of 16-24. Maybe the whole reason for this controversial advertisement was that they were just trying to relate to the majority of the population in Poland. But, that leaves us with a tough question to deal with. Why the ad was originally filmed with a black male and then photo shopped to a white male? If they were doing this for marketing the original ad would have had the white male all along. This leads one to see how blatant racism can be not just in some parts of the world, but also in the all mighty U.S of A
I don't want to say that I'm educated on the Polish market, but being a student majoring in advertising, I can see how companies want to appeal to their target audience. I don't believe Microsoft was trying to exclude a certain group or race from their ad, nor were they trying to offend anyone by their poor decision that they made, I think they were trying to appeal to their audience; whoever that may be. It doesn't make it right what they did, and I’m certainly not trying to justify their actions, but whoever made this decision thought they were doing the right thing at the right time. However, if I were to working for Microsoft, or have been involved in this photo shopping, I’d be embarrassed. Actually as a viewer of the ad I’m embarrassed to be looking at it. It shows poor judgment on the individuals who thought it would be OK to edit the original photograph; in addition it shows poor judgment on the company for allowing it to be printed and shown to the public. And to top it all off, you can see that the editing of the photo wasn’t even done well! I think that if you are purposely going to exclude someone from photo that they were originally a part of and put someone else’s head on their body, then at least make it look good! The white man doesn’t even seem like he’s a real person. He’s head is awkwardly to the side and, really, a white face with a black hand? Not only was it a poor choice, but poorly executed.
The reason that the American version has a white female, a black male, and an Asian male on the ad is because they are trying to please the public and they are not trying to offend or leave anyone out. You can pick up an application or pamphlet from any major corporation in American and they will try to persuade you into thinking they are the most diverse company in the country by having multiple ethnicities on the cover.
I did a project on something like this in COMM 403. The University of Wisconsin-Madison photo shopped an African American student on to the cover of their undergraduate application to show to their prospective students that they have a diverse population. After it was made public about the editing job, the university had to spend extra money to reprint the application, included an apology letter, and worked with the black student who was on the cover to find ways to add more diversity to their campus. I included the link of the picture so anyone can take a look at it.
http://15.media.tumblr.com/TvWO4btirmb36o4lhylp6O0qo1_r1_500.jpg
When I first heard about this article I really was not sure what to think about it. I was amazed that Microsoft would make a mistake like this with all of the money the corporation has to spend on advertising and that nobody managed to catch the error, but I do not think that this oversight is a huge deal. I think that this is just the media blowing a minor photoshopping error into a big issue dealing with racism. If the media did not make this error out to be a huge deal nobody would even be discussing this “issue”. I understand Microsoft’s reasoning to edit the ad so it appeals to the Polish consumers who are a predominantly white group. I know that the point of advertising is to sell a product, and if Microsoft felt that the prejudice or racism of the Polish consumers would affect the sales of their product then what Microsoft did is understandable. The error in the picture was not very noticeable to me at first glance, but when I looked closer I was able to see a difference in the skin color of the white guy’s face and the black guy’s hands. I do not necessarily believe that what they did was right, but I can see the thinking behind what they did. One thing I don’t understand is why they did not photoshop the Asian guy out of the add along with the black guy and replace him with a white guy. If Microsoft thought that the prejudice of the Polish consumers was bad enough to need to photoshop the black guy out of the ad then I believe they should have photoshopped the Asian guy out of the ad. I’m sure the only reason that this is considered a big deal is because Americans found out about the ad. We as Americans are used to seeing diversity in advertising and other aspects of the media, and because of that we expect corporations to have diversity in their ads. We don’t take the time to consider how other countries feel about diversity. If nobody noticed the ad directed toward us did feature diversity in it. The ad had a white woman, a black guy, and an Asian guy. If there was going to be an issue about diversity where are the other ethnicities that are not featured in the ad, like Hispanics. Maybe they should put another woman in the ad that was directed toward Americans, such as a Hispanic woman. Most people don’t consider those who are left out of ads, but rather those who are in ads that are directed toward us and taken out of ads that are directed toward other countries that don’t have anywhere near as much diversity as the U.S. That is why I feel that this is just an error that was over looked and blown out of proportion by the media.
Agreeing with others it’s difficult to decide where to begin on this interesting story. Instantly I feel intrigued to find out what made Microsoft feel the need to alter this picture. I am confused about several things with it and their actions. First what did they think the black man represented on this advertisement? Next, why did they feel the need to cut out his head and replace it with a white man’s head? Immediately this made me think of Sam’s lecture where he talked about the white people at a table of various races and how the white people usually don’t want to say anything as they feel they may offend another race. To avoid criticism from others they often choose to be neutral and in this case cut out the black man. I picture in my mind a number of white people making this advertisement and as they attempt to make it a multi-cultural and multi-sexual and diverse as possible they catch themselves recalling that this ad will be directed towards Poland which as Sam stated very much white.
What really gets me thinking is what Microsoft believes people will say when they see the original advertisement. Will people freak out because there is a white woman, black man, or Asian man on it? So, we can see that they were most concerned with the black male’s picture as they cut it out. This make me wonder if the act was done out of greed for increased profits, ignorance as they feel the white people will not buy Microsoft products due to this black man on their ad, or just sheer stupidity. Do they believe that this older male that appears very well educated, dressed nicely, and working at a very good job really tarnishes Microsoft’s reputation? I feel that they are deeply mistaken. I could see the concern if they were a gangster drug dealer waving a gun and a knife in the air that happened to be black on their ad, and then they may want to change the advertisement around a little. But in this case the black man on here draws for no reason for him to be cut out.
I believe today we are more diverse than ever before as we have seen around us in the people we pass and media and what have you. We certainly have to realize that there is no one kind of people. Whether in Warsaw, Poland, or in New York City we must be open to the fact that there are other races and ethnicities in our lives besides that of our own. For someone to see an ad without their own race displayed and truly reject that product or company solely because their own race isn’t represented is a terrible thing to think about. To believe that people can be so close-minded and ethnocentric is difficult it today’s diverse times. People should not care what race or ethnicity anyone else is especially on something as nominal as an ad for Microsoft. Shame on the people who changed this picture and shame on those who would look at this ad and respond to it differently based on the race of people shown on it.
Racism exists in commercialism worldwide in order to relate to specific ethnicities. Populations with huge majorities that coexist with other small minorities obviously show favoritism towards the larger group. Corporations, for example, use this tool to their own advantage when appealing for a larger consumer audience. For many industries, race selection is highly specific for their marketing strategy. Through a business perspective it can be very effective, yet ethically, however, it is considered to be unprincipled. According to the blog posted, a Polish Microsoft commercial replaced a black man from the original American commercial with a white person. It was unclear why exactly this was edited; one could agree that this was done intentionally to appease the white Polish market. One fact from this story is that companies just don’t care… unless it’s spotted by the public media. According to this story, Microsoft stated that they “apologized for the gaffe” and were “investigating who made the changes.” Although this may be true, it does not give them the excuse for the racist damage they have done. As a company, including all of its employees and employers, I think that everyone is responsible for the actions they make. Through a first-hand perspective, one might think that countries such as Poland are more racist than the U.S., but is the U.S. more socially acceptable of other ethnicities? Despite its mass diversity, racism is still prevalent all around the U.S. In 2000, the cell phone company Boost Mobile was introduced to the U.S. from Australia. Compared to other rival companies such as Verizon and Cingular, Boost Mobile launched commercials that appealed to a majority of African Americans. Their key slogan, “where you at,” became a popular phrase that appealed to their targeted race market. This may seem like a harmless advertising strategy, but let’s take a look at this on a subliminal level. The slogan message implies that this specific ethnic group isn’t good enough for society. In the process, this company completely changed the image from its Australian counterpart and reinforced a negative stereotype. In another scenario, companies who manufacture “whitening cream” significantly alter the perception of being normal. Where sales become stagnant in the U.S., most of their profits exist internationally to cover up the holes. It seems to be that the world’s number one focus is on being white. Companies are utilizing this false reality for their own benefit. In my opinion, companies are segregating minority races while promoting the “more important” race worldwide. I understand that some of these actions may be unintentional, but this world needs to turn off the television or computer once in a while and see the bigger picture. We are not enslaved by corporations and their stereotypes that they present on society. Changing one mindset is the first step to changing a thousand.
Microsoft is not racist. It is simply absurd that people would even begin to consider that this advertisement is racist toward black people. In my opinion, the world today is becoming too quick to declare articles, actions, and sayings as racist. There has to be a more legitimate reason why Microsoft changed the race of the man in their advertisement. There are two possibilities that can explain this advertisement, and neither will promote that Microsoft is racist.
First off, Microsoft is one of the biggest corporations in the world. They’re a billion-dollar business that leads the world in state-of-the-art technology and sales in that field. If it’s from your Apple IPod to your new Macintosh Computer, Microsoft technology is everywhere. In my opinion, this advertisement could be showing the harmony of the black and white community, agreeing with BlackBerry. Thousands of advertisements are dispersed across nations of the world trying to sell Microsoft; there is a slim chance that this huge corporation did this on accident. That this billion-dollar company that is one of the largest corporations in America missed this large of a “mistake”. I’m sorry, but I can’t fathom it. From my point of view, the company was expressing how business is becoming more globalized. From outsourcing to diversity, business is becoming an opportunity for every race, class, and ethnicity. The mixture of the white head and black hand shows that business is becoming multi-racial and the conformity of races.
“People are becoming more multi-racial as generations pass. From interracial marriages or couples with different ethnic backgrounds, it is becoming slimmer that a pure-bred Caucasian or African American can be found.”
Even if Microsoft made this enormous of a mistake when they published this advertisement, it is their prerogative who they want in their advertisement. I am almost positive that the advertisement team for Microsoft knows what ads help sell their products, and parts of advertisements that cause advertisements to fail.
“Advertisements are based to fit the desires of the audiences that are intended to watch them.”
If the company decided that replacing a black man with a white male to increase sales and capture the attention of the audience the advertisement is intended for, it is ridiculous to call Microsoft racist. The people that claim this advertisement is racist should talk to marketers and they will soon learn that it is all about what will sell their advertisement. If people would think about it, the advertisement makes sense. America is becoming one of the most diverse nations in the world; there is no problem with having three different races in their advertisements. Going to Poland with a population filled with Caucasians, it is logical that Microsoft advertising team would replace a darker male with a lighter skin male to better advertise their product.
I’m not racist. In reality, all businesses care about is profit. Profit is what drives America. Clearly the advertisement wasn’t supposed to demote black men or show any type of racism. Microsoft just wants profit, along with mostly every business in the world.
After reading this blog, I decided that while Microsoft’s actions were racist, I do not believe the motivation behind these actions was racism. I believe instead that Microsoft was motivated by an advertising strategy whose bottom line is to sell the most product possible. In order to be politically correct, Microsoft should not have changed the black man’s head to a white man’s head, but I can understand why they did it from an advertising standpoint. Advertisers must consider their target audience. For example, as a teenage girl, I would most likely not purchase a product that was being advertised with a bunch of little five-year-old boys using it. It’s not that I have anything against five-year-old boys, it is simply that I do not have the same interests and needs as they do. Therefore, something that appeals to the five-year-old boy demographic would quite possibly not appeal to me. Similarly, in the Microsoft advertisement, the advertisers were probably not trying to be racist, they were just trying to appeal to their target customers.
Unfortunately for Microsoft, instead of appealing to their target customers, they may have actually offended a large number of people. In Poland, it may be considered acceptable to not show diversity in advertisements because the Polish population is not very diverse. In America, however, diversity is a very common thing. We almost expect every race to be represented in our advertisements. As a result of this, Americans will most likely find the Microsoft advertisement much more controversial than the Polish people will.
There is something that puzzles me, however, about the actions of the advertisers. I do not understand why Microsoft advertisers took the time to change the black man’s head to a white man’s head, but they kept the Asian man Asian. This makes me think that what Microsoft did was racist because they only eliminated the black person from the advertisement. If they were trying to relate the advertisement to the white people of Poland, then why didn’t they make the Asian man white too? It does not make sense that Microsoft would remove one race but not the other.
Overall, changing the race of the black man to a white man in the ad was a very big mistake on the part of Microsoft. It would not have been such an issue if Microsoft would have either kept the advertisement unchanged or if they would have used all white people to be in their Polish ad to begin with. It also seems very careless that no one from Microsoft saw that the black man’s hand was not changed to white as well. In a world that is so racially diverse, people need to be more careful about trying not to offend other people.
The article that I read was called “Political Correctness or Blatant Racism”. The article is about an advertisement from the infamous Microsoft Company. Apparently there was a drastic change made to one of theirs advertisements. The change involved changing an African American man’s face with a white mans face. A big deal was made out of this situation, most people including myself consider this incident to be very offensive to anyone of color. I really do not believe there is an excuse for this. Microsoft should have known better than to do something like this. This makes me feel like wow they really think a black man will not be able to sell their products. I think that the reasoning behind the change is that they wanted to target the largely white population of Poland. However if they wanted to do this they could have found a different way to do so. I understand that America’s a melting pot full of many different races and cultures. A white man is more easily accepted here, than in Poland where most of the population is strictly white. I understand that mostly everyone in Poland is white however that doesn’t mean that they need to change their entire advertisements to cater to the supposed wants of the Polish. Microsoft was probably so focused on making a profit that they failed to see how their error could effect their company. If they would have changed all the models or taken a different picture all together it would not have been such a big problem but since they only changed the black man’s face they have to live with the consequences. Microsoft will most likely loose many customers because of this issue. I disagree with those that say keeping the black man’s hands shows a sort “interracial harmony”. Personally I feel that this was either a mistake or a task to hard for Photoshop. I think that a fix to the situation would be to have Microsoft try to appeal to more than just one audience America is getting better everyday at accepting people of different races, but they didn’t get here overnight. It took decades to get as close as we are to racial equality. I think Poland needs to become a little more aware of the different cultures which exist in world so that companies do not feel the need to change the way they market to meet the needs of a specific demographic. Poland needs to accept that the world consists of more than just white people. Overall I think this goes to show that the world still thinks in a racist way. People are still stuck on the ways of the past. This is obviously blatant racism or at the very least racist thinking, hidden to seem like clever advertising.
In response to the blog “Political Correctness or Blatant Racism”. What is marketing, well most dictionaries state it’s “the commercial processes involved in promoting and selling and distributing a product or service”. I am by no means particularly adept in marketing; actually I would probably be as far as you can be from an expert in the field. But from an outsiders point of view on marketing it makes a lot of sense, in my opinion, to appeal to a white audience by displaying to them something they are used to, therefore making it less foreign and more marketable. I’m not sure why we have to pretend like race doesn’t exist and that it would be such a big deal to change a black mans head to a white mans depending on the audience. If this country is very white then, I would speculate, it would be a better marketing strategy to market white. Microsoft isn’t here to better the world or rid it of its race, sex, and cultural problems they’re marketing to make money, not to help broaden Poland’s racial conceptualizations. Let’s also not kid ourselves corporate America is WHITE by and large. It’s nice to put the picture up of a woman, a black man, and an Asian guy looking up and smiling gleefully at god knows what, but what my studies have shown me so far is that this isn’t going to be your typical group of employees in corporate America. If I wanted to sell a MP3 player in Baltimore I would use a black man in my marketing and advertising, or a ski package in the Hamptons I would use a young white couple smiling cruising down the slops. It actually makes me laugh thinking of the fact that I can’t remember the last time I saw a skiing or snowboarding advertisement that had anything but white faces on it, can you? What also strikes me as amusing is the blogger who on the BBC article suggested that maybe Microsoft was trying to please all markets by having a man with “both a white face and black hand.” Trying to please all markets? I don’t know if I find a white man’s face with black hands pleasing, maybe scary. Going on that train of thought, Microsoft should probably attempt to please all markets by just cutting the face in half making half of it a white guys and half of it a black guys, then everyone would be pleased. One blogger wrote that the white head and black hands was symbolizing “interracial harmony….show(ing) a person can be white and black, old and young at the same time”. Wow. To me it symbolizes corporate stupidity, or someone who just has a great sense of humor. Would it be possible to stop pretending like everything is fair and just when it comes to race now, and that the face on a Microsoft add really matters. What does matter is public policy, racial disparities that are increasing with time instead of decreasing; the fact that ghettos are black and resorts are white. These are the questions that interest me, not why some moron replaced a picture with a white guys head and forgot to change the color of his hands also. So would I categorize this as political correctness or blatant racism? I would probably say neither, this to me represents, stupidity, capitalism, and good humor.
When I first read the article about the ad a part of me was disgusted and another part of me was not really shocked at all. This is a very unfortunate situation especially because we are living in the 21st century and sadly we still have to deal with issues like this. This is just proof that racism is still alive not necessarily by the owners of Microsoft but somewhere in the company’s staff. This issue was something that could have easily been avoided but for some reason the more that I think about it the more I start to believe that this was done intentionally and the person either forgot to replace the hands or felt that leaving the hands untouched would stir up controversy as it has. In my opinion whoever changed the photo did a sloppy job with their photoshopping. One thing that could make me agree with the thought that “Polish people would probably rather see people who look like them” would be if the Asian man had been photoshopped out of the ad as well. Also if that was the case that would say a lot about Polish people and what people think about them. That thought is basically saying that Polish people are somewhat closed-minded and if this is the case it is sad for 2009. As far as Dr. Richard’s original posting stating “Would you use photos of straight couples in your advertisements in LGBT magazines? Sometimes, no doubt, but you'd more often opt for a gay or lesbian scene.” The photoshopped ad still has an Asian man in the ad so I cannot really understand how this would apply since Poland has been described as being predominantly white. However, the point of this blog is not about the Asian man it is about the face of a black man being replaced. If the person in the middle of the ad had been completely changed (hands included) I do not think that this would have attracted as much attention as it has. Furthermore if someone at Microsoft truly felt that the people of Poland would not be satisfied with or could not handle the final ad that was presented at the Microsoft office then why not mention it before they took the actual picture. Any way you put it the final ad on the Polish website was horrible and hopefully Microsoft will find out who is responsible for this and will take the appropriate steps to ensure that a mistake like this never happens again because this is not a good look for their company at all and more mistakes like this could cost them many customers and a big dip in their yearly intake.
Who cares? I honestly don’t see why everyone is so up in arms about this “issue.” It’s business. If the majority of the Polish market is white, then have a white guy in your ads. Advertising agencies are trying to reach their target audience. If black people aren’t their target audience, then they shouldn’t have a black man in their ads. It goes along with what Sam said in his entry: “Would you use photos of straight couples in your advertisements in LGBT magazines?” Probably not. I wouldn’t think that it would be in the best interest to include white people in an ad for a company targeting people in North Korea, either. Like I said before, it’s business. There is no need to reshoot the entire ad if Photo Shopping a head will suffice. Microsoft is not saying “black people are bad” or “We, at Microsoft, only like Whites and Asians because that’s who we keep in our ads.” It is not racist to use models/actors that fit the description of the target audience. If that were racist, then all ad agencies would be shut down due to racism.
This happened a couple of years ago when some university “photohopped” a person of color into their brochures. Everyone thought it was absolutely appalling. I don’t. And I cannot really grasp why everyone else thinks that it is. They wanted to show diversity among their students. Maybe an intern screwed up and didn’t get a representative sample to model the student body. Or maybe some people failed to show up for the shoot. Regardless, the show must go on. Adding someone in here or there via graphic arts shouldn’t be such a big deal. Would everyone be acting this way if they added a white person into an advertisement?
The only thing that is upsetting to me is that Microsoft was too stupid to realize that this was going to be a hot issue. It always is. But, maybe that is what they were going for. They do say that all press is good press and they are definitely getting a lot of exposure. I mean look at us: 700 students are writing about Microsoft. Was this all a well-organized plan to get us thinking and talking about their company? Who knows? Who cares?
There is no doubt in my mind that racism exists. I’ve never seen more racism than since I came to Penn State, but I think we shouldn’t be wasting our time and energy worrying about how politically incorrect Microsoft is and concentrate on something worth while. There are a lot of tragedies and significant events going on in the world today. This is not one of them.
First of all I will start by saying there are many definitions to racism. Not one specific person has the same definition. I think people are to quick to say that it is racist when they do not even know what the definition of racism is. When it comes to this article, I do not believe it is racism. I feel that the people doing this Microsoft photo just knew how to find a loop hole I guess you would say and make it seem that it would benefit the people in that one area they were selling this product or what ever they were selling. It is known that Americans are not the same.
Anytime race is involved, with any issue, the stakes are immediately raised. I do agree with the reasoning; nobody should be judged based on the color of their skin. However, I like to think that we as a people have evolved to the point that racism is more of a past issue than a present one. Racism does still run rampant throughout all of America, but a much less violent and much less widespread version. I do not believe this Microsoft ad invokes any racist feelings. Microsoft is too well respected and too professional to make such an error.
Sure, it is easy to interpret this ad as being racist. The reason I fail to believe this is racism is the nature in which it was created; it is such a poorly done photo shop (as stated the hands and body are the same, the face is just imposed). Why would a multi-billion dollar business stoop to this level, anyway? I feel these two factors prove that this picture does not show any racist feelings from Microsoft. In fact, I feel this proves that the picture is illegitimate.
Microsoft, being such a huge worldwide company, and a company that deals with the best computer programmers in the world, would have plenty of resources to create an entirely new or at least well done advertisement. The quality of the work is so terrible that it seems to me like this was an ‘oh shit’ last second put together. I truly fail to believe this is actually a Microsoft ad. It seems to me that some online blogger did this in order to stir public opinion. Microsoft would have made a terrible mistake IF this actually a Microsoft advertisement.
Microsoft not only has the best programmers in the world, but also the best Public Relations people. I believe this also enforces the idea that this is a scam advertisement, because this ad mix-up would surely catch the attention of people who are trained to evaluate and market these ads. The fact that they would not see the “black body” with a photo shopped face seems ridiculous.
One last thing I can say about Microsoft, however, is that they are a multi-billion dollar business. In the one case, assuming the picture is fake, this fact bolsters the point. Now assuming the picture is actually a Microsoft ad, the fact that they are a huge enterprise can also support the validity. Businesses are generally created for one reason: profit. So, the picture is altered to give the buyer more of a feeling of empathy, albeit at a slightly racist cost. Microsoft is trying to sell a product to its users, and will do anything they deem necessary to do so; in this case possibly by editing in a more common face.
Again, I do not feel this picture has any legitimacy whatsoever. However, if it does, I don’t think that racism in any form is involved. Companies will try to sell their products as best as possible, and if changing skin color will sell, it is simply a profit based motive.
In an attempt to absorb what I had just seen and read about, I found myself feeling a mélange of different emotions. First off, I found myself slightly amused after looking at the white man’s head paired with a black man’s hand. Then, after the chuckles wore off, I found myself slightly annoyed. The fact that an advertisement needs to be changed for a different country might be downright ridiculous. Honestly, if I am a business person buying IT tools for my company, I wouldn’t be basing my choices around the racial mix that is included in their billboard. I am 99% sure that Poland understands that there are people of various colors in our world, and I think that they further understand that some of them may use Microsoft’s IT technology. However, if I just happened to be one of those shallow Polish businesspeople that actually considered to base my decisions off of a billboard on the side of the road or the welcome screen to Microsoft’s IT division, I would certainly think twice after looking at a black hand paired with a white man’s head. I would laugh, and then quickly realized I was laughing at someone who could potentially provide a service for me. Would I be grateful that this company was hiding the realities of a diverse universe from my Polish eyes? Some may feel that way, but a truly intelligent person would feel downright duped. I would almost feel more offended. Why would Microsoft have to go through all the trouble (or more like half-ass) to alter their ad campaign for my tender Polish eyes? I wonder if any of Microsoft’s mammoth’s profits are trickling down to their advertising, or is all that money going to the Bill and Melissa Gate’s foundation to help people from all over the world so that the company can look good? Well that seems humorously ironic that they feel the need to support diversity in the public eye, but in reality they must badly Photoshop an advertisement so not to offend the Poles. The members of the marketing industry are swindlers in their rawest form. They are the used car salesman that won’t show you the CarFax mainly because the car you are about to buy had, at one point in the past, been about 15 ft under water, and possibly it could make it off the lot. The marketing industry makes things look pretty. They attempt to make things look great, fascinating, and spectacular to the prospective customer’s eye. You know it would be fascinating and spectacular to me if, in fact, there was a man in an advertisement that actually had a black hand with a white head.
Oddly enough, I saw this not on the news, but on Engadget, a techie blog following gadgets and electronic news. The author was remarking on the HORRIBLE photoshop job, and pointed out the folly of MS’s marketing and advertising strategy. But let’s look at the graphic briefly, shall we? Not only is the man’s neck completely disproportionate to his body (seriously, his chin is below his shoulder), but there’s a phantom light coming from the middle of the room, a light which the two others who accompany receive. It could be the designer’s subtle hint that white people are radiant and good, but I’m guessing it’s more a case of bad stock images. I’m also enjoying the sudden cliff in the window behind his head...
However, the poor job, combined with the circumstances, indicated to me that Microsoft was simply adjusting to the demographic. While I (anything BUT a proponent for MS) will always look for legitimate reasons to bash the company, I do not feel this is something to get too excited about. At least, on the field of racism. It IS a very bad photoshopping.
So, let’s look at the situation. You, as VP of advertising, just approved a new graphic for your website, which will go live in about three hours. Suddenly, your market research head calls in and mentions that the polish header was originally supposed to have two whites and one (severely airbrushed) asian. Not necessarily out of racism, but to relate with the audience as you mentioned in your post. So now you, with a severely restricted time limit and lack of skills yourself, must put a rush on the modification of the header by means of another trained individual. You contact the graphic arts department and alert the head honcho that there’s an adjustment than needs to be made on a web banner. In a panic, the head graphic artist makes completely amateur mistakes, such as the hands, lighting, perspective, and window sill. Now, it’s time to send the image back. The web master must then pull the original file off of the FTP server, reload the new one, and post it online just in time.
Granted, I know next to nothing about how Microsoft works. They could just be a bigoted company who caters to bigoted people. But, given my knowledge of design work and “shoopin’” things up, I can guarantee you that, unless they hire high schoolers to do their web graphics, these mistakes should NOT have happened unless there were dire circumstances at hand.
Regardless, even if I have not been to poland, I think such things should hardly matter in the world today. Not only that, but I think some people don’t even know racism exists anymore. In my art history class today, we had a picture of an Aunt Jemima product up, and the teacher asked what was wrong with it. You know the image: big smiling black woman with her hair under a maid’s hood and ready to serve her master? Not ONE student was able to say what the problem was. The phrase “Jim Crow” never even got mentioned.
9/3/09: SOC119 Journal entry
I will be honest here – the picture was all that it took to hook me. From the picture alone, I lost it. I laughed pretty hard. I inspected the picture pretty hard. It’s safe to say that there were some very minor alterations. It’s funny how minor alterations like these can cause such uproar. The uproar and the controversy that resulted from the minor alteration is what made me laugh even harder. As you can see, I’m getting a kick out of this because of how ridiculous it is.
Upon reading the article, I took note of what Microsoft said. They claimed that the picture was a gaffe and they apologized for it. That’s great and all, but the fact of the matter is that someone from Microsoft altered the photo so that what originally a black man looked like a white man for its distribution in Poland. Someone messed up, but that’s fine by me since I find it hilarious.
The article talks of possible reasons as to why such a drastic alteration was made. Most of the possible reasons discussed originated by bloggers and internet forum posts. “The white head and black hand actually symbolise interracial harmony…” That line made me giggle on the inside. Why, you ask? Well, I don’t even think Stretch Armstrong could make a stretch like that, and ‘stretch’ is in his name, for crying out loud! The most likely reason for the alteration is stated at the bottom of the article. It says that the most likely reason for the alteration would be because of Poland’s ethnic make-up. Apparently, there aren’t many people of ‘color’, in that country. Now, that’s fine and dandy, but that leaves me pondering why they didn’t alter the Asian in the picture? If you’re going to make a change like that, then be consistent! Microsoft could look like blatant bigots by just singling-out the black man.
As a common poster on internet forums and imageboards, I have seen a lot of photoshop jobs and whatnot. Normally, those are created for laughs, and yes, they can be racist. Racist or not, they are for laughs. This picture does not look like something that Microsoft would be responsible for. It looks like something I would see while cruising an imageboard forum. Great job, Microsoft! You are now seen as unprofessional and possibly racist! A great job, indeed…
Now, Microsoft most likely had no intention of offending anyone or portray any kind of racism in that photo. Odds are that they just wanted to appeal to their target audience. Unfortunately, the picture was made public, and it hurt them a little bit. Hopefully they’ve learned their lesson. If it happens again, though… I will still laugh about it.
When I first saw this ad on the race relations blog my initial reaction was to laugh at the serer ridiculousness of it. I find it incredibly funny that Microsoft would do something like this and even funnier still that people would criticize them for it. If you look at each ad by itself and not side by side the two would just look like normal boring run of the mill Microsoft ads. When the ads are placed together however it suddenly becomes a question of whether or not Microsoft is being racist. In this particular case I do not believe that Microsoft is guilty of racism. The most compelling evidence of this lies right in the ad itself. In the ad the three employees are simply sitting around a table at work. They aren’t doing any work just sitting there. For this reason I believe the ad is not racist. On the other hand if they had been doing actual work like for instance giving a presentation then it would be a different story. Then they would be suggesting that the black man is not capable of giving a quality presentation or vice versa. When it comes down to it Microsoft is just simply making a smart business decision. They realize that in different parts of the world there are different races of people. By changing the race of the man in each ad they are just making a good business decision and allowing their company to have a wider appeal to possible consumers by making it easier for them to relate to the people in the ads. As for the fact that when they changed the ad they only changed the man’s head and not his hand I think people are reading into that too much. I don’t buy any of that bi racial appeal stuff. I simply think that whoever did it was just cutting corners changing the head and simply forgot about the hand. I do agree though on the point that if the ad had been run in the United States the photo shopping probably would have been the other way around. We live in a society where everything has to be so politically correct and nothing can offend anybody that we are really beginning to hurt ourselves. It seems like every ad or picture you see anywhere always has a mix of every race in it whether it be here with a Asian guy, a black guy, and a woman or in a children’s math book where the kid is black and in a wheelchair. What we are going to wind up doing and which we are already on the way to is limiting our constitutional right to free speech. If we don't watch out soon people will be so scared of offending each other that nothing will be published anymore and we will lose a lot of wonderful work do to the fact that it might offend someone. We need to focus on other more important things and not whether or not that because some worker at Microsoft edited an ad that none of us would have even noticed otherwise now they are being considered a racist corporation.
The post about Microsoft's advertising blunder has no doubt sparked a lot of constructive and insightful comments regarding the role of racism and political correctness in the field of marketing and the global marketplace. Some people, like myself, see the crudely photoshopped white man in place of the original black man and sense that there is something very wrong. Other classmates side with Microsoft saying the claims of racism more or less stem from excessive political correctness. Most arguments for Microsoft go something like this: If Poland is almost entirely white, their advertisements should be allowed to reflect that. While I appreciate both sides of this argument, the point of my comment is that this perceived relationship between advertising and reality is the opposite. The use of class distinctions and racism in mass-marketing are actually reflected by reality.
As we saw in class, advertisements can serve as a way to further stereotypes and lessen the power of certain racial groups. Products that can help brown or black people become white such as “White Power “ and “Perfect White” are inherently racist because they infer that brown or black is bad and white is good, or in this case “Perfect”. The effect this has on people is evident in the example of the Asian woman who surgically repairs her eyelids to become more European. Why is the demand for such a surgery even in existence? Advertisements touting European features as perfect aren't the only example of marketing encouraging racism. Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben, mascots most of us will find in our kitchen right at this very moment, were originally servants for white people. The characterization of black men and women as servants was not specific to just these marketing characters. Other equally or sometimes more offensive images permeated magazines and newspapers during the Jim Crow era, further justifying segregation, hatred, and ignorance.
To say advertisements do not change how we think would be to deny their very purpose. When Aunt Jemima is serving up a tasty stack of flapjacks, the ad agency's intention is to change how you think about pancakes and brand loyalty, not how you think about black people. But how can your mind differentiate between the two? Simply put, it cannot.
To summarize all of that, the men and women behind Microsoft's Polish ad should be ashamed for falsely believing that their ad had little consequence on the racial landscape of Poland. They consciously and actively turned down the opportunity to promote diversity and understanding in Poland's corporate culture. This is less an issue of racism vs. political correctness than it is an issue of accountability and courage. The advertisers may or may not be racist, but they certainly should be ashamed.
After reading the CNN article online I first thought that they were way off. There is no way that Microsoft would have photoshopped a white man’s head on a black man’s body to show “interracial harmony”. That idea is ridiculous, and there are two reasons disproving that thought. First, Microsoft would have said something about that when the issue first came up. This would have avoided all the bad media that the advertisement has brought to the company. Second, they would have also made the black hands, more black. If I were to see the Polish advertisement without ever seeing the English advertisement I would never know that those were a black man’s hands. Making the whole idea of “interracial harmony” arbitrary. The simple reason for Microsoft putting a white man’s head over a black man’s head is because they were appealing to the audience. I’m not saying it was right, but I am not really that surprised that a company the size of Microsoft had done such a thing.
Since there is very little racial diversity in Poland, Microsoft was looking to relate to the mostly white public. It’s similar to a woman using Pantene, in one of Pantene’s commercials, or a young adult drinking Bacardi in one of Bacardi’s commercials. The company is appealing to the audience that will be using the product. It would not make sense to put someone under 21 in a Bacardi commercial, because legally no one under 21 is using the product. In Microsoft’s case there are not many black men or women buying their product in Poland. This is due to the fact that there are not many black men or women in Poland. So in Microsoft’s defense they were just trying to make the most sales that they can.
The fact that they would be able to appeal to the audience more with a white person over a black person is the problem. Skin color of a person in an advertisement should not influence a buyer one way or another. It’s not like black people do not use the products so having a black man in the advertisement should not affect the amount of sales. Unfortunately in a place like Poland I believe it does, and so does Microsoft. In the end, this thought probably hurt Microsoft with all the media attention the advertisement has gotten. This sucks for Microsoft. According to Sam this method shifting races to appeal to the market occurs all the time. All of which is occurring in the United States, a country who pride themselves on being culturally diverse. Microsoft should not have gotten all the bad media that they got if the media were not willing to bring up the problem that all companies do the same. All in all Microsoft was just trying to make the most sales and in no way were they trying to be racist. The problem lies within our society, since people are more influenced by an advertisement with their own race in it.
First and foremost, whoever is working at Microsoft in the advertising department needs to be fired. I mean, why are you working for such a large influential company if you suck at it? What a stupid, idiotic mistake! I do not agree with this decision, and I don’t and won’t understand why the corporation would make this decision. Upon reading the article attached to this, I read that some bloggers were actually defending the company. They stated that it shows they are trying to promote multicultural diversity by having the face of the man white, and the hands black. That is just stupid. They obviously didn’t do it on purpose. I’m not sure what the mindset is of the people in Poland, but why would making one of the people in the advertisement white have anything to do with whether or not Polish people could appreciate the product? Race should have nothing to do with whether or not someone will buy a certain product. Overall, Microsoft just ate the big one. I promise you that their product sales will go down based on this single bluff. Who wants to support a company that is potentially racist? I think that this is eye opening and actually beneficial to society that this happened. It shows just how judgmental the world is and just how far large corporations will go for money. It’s disgusting how much the world relies on money and power and this represents a picture of the world. Not everyone feels this way, but most people would do pretty much anything for money. My first reaction to the change in the advertisement was complete shock. I don’t know why it was shock, because in the back of my mind I’m sure that most corporations do things like this in their advertising. Why did Microsoft think that the race in the advertisement was going to affect their sales in any way? No one cares about that. Buying a computer or program or whatever your trying to buy from Microsoft has nothing to do with race! I agree with Sam. The only reason this got attention because it was exposed for what it is. This happens all the time, but we just don’t realize or take a deeper look into the world of advertising. And why was it just the black man? Don’t they see the Asian man as something different? Why wouldn’t that affect them too? This was a poor decision made by a poor minded individual who doesn’t deserve a high paying job in a highly influential institution. I hope to see some changes be made to these types of corporations that influence so many of us in the world today.
The target audience is very important to take into consideration when it comes to a marketing campaign. The United States has a very diverse population in the business sector, so it makes sense that an advertisement aimed at business types from the United States would include a selection of men and women of all different races. When considering a country with a less diverse body of people involved in business, such as Poland, it makes more sense to show an environment dominated by white people. An image depicting a group of many different races doesn’t have as much of an impact as a picture that shows a similar racial majority to that of the audience. So, does this mean that the Microsoft employee who decided to make this change is a racist or does it mean that he or she is just a good marketer who considers the demographic that is being targeted? Marketing needs to be realistic, and in this case, perhaps, a black man wearing a suit and working for a Polish company is not realistic. A good advertisement will appeal to people based on these types of demographics. Obviously there aren’t enough black men in corporate Poland to include a black man in an advertisement, so why not throw in some more representation for a group of people with whom the Polish can identify. I really don’t think that anyone in this situation is racist. The BBC News article fails to state what that social status of racial minorities is in Poland. Who are we to assume that Polish people are predominantly white because they are all a bunch of racists? Also, we should consider if this scenario were to be reversed. How would people react if a Polish company made an advertisement for Poland and replaced a white man with a black man or black woman to make the ad more appealing to be run in a more diverse nation such as the United States? It’s all about appealing to the customer. It doesn’t mean that the advertiser or customer is racially insensitive. It just makes sense to match the people depicted in the advertisement with the people who are viewing the advertisement. If the ad had been made to catch the eyes of Asian companies, wouldn’t the people depicted in the office setting be Asian? The same would go for Latin America, South America, and countries of the Middle East. And why would we immediately assume that the issue at hand is race? We can see in the picture that the black man is far older than his white replacement. Perhaps Microsoft’s angle was to appeal to younger customers and decided not to have an old, grey haired man in the picture. So, in my opinion, this picture is not racist. Perhaps the racists are the people who are so upset about the picture. Until Microsoft confirms their reasoning for altering the picture, no one can safely assume that this action was racist.
I can understand where people may be offended by these pictures and yes, I agree, this was a very dumb move for Microsoft to make. But I think calling Microsoft racist may be kind of out of line here.
Lets not forget, Microsoft is a business and the main goal of a business is to make money. One division of this business is advertising and the main idea behind advertising is to get people interested in their product by eye-catching flyers, comedic commercials and things of that sort. In my opinion this is Microsoft gearing its ads geographically to its potential customers. Microsoft isn’t saying that the black man doesn’t belong in that picture and he needs to be replaced. Another thing is that Microsoft never said it was a bad idea to have the black man in the ad for Poland. They were simply adjusting it for their audience. For all we know there could be an all Chinese version of this picture for Hong Kong and one with all Spanish people for Madrid.
I would like to say that Microsoft’s main crime was how they went about changing the ad. Simply cutting and pasting does show a lack of caring about the feelings of others and a lack of caring about the reputation of their company. It is a ridiculous notion to think that people wouldn’t catch on. Microsoft should have been much more diligent in changing the ad. One thing they could have done is they could have taken a completely new photo with all white people and used that. Had that been their course of action then this whole issue is avoided. Another thing is like could it be more apparent that this was photo shopped. A company as large as Microsoft should be able to afford an artist who can make it look like maybe it was a different guy in the photo. On top of that, they didn’t even bother to change his hand color. At least change his skin color so it looks real or close to it cause who ever did this picture really did a poor job.
Obviously there is no way an ad can please everyone, someone will always find something to criticize. In the world we live in today there is always someone who will be offended by some tiny detail; even if they are drawing a conclusion on a detail that isn’t even there. This, however, was an obvious and terrible blunder by a huge corporation and I would be their reputation will suffer. Personally I feel Microsoft should step up to the microphone and apologize for being lazy and careless in their advertising department. I do not feel it is necessary for Microsoft to apologize for being racist.
“Microsoft in web photo racism row”
What I think about this article is that the Microsoft Company in the U.S. should not be blamed for something that another country did. I believe that the Polish internet company should be sued for the racial problem instead of the American Company. If the Polish Company did not want to have a model of a different skin color, then they should have not accepted to advertisement or at least have done nothing to it. I believe that Microsoft should not be apologizing on the behalf of the Polish Company. Since Microsoft is a worldwide company I guess it affects them if they don’t apologize. If the Polish really did wanted to promote interracial harmony, then they should have notified the U.S. Microsoft Company of what they were planning to do. I agree with the last phrase about the population of Poland is predominantly all white. So if this advertisement had an African- American model being advertised in a population of only white ethnicity, the consumers would not be satisfied at all. Maybe there might not be a Polish Company for Microsoft, but if there was it is wrong to change an ad without the author’s consent. A thing like this can really ruin a worldwide company for something so small. Some people will not take this offensively; others might take it the wrong way and sued the company. I think some of the people who wrote that what they did was promoting interracial harmony are wrong and right at the same time. The reason why I say this is because they can be right because now a days, companies and advertisements are promoting interracial things to the consumers. They can also be wrong, because whoever did this is racist or are just trying to be funny in a bad way. The thing that the Microsoft employee did wrong was that if he was being racist he would not leave the job half done. He would have changed the hand color as well to match the face of the white model. The way that I support this is because I am an American-Mexican citizen. I would not be pleased to see a Latino(a) model wearing a sombrero. I probably would not be the only one offended by that stereotype if it was being advertised through the internet. The thing is that the employee tried to do something different and he chose it by hitting it with the racial advertisement. In my opinion I think that it was wrong of the employee to have done that. He could have put his job and his employer in jeopardy. So it is good that Microsoft is going to find out who did it and make that person apologize of his actions.
Don’t take this the wrong way, But Microsoft’s mistake didn’t surprise me…
Microsoft is a well-known, well-substantiated business; its’ enterprise, built around technology, has become a powerhouse in not only America, but in the entire world. It is upsetting that Microsoft felt the need to change their actor’s race in an ad when gearing it toward citizens of Poland, but I understand their reasoning (even though I wish I didn’t). On one hand, it is reassuring to note that Microsoft believed that the ad would go over well in America, and included people of color. To that, I give them props. When applying for college, many of the university ad’s looked just like that of the Microsoft ad—a smiling group of mixed raced people laying in the grass, enjoying their time at college. Microsoft served its purpose in the American ad, because it showed that it supported a wide variety of people and cultures. But on the other hand, Microsoft also failed to entirely promote its acceptance of all people.
When you look to the 2nd ad, we see a whole new perspective of the world in which we live—the world that sees a difference between the color of skintones. Poland may not be the most “racial friendy” country out there—and Microsoft geared its advertisement right to that appeal.
Microsoft exemplified one of biggest problems of today’s society: image. Microsoft has built up such a wealthy and respectable business, so why should they fear losing that to public image? I asked that to myself. We, as Americans and as accepting students, can acknowledge the case in which Microsoft should not worry, because we can understand that Microsoft, as a business, should hire a well diverse and experienced group of workers. We understand that Microsoft employs thousands of workers on the basis of their capabilities. In their Ads, however, we also understand that they feel the need to show a certain “image.” The business world is constantly concerned about image. In the United States, Microsoft feels the need to prove that they are not racist, that they are accepting of everyone. But in Poland, we find that Microsoft is in fact, just as racist as their Polish consumers. The change does not surprise me, because I can realistically see that people in today’s world are not as “open” as they say they are. It is something that we are working towards, but it is not yet something that we can say about the world as a whole.
Microsoft should not have complied to the image trend. I would have kept Microsoft in much higher respect if they included the black man in the Polish Ad, despite the repercussions they could face. The actor played his role as a Microsoft employee—and that’s all you can as from any actor in a commercial.
In a perfect world, it would not even matter if an Ad included all people of color, or if only white people were in the ad. But everyone is focused on image, those who are racist and those who are not—everyone is trying to impress someone (whether that be the public, the consumer, the man in charge). Microsoft was at fault; they must now face the wrath of all those who felt it was a racial stab. Microsoft will still continue to flourish, however, because they have built up their enterprise due to consumer support; as long as they keep bringing in the big bucks, they will keep doing whatever it takes (even if that is acting racist and changing their actor’s races in ads). It seems like a lose-lose situation, but at least those of us who recognize that we are all the same, despite the color of our skin, can take one step closer in wiping away the mistakes of companies like Microsoft.
I think that there are two separate issues at hand here. One: is this racist? Two: is it wrong? First things first, I don't think this is racist. Maybe because I'm white I just don't “get it,” but it seems like things are going well enough for black people in industrial nations right now that a lot of people forget what racism really is. It is disliking/hating someone for their skin color and acting upon those feelings. Does Microsoft hate or dislike black people? Did they crop the black man out of the picture because they thought he wasn't good enough or smart enough enough to be included in the Polish ads? I would imagine not. They were just trying to have their ad be relate-able to Polish businessmen. Was it wrong? Yeah, probably. I don't think a Polish individual would look at a picture of a black man and not be able to relate to it. It was a stupid move to have the alternate versions just hanging around. Why not have a completely new set-up? You're Microsoft for Christ's sake. Your company is worth billions of dollars. You can't spend a few thousand making a new commercial? Another thing: what if there were a photo with a bunch of white guys who were photo-shopped to be Latino for a commercial in Mexico? Would people be running to yell racist? How many years do you think it will be before white guys get to play the “race card?” 50 years? 100? Never? I have seen a ton of commercials by Microsoft and other companies that have this scenario, only with Japanese or Asian people and white people. It usually isn't photo-shopped this crappily, or the same exact commercial might be redone, but they are carbon copies. It is just another case of trying to make sure you are hitting your target audience. I personally don't even think this strategy works as well as big corporations like to think. I don't care if a white guy or an Asian guy or a talking CGI animal tries to sell me a Mac; it's still a Mac and therefore sucks (yeah, I said it.) This is just another made up thing companies like to do after going through a ton of study groups. My guess is words like “synergy” are thrown around a lot at these meetings. Grow up. We live in a world-wide society now. If anyone is turned off of a product because it is advertised by people outside of their race, then that IS racist, not the advertising team who just wanted to put down on their yearly reports that they created advertisements for both the US and Europe. This isn't racism. This is lazy, stupid, and wrong, but not racism. Chalk this one up to a poor marketing plan, not to an evil corporation trying to subtly suggest that black people don't have a place in the business world in Poland.
I am a young woman of color who shamefully and naively believed that the human race was beyond racism. I grew up in predominantly white neighborhoods; I played with white kids, made lasting friendships with white kids. I’ve even sat down in kitchen tables to share food and laughter with white families. Prejudice to me had always been just a dark part of American history. In my postcard perfect town I never really had a reason to believe I was less human because of the color of my skin, or the texture of my hair. I’m not saying I thought racism did not exist at all, I have always known it was there but it just always seemed so far away. I think this is the problem with most people today. We are deceived into accepting that these are the times of equality. That Martin Luther King’s dream has been actualized, when in reality we’re barely half way to the goal. It is easy to forget the racial struggles that still exist today, especially with the election of a black president. The discrimination behind the Microsoft ad proves just how far away we are. To some it is just a photo, but I say that it’s these little things in life that show just how racist, shallow, and small-minded the world remains. We fail to see that these negligible factors are the ones that keep us chained down. I understand this is all clever marketing that companies have a target audience, and an image to uphold etc. I comprehend that people have stereotypes about black people and that these misconceptions can potentially be detrimental to a company’s reputation. However, this is not an excuse for such an amateur mistake. Editing out a black man and replacing him with a white man is simply “low”. As a person of color I am offended, as a human being I am disgusted. There does not exist a valid justification for this act of “blatant racism”. The fact that they cut out the black but kept his hands just makes me want to blurt out “What the f**K“. The article states that this could be an attempt to show “interracial harmony”. To me this shows either a sick, twisted inside joke amongst Microsoft’s Marketing staff or plain carelessness. For lack of a better term (in my vocabulary) this is just “stupid”. You would think that a billion dollar company would have a bit more common sense or at the very least higher employees with better judgment. I bet in the end Microsoft lost more customers than they would have gained had this gone undiscovered. Words of wisdom to Microsoft; Karma’s a female dog, you reap what you sow, I guess editing out the black guy was not such a good idea after all.
Ok so let me start off by saying that I am of Polish descent. My mom and dad are both from Poland and I’ve been there numerous times to visit my family that continues to live there. From all my visits and knowledge of the country and people, I cannot see why the Microsoft officials decided to take the black man out of the advertisement. The Polish population in general is not anti-black. Granted, there are very few people of color in the country, but that is just the way it is over there. In my opinion, this advertisement would have been successful either way: with or without the black man. It’s not like Polish people would have looked at the advertisement with a black man and thought “Hmm yeah I don’t want to associate myself with Microsoft products if they put black men in their advertisements”. That would be absolutely ridiculous. Even though there aren’t many black people in their country, I’m pretty sure the Polish people still know that they exist, whether or not they’re in a Microsoft advertisement. I just think it’s quite strange that Microsoft thought that having a black man in their advertisement would deter the Polish population from their products. It just really does not make sense to me. And I also wonder how this story got out into the public. I assume it would have to be someone in the Microsoft Corporation who let this piece of information leak, seeing as they would be the only ones who would have known about the switch between black and white. And seeing how it got out into the mainstream media, what started out as an idea aimed at helping the company profit has turned into a huge scandal, which I’m sure doesn’t bode well for the company’s sales and profits. This whole idea is just stupid and ridiculous, in my opinion. I really don’t understand how in this day and age, a huge corporation such as Microsoft would make such a dumb decision. Generally, people of the world are level headed and can think for themselves, and a black, yellow, white, brown, or blue person on an advertisement really wouldn’t sway most of it to buy or not buy a product. Microsoft clearly read way too much into their advertising and caused a huge unnecessary scandal for themselves because of their stupidity. So, in conclusion, good job, Microsoft, for being so “ahead of the times” and thinking that the color of someone’s skin can change your likelihood to profit off your less than par products. Next time you make a dumb decision like this, try to keep it under wraps, at least. Good thing I have a Mac.
I am a young woman of color who shamefully and naively believed that the human race was beyond racism. I grew up in predominantly white neighborhoods; I played with white kids, made lasting friendships with white kids. I’ve even sat down in kitchen tables to share food and laughter with white families. Prejudice to me had always been just a dark part of American history. In my postcard perfect town I never really had a reason to believe I was less human because of the color of my skin, or the texture of my hair. I’m not saying I thought racism did not exist at all, I have always known it was there but it just always seemed so far away. I think this is the problem with most people today. We are deceived into accepting that these are the times of equality. That Martin Luther King’s dream has been actualized, when in reality we’re barely half way to the goal. It is easy to forget the racial struggles that still exist today, especially with the election of a black president. The discrimination behind the Microsoft ad proves just how far away we are. To some it is just a photo, but I say that it’s these little things in life that show just how racist, shallow, and small-minded the world remains. We fail to see that these negligible factors are the ones that keep us chained down. I understand this is all clever marketing that companies have a target audience, and an image to uphold etc. I comprehend that people have stereotypes about black people and that these misconceptions can potentially be detrimental to a company’s reputation. However, this is not an excuse for such an amateur mistake. Editing out a black man and replacing him with a white man is simply “low”. As a person of color I am offended, as a human being I am disgusted. There does not exist a valid justification for this act of “blatant racism”. The fact that they cut out the black but kept his hands just makes me want to blurt out “What the f**K“. The article states that this could be an attempt to show “interracial harmony”. To me this shows either a sick, twisted inside joke amongst Microsoft’s Marketing staff or plain carelessness. For lack of a better term (in my vocabulary) this is just “stupid”. You would think that a billion dollar company would have a bit more common sense or at the very least higher employees with better judgment. I bet in the end Microsoft lost more customers than they would have gained had this gone undiscovered. Words of wisdom to Microsoft; Karma’s a female dog, you reap what you sow, I guess editing out the black guy was not such a good idea after all.
This advertisement was shocking at first. Through the years, the United States has done so much to try to overcome prejudice and the separation of races. We have attempted to bring people of all races together in whichever ways possible, including through the media and advertisements. However, it is evident that other countries are not running along the same lines as the United States. While the United States would rather diversify an advertisement, Poland did the complete opposite. Poland felt that it was essential for one of their Microsoft advertisements to be altered. However, they did so in such an inappropriate way. If Poland believed that it was unnecessary to have an African American in their advertisement they could have and should have easily just made a new advertisement. Instead they simply cropped and photo-shopped the picture. The worst part is that they actually left the body and hand of the man in the original photo. So now, there sits an advertisement of a man with a Caucasian face and an African American’s body. This situation was sure to cause confusion and fury. While myself, and most others in the United States would argue that this is an improper way to go about changing the advertisement, we can agree that this is just another typical situation that arises in the everyday world. It is almost understandable why Poland would do such a thing. As all other countries, states, companies, etc. would do, Poland was trying to market the product to the group that would be most inclined to buy the product. This marketing strategy has been successful for years. It has and will continue to make companies profitable. Microsoft simply wanted to make the most money they could. As said before, America is struggling to diversify the country as much as possible, while it is clear that Poland is not doing so, which makes sense by looking at the ethnic groups of both countries. According to the CIA World Fact Book, America is 79% white, which is a large majority but still leaves room for about 21% of other ethnic groups. However, when looking at Poland, almost 97% of their population is Polish, leaving only about 3% for other groups. So why would they feel the need to advertise towards this “other” 3%? The answer is, they didn’t. As disturbing as it is to say, for a country such as Poland, diversity in advertisements and the media may actually stray people away. The whole point of advertising is so that that specific company will get their product or service noticed by consumers, and then hopefully purchased by those people. Marketing is, if not the main, one of the most critical aspects of a company. Where, when, and who the company targets is the difference between a company’s net loss and profit. It is evident why such a large company such as Microsoft would do such a thing, but it is not understandable why they did so in such an inappropriate manner.
In all honesty, I think Microsoft’s advertising executives were doing the right thing (minus the fact that they forgot to change the hands). Advertising is, as Dr. Richards says, a manipulation. They are trying to sell a certain production to a certain population. In this case, the population is Polish people. Being that Poland is one of the whitest countries in the world, it does not shock me that the advertisers decided to substitute a black man for a white man. I don’t think it has anything to do with racism, I think it has everything to do with smarter advertising. Think about it, I’m sure most people in Poland are more comfortable around white people than black people. It’s not that they are racist (although I’m sure some of them are), it’s just that that is what they are used to. It’s just smart advertising – you want to target the majority of the population, and that’s exactly what Microsoft tried to do. I’m not saying that this way of thinking isn’t messed up; it totally is. I’m not going to stop buying my favorite kind of shampoo because now there is a Chinese actress promoting it instead of a white woman. If it still works, I’m still going to use it. So I don’t think it should be any different for Polish people when they see advertisements for Microsoft featuring a black man. But unfortunately not everyone thinks this way. Racism has become such a huge part of our world and our way of thinking. Every culture discriminates against other cultures based on their features or on the actions of a few people. It has affected our lives in so many ways that we don’t even realize until we read articles like this. It is actually part of someone’s job to collect data to decide whether or not they should put a black man in their advertisement. Even more shocking than that is the fact that they might actually sell less of their product if they do use a black man to promote it. But that is how the world is and it’s Microsoft’s advertising execs’ jobs to recognize this. Fortunately they did, albeit a little late in their process, and decided to substitute a white man for a black man. Their downfall? Forgetting the hands. If they went through such a fuss about changing their campaign you would think they would be a little more thorough with the rest of the changes. If they had been careful, this wouldn’t be a big deal at all. I’m sure companies do things like this all of the time. The Poland consumers would have been happy with the advertisement and Microsoft wouldn’t be facing this scandal.
When i first began to read this article i felt that the approach Microsoft took to aim its add at the Polish community was wrong. I did not think that such a high-powered company would be so sensitive to the idea of marketing the "wrong" type of person to a certain community. The fact that Microsoft took the time to remove the black mans face and replace it with a white mans face shows that Microsoft puts value into the idea that color changes people or that because someone is a different color than a specific market they would not appeal to that community. I find this idea of business to be unnecessary and outdated.
I then looked at a few of my classmate’s responses to this issue and tried to look at it from a different angle, from Microsoft's point of view. I found this to open my mind up a little and try to see a different perspective. In the business world you are taught that profits are all that drives a business to do anything whether that is to better their products, provide customer service or advertise products or services to their customers. And with that in mind you really have to look at some of the facts, one of which is the if Microsoft was advertising to a strictly white population then it is logical, not "right", but logical that those people would respond better to people of their own color. Whether or not that is a true statement I am not sure of but I believe that it is a commonly held belief among many business professionals.
One question that hit me when I had finished reading the article is that no attention was brought to the fact that the 3rd mans face, who appears to be Asian, was not changed. Now I do not know why it wasn’t brought up in the first article, maybe because in order for people to notice something has gone wrong things must be change. But I feel that the fact that the mans face was unchanged is as important as the fact that the black mans face was changed. Why was it acceptable for an Asain man to be advertised to a “white” community and not a black man? What is the difference? I think that is the main question that should be looked into. Does Microsoft feel that being Asain is more acceptable to white people than being black? The fact is that they took the time to remove one mans face because they felt it would not appeal to their intended market for whatever reason they may have. But why was the other man kept the same, why was only the black man changed?
Well to start off there has always been racism and I do not think it will be over any day soon. I think we as a country have started a process, but we still have a long way to go towards in order to have the Martin Luther King “I have a dream” come true. I think that this article is full of racism. If it`s true of how you say the population in Poland is almost all white people then their purpose was not allowing color people be seen on TV. The whole situation of cropping the picture of a color man giving orders should have a least have been done right. This whole situation would have near started. Anyhow why bother switching the man’s skin color if he`s the one there. It is a very stupid mistake that Microsoft has done because it causes a lot of controversies. In which they will be known or hated by those of color for a stupid mistake. It not as simple as they say it was a little mistake because why only were his hands the only part of his body not changed. Why did Microsoft have the need to crop even, if it was done as a mistake it is still not right because it such a well known company that can pay to have editors check there work. I think this was done to show that a white man is always on the top of everyone and that color people will never be on the top of the pyramid. Microsoft for sure wanted to have another white person represent them in an important thing then having a color person to represent. In my opinion I dislike it very much because for example in my high school there was an issue about racism for stupid reasons, even though most of the school is full of color people, but there was still this problem. Plus there were stereotypes like the smart students were all the white people and those that were color were called nerds or white want to be if they were smart. So it even hard for me to see it on an article that traveled all around the world and to have everyone of color to see this must have been bad. Now that we have a color president and one that is willing to change the way everyone think and keep up with the whole process of finding a way to get everyone together and have a peace country and stop racism. I think that at least 50% of everyone is trying to work in stopping the whole situation, but that other percent doesn’t want to work with every other person and instead their working to making everyone’s life impossible.
Honestly, I’m torn about what to think regarding the (horribly) Photoshopped Microsoft advertisement. I’m sure incidents like this happen all the time; the general public just doesn’t know about it. If the person who edited this ad had known a little more about Photoshop, or just paid more attention, most of us would have never known about this particular incident. I understand that every ad has a target audience and that Poland is undeniably a white country. But would a black man – not to mention a professional-looking black man dressed in a suit – really deter Poles from buying Microsoft products? I could see a “thugged out” black man having this effect, but this type of man would never be in an ad like this, anyway. Besides skin color, what made that professional black man any different than the professional white woman and professional Asian man? He is dressed just as well as the other two people, if not better (the black man is wearing a suit jacket, as opposed to the Asian man) and has a smile on his face, not an angry expression. I was almost, but not quite, surprised that the Asian man was able to stay in the ad; I guess the Model Minority status Asians have obtained reaches beyond the United States. Poland also seems to have a sizeable Vietnamese population, so that could be another reason that an Asian person was A-OK for the ad, but a black man was not. I assume that Poland doesn’t have a large population of blacks and any black people that they do have are African immigrants (and black immigrants from other countries, as well). Do these Africans have as bad a reputation in Poland as black Americans do in their own country? Even if that is so, I ask once again, would this really stop the white Polish majority from buying a product featuring a black man? I would hope not, but the extremely racist mind works in weird ways. Sam Richards brought up the point about how people in advertising change ads to appeal to a certain demographics and used the examples of the different ethnic women on ads in various regions of the United States. Often times, I don’t think that people think about whether or not these types of ads are racist just because they are not aware of the ads in other cities. Is this type of advertising racist? I’m inclined to say no. But is it really any different than the Microsoft issue? At its core, the Microsoft ad isn’t really racist because they were just trying to reach their target audience. Still, it makes me wonder if black people are not good enough to sell products to non-black people.
As I reviewed the article entitled, Microsoft in web photo racism row, I from the start had mixed emotions about the advertisement. Coming from a marketer’s viewpoint, I do not understand the enormous deal about the advertisement. Personally I, (and I am African-American, white and Native American) believes marketers advertise certain products in certain areas not because of the “racial card” but merely the demographics of the area. Why sell heavy thick coats year round in the Virgin Islands when it’s typically hot or humid there? On the other hand, I do believe a person’s environment plays a heavy influence on the way an individual thinks, reacts, and their outlook on certain issues about life. In this situation, I do believe (for the sake of diversity) Microsoft knows there is life outside of Polish (living proof the first advertisement that was created). Therefore, in order to bridge the physical and mental barriers of racism, everyone within the world should try to have the courage to change and to accept accountability of one’s action AND learn from them so one DOES NOT do it again.
Now, as I was reading the article there was a section about bloggers suggested that Microsoft tried to persuade all markets by have a white man’s face and keeping the blacks man’s hand. Yet, (maybe it’s just me) if you look at the hand in both photo’s, the hand looks like it was photo-shopped already. When you enlarge the photo it appears that the man’s arm looks much darker than the actual hand. Additionally both the white male and females skins look lighter in the second picture also. This now poses the question of how dark was the actual man in the picture, and was he made lighter to show more acceptance in other areas of the world other than Polish (where they just replaced him altogether). Unfortunely, I myself, cannot truly answer this question since I was not the person who edited the picture but it truly reveals how one individual or business views people and social status.
Yet, this gets me back to my first point. Demographics are one of the main issues in marketing. Is it right or is it wrong? I believe it depends on the reason behind what is presented to the public and how it is presented. The more you move southern and western state the more you see Hispanics and people who speak Spanish. Can I conclude that its racism for northern states not to market products in Spanish as much as those regional states does? As far as this particular situation goes, I believe if many different representations of this picture (meaning switching EACH person by adding one that may be African, Hispanic, Asian, Cuban, etc…) then I can conclude that the debate over this issue would not have been really address, but since the circumstance singled out only one type of person the “race card” was again brought up. When will we ever stop repeating history…? (And stop being so easily offended for that matter)?
Well in the past five years, there has been a huge increase in colored people in advertisements in general. There used to be no diversity in any type of television commercial, billboards, and models as a whole. Even if we look at today’s magazines Teen Vogue, Seventeen, and any of the others that include media (aka everything) it is predominantly white male and females. There is still rarely any diversity in any of the advertisements standing today in 2009. I do believe that in some areas they do add in a little of diversity if they are trying to attract a specific group of people, or to make their product a wider variety. One that pops into my head is the Maybelline beauty products; this company usually has pop stars like “Beyonce to Mandy Moore.” To support a wider variety of crowds and make available to all skin colored women. However, with this product, it can be used by people with white skin, yellow skin, and light brown but, for the people who are distinctly black. Where is there make up supporting them? I have never saw a face concealer, or cover-up for a women with such a dark color.
However, contrasting this idea many people of the “black race” are considered the main points of interest for “hip hop” and style. Have you ever noticed that many black females and males tend to have a better sense of style than white male or females? This could be why most advertisements are including African American. If a black person wears it, then most likely it is in style? Notice, if it was consistently excluding white males/females then the product could be taking a different direction. For some reason I get in my head that white is the priority, almost as if they have to give their thumbs up in order for a product to initially take off. Almost as if black people can sell the product but, if there was too many black people it could be considered trashy?
But I do believe that initially products have certain people modeling to attract a specific crowd. We talked about it a little in sociology class about the cream to whiten someone’s skin color. It would be pointless to have a white person on there trying to get whiter with before and after pictures. However, someone with an Indian color skin is shown before and after using the product and receiving the results would convince more people to use this. Not to completely kick the whiteness out of it the products are labeled as “Pure White” and “Simply Perfect.” It is the same reason why Chinese/Japanese people are getting their eyes surgically fixed to have more of an open eye. Why? Look at all of the white models. If white people are no longer the dominant race, which is people of the Asian descents, would white people try to change to look more Asian?
When I saw this advertisement and read the article the first thing I found myself thinking was how Microsoft, a huge corporation, could possibly make such a foolish mistake. I would have thought that they would put a lot more effort into their advertisements, especially since they pay a large sum of money for them. Someone clearly became lazy and made a careless error.
Next, I understand why the company would want to change their ad to appeal to a particular audience. What I don’t understand is why they wouldn’t just create a whole different advertisement and use different people. I’m sure they had some kind of logical reason to change their advertisement to all white people when it came to making one for Poland. Maybe they thought it would boost their sales in that particular country. I think it’s fine that they had the idea of doing so, but I think they should have started from scratch and produced a completely different photo if they wanted to appeal to a specific race of people.
From a business standpoint, I believe Microsoft had every single right to do what they did, but because of a silly error of judgment, they are now being called racist. In America, we are accustomed to our “melting pot” lifestyle. Let’s face it, almost every commercial displays an assortment of races. If you go to Poland or any other country for that matter, their commercials are not like ours. Thus, I do think that their reasoning was probably correct in changing their advertisement. Again, I also believe they shouldn’t have used photoshop, but rather a completely different photo. That’s really the only thing they did wrong. Think of it this way, would you put an advertisement of three people of the Asian race in an African country? The answer is no because it honestly wouldn’t make sense to do so. In our country, if all our commercials and advertisements only displayed one particular race constantly, people would immediately point their finger towards racism. But in other countries like Poland, displaying one race is completely normal because guess what? The large majority is white and that is what they see every day. Us Americans are completely used to seeing different races in all advertisements and it’s great for us to be able to show that our country is composed of a multitude of races and ethnicities. Microsoft wasn’t being racist; they just realized that for their business it made the most sense to show all white people in their Polish advertisement.
I’m not saying that absolutely no one in Poland would buy Microsoft products if there were a black person in the advertisement because I’m sure they would, but Microsoft was just trying to completely appeal to that specific ethnicity. Bottom line, my point is, the idea wasn’t wrong, but simply using photoshop as the solution was. However, the advertisement should have been changed completely if the idea was to appeal to a specific race.
While I think it was a bad mistake on Microsoft’s part to not review the ad before it was placed in the market, I do not think it is a sign of racism. I believe to be good in advertising you definitely have to appeal to the audience you are trying to sell a particular good to. I think many companies adjust or photoshop a different ethnicity into their ad for the purpose of the demographic. I do not think this is racist but rather good advertising. It was unfortunate for Microsoft to get caught and for this to be a big deal. Companies are in the business of making money, so in this case it was probably cheaper to photoshop instead of replacing the whole ad. I’m not justifying that this is right, but sometimes the philosophy of not getting caught should be implemented. I’m not sure why they didn’t replace the Asian guy in the back since Poland as mentioned is a predominantly white. They probably should have replaced the Asian guy as well, but since they made such a big mistake like leaving the black guy’s hands I didn’t really expect much. I don’t the big deal should be Microsoft changing the picture, but rather why they felt the need to change the picture. Did Microsoft really think that the Polish people would not have bought the product since the black guy was in the picture? The focus should be why everyone feels the need to not offend people and be completely neutral. The big deal about racism in advertising is not uncommon and every ethnic group feels like they are left out. Not just in advertising either but also in movies, TV shows, etc. It seems a common notion to HAVE to have an ethnic person in the TV show or movie. Studios feel like people will get upset if it is a bunch of white people having fun. I don’t understand this because Friends was a TV show about six white young adults and was one of the most popular shows on television for ten years. There are many other examples of this same type of programming. Seinfeld is another example. I understand studios trying to be politically correct, but sometimes it is bad trying to please everyone. It is impossible to please everyone and trying to do so will cause more headaches than it is worth. Someone will always be offended about something you do or say. It is unnecessary and unfortunate that the country has come to this. Political activists have forced companies a certain direction with lawsuits and boycotts. I think this is unfair, but also believe it is their right. America is a land of freedom and people have the right to believe whatever they want. For example, people may believe I am wrong and think that the Microsoft ad was racist and it is their right.
Before I even read the article, I saw the picture of the Microsoft advertisement, and it seemed way too obvious that the bottom picture was photo-shopped, just by the way the man’s head is positioned. However, besides that observation, what Microsoft did in the advertisement highly upset me because I am an African-American. Professor Richards brought up the point of being politically correct in the advertisement, stating that in advertisements like this one, there is always a woman, a white male and an African-American. We see these types of images of being politically correct in advertisements like this one, or even television shows or cartoons.
Nonetheless in my opinion, being politically correct does not apply to this image. Obviously, Microsoft was trying to attract their audience with images of white people because they are aiming towards a primarily white audience. That’s all good and dandy. But does it excuse why they need to delete and overlook the fact that the black guy was already in the image? Why not just keep the image the way it is? Either that or use a whole different image as an advertisement. A big question that arose when I saw this was: Why bother changing the image at all? Does a black man in the advertisement really affect how many more people would buy the product? If so, then this world has many other unseen problems to deal with.
Something else I find interesting is that they decided to leave the Asian male in the picture. If Microsoft really wanted to seem non-racial and leave only white people in the image because it was directed towards an all-white audience, then why did they leave the Asian in the image? There simply is no excuse why they decided to leave the Asian, if they wanted to take out the African-American.
"The white head and black hand actually symbolize interracial harmony. It is supposed to show that a person can be white and black, old and young at the same time," said one blogger on the Photoshop Disasters blog. I got this quote from the actual article itself, and I couldn’t have read a more ridiculous comment. It’s just Microsoft’s way of covering up for their blatant racism.
Overall, I think that Microsoft should take full responsibility for their acts of racism. They were very tacky when they decided to photo-shop the image, so if they were deciding on photo-shopping it, they should have taken the time to at least make sure that the face and hands of the same person were the same skin tone. And because of Microsoft’s inattentiveness to detail, they suffered the brute of every bloggers worldwide response because of their mistake.
Journal 1
Black or White
So far in Sociology class we have talked about race, differences between people, discrimination and other social issues that human kind has always faced. These “incident” by the Microsoft Corporation might be interpreted as discrimination against colored people. I believe that these kinds of situations still occur not only against black people, but also against ethnic groups in countries where they are considered minorities. In this case in particular racism is directed against black people, since any modifications were made to the Asian guy that is next to the colored men. By the other hand is understandable that the people that modify the ad wanted to make the majority ethnic group in Poland feel identify by the people that appeared in the ad, since the written part of the article says; “Empower your people”.
I don’t find wrong to have different commercial advertisements depending on the location in which the advertisement is going to be presented, what I find intolerable is that with all the earnings that Microsoft gets, yet is not enough to pay to at least some good graphic designers able to create a decent job working with Photoshop. I think that this issue is going to affect Microsoft’s image because after all, minorities also use Microsoft products and deserve an equal and fair treatment. It is very hypocritical that these global wide ads change from one country to another, I release that in the United States all types of media have different ethnic group representatives in them. Another thing that I find untrue is that in the blog is mentioned that there is not colored people in Poland. There should be some diversity within the Poland population. Is just racism to believe that having a black man in an ad might hurt the sales rate of the company in a certain location just due to the demographics of the place.
I don’t believe that the apology made by Microsoft is enough or that will repair the discriminatory offence against this man and all dark skin people. I don’t agree with the bloggers this kind of ads are not a way to please any audience or a way to create harmony. Regardless of the skin color of most people in Poland the ad in its regular form could cause less controversy. There is also true that this kind of incidents don’t benefit Microsoft, by the contrary, but in the same instance an ad like this one shouldn’t even been published. The Microsoft Corporation mentioned that investigations to find the responsible of this action are being made. I believe there is needed more than just one person to publish something like this; several people had to be involved.
I have read some other comments from other students and honestly I am surprised that other people are so surprised. By no means do I agree with the obvious racism that took place in this marketing decision, but it is exactly that- marketing. This kind of marketing occurs everywhere for almost every product. Marketing is defined as the act of selling or buying in a market. Therefore, it is necessary to adjust advertisements to the market in which they are displayed.
In the United States this would not be acceptable, but that is because we are lucky enough to be in a country that has progressed so much and is welcoming of so many different races and ethnicities. There are other countries who are not accepting and open to other cultures, but that does not mean you shouldn’t market your products accordingly in those places. Companies need to do what they need to do in order to sell their products and be successful. Microsoft is being scrutinized for such a small issue. They are doing business, just like the rest of us. People in business are always making decisions with profit in mind. It’s not my idea of the good life, but for a majority of the population it is. We work for the dollar, and in order for that to happen, companies must turn to market-specific marketing techniques.
My emotions were mostly drawn to the fact that companies do indeed need to adjust their campaigns to be accepted. It is not Microsoft’s decision that upsets me so much, but that fact that they are put in that position at all. I feel fortunate to live in such an accepting country and I am proud our advertisements can represent our diverse population. It saddens me that other countries are still so un-accepting of other races and cultures.
My first reaction to the article is different than I would have expected of myself! Of course I do not support any form of racism, and I do not think money is the key to happiness- yet my response may make me appear differently. I am getting to a point now where I have to look at business situations realistically. Its making me scared to think how my views are changing the closer I come to breaking into the real world. I always try to see the best in people and Obama has given me hope to thinking our society is heading in the right direction. Despite these incredible advances, I can’t keep going through life so carefree, believing that change can and will happen any time soon. Microsoft’s decision is a rude awakening to how far we still have to go in this world. I think that is what upsets people the most about the advertisement changes- the fact that we are forced to face reality and that not all countries are as far ahead as ours.
Journal 1
Black or White
So far in Sociology class we have talked about race, differences between people, discrimination and other social issues that human kind has always faced. These “incident” by the Microsoft Corporation might be interpreted as discrimination against colored people. I believe that these kinds of situations still occur not only against black people, but also against ethnic groups in countries where they are considered minorities. In this case in particular racism is directed against black people, since any modifications were made to the Asian guy that is next to the colored men. By the other hand is understandable that the people that modify the ad wanted to make the majority ethnic group in Poland feel identify by the people that appeared in the ad, since the written part of the article says; “Empower your people”.
I don’t find wrong to have different commercial advertisements depending on the location in which the advertisement is going to be presented, what I find intolerable is that with all the earnings that Microsoft gets, yet is not enough to pay to at least some good graphic designers able to create a decent job working with Photoshop. I think that this issue is going to affect Microsoft’s image because after all, minorities also use Microsoft products and deserve an equal and fair treatment. It is very hypocritical that these global wide ads change from one country to another, I release that in the United States all types of media have different ethnic group representatives in them. Another thing that I find untrue is that in the blog is mentioned that there is not colored people in Poland. There should be some diversity within the Poland population. Is just racism to believe that having a black man in an ad might hurt the sales rate of the company in a certain location just due to the demographics of the place.
I don’t believe that the apology made by Microsoft is enough or that will repair the discriminatory offence against this man and all dark skin people. I don’t agree with the bloggers this kind of ads are not a way to please any audience or a way to create harmony. Regardless of the skin color of most people in Poland the ad in its regular form could cause less controversy. There is also true that this kind of incidents don’t benefit Microsoft, by the contrary, but in the same instance an ad like this one shouldn’t even been published. The Microsoft Corporation mentioned that investigations to find the responsible of this action are being made. I believe there is needed more than just one person to publish something like this; several people had to be involved.
A company’s main goal of advertising is to appeal to the desired crowd in order to sell a product. In this add, Microsoft deliberately ‘photoshopped’ a white man’s head onto a black man’s body in order to appeal to their polish consumers. Because the change is so obvious (the hands are still black!), I have no other reason to call this anything but racism. My first thought while analyzing this ad is the company responsible for this, and I must say that the fact that it is Microsoft angers me tremendously. As a consumer, I like to believe that I am somewhat aware of the background of most of the products I buy. I am normally always proud to buy Microsoft products because of the contributions Bill Gates has made to the global health fund. Because I am a strong advocate for global health awareness, I have always admired him. The fact that this issue involves race puzzles me even more as to why this was found in the media.
I understand that with the American idea of ‘political correctness’ entails having as much ethnicity in a picture as possible, therefore in the English ad there were three different people of three different nationalities. However, this is absolutely no reason to single out the colored man and paste a white man’s face hoping to appeal to a polish crowd. There is a hint of cleverness when placing specific ethnicities in advertisements shown in areas where those ethnicities are very affluent (like the example given with a Hispanic women in an advertisement in Miami). I know from personal experience growing up in South Texas that this concept generally works. Mainly because many people buy products that they can relate with. However, I am not sure how anyone in Poland will relate more to this advertisement just because a black man has been removed. To me, there is a clear difference.
I respect Sam’s statement that Polish is a very-white locale, although I find it very hard to believe that their product sales would drop tremendously just because of the people found in the advertisement. And if Microsoft truly believed it would, then they could have at least made a whole new commercial to specifically address the polish population, instead of cutting corners and using Photoshop. I am very curious to see the media reaction if this obvious manipulation had happened in America. I do know that Microsoft would have a huge decline in sales, which only adds to my confusion as to why this corporation was involved. I also would like to know how the actually country of Poland thinks about this act of racism. I just can not see it looking very good for their country. Granted advertising requires a huge budget, but I am very appalled with Microsoft (a company that should be able to afford it) and hopefully this will not be seen again.
When I first saw this advertisement and read the blog about it, I immediately thought that this was a racial issue and that it was way out of line. However, when I took the time to think about what was really happening, I saw that there really is no racism involved, and frankly everyone is making a big deal out of a little business decision.
Microsoft photoshopping a white man in place of the black man for the Polish ad is just merely a matter of trying to target the correct audience. Poland is a predominantly white country, so it only makes sense to have a commercial with white people participating in it. Obviously there are black people in Poland but I’m sure it is a very small percentage. It would be like a Chinese commercial airing in China that had black people featured in the commercial. It is not like that would be a bad thing, but I bet not as many Chinamen would relate to that product or commercial. Let’s face it; it is unfortunate that human beings relate to others whom they resemble and not every race or ethnicity. There was an example in class today with the two black women, and one had straight hair while the other had curly, wilder hair. Most white people would be more comfortable being in the presence of and interacting with the woman that had straight hair solely because it was more like a white person’s and more of what we are used to. It is a sad fact, but it is true.
Stepping away from the race issue for a second, one would not see an ad for a women’s deodorant, or any product mainly targeted towards women, in a men’s magazine. That would be a very poor decision on the advertiser’s part. It would be a waste of money and resources. This is exactly what happened in the Polish ad, however, race got involved, and suddenly everything gets blown completely out of proportion.
On the other hand, I completely understand why some people would find Microsoft’s action very racist. In the United States we are very accustomed to making all TV commercials and ads as multi-racial as possible. It is very normal that a black, Asian, and white person are all together in an ad. That is just what we are used to here, especially since America is referred to as “The Melting Pot”.
Now that I have spent most of this blog defending Microsoft’s decision, I would like to add that I think it was a very careless mistake of them to forget to change the hand of the black man. If they would have been a little more careful I feel like this issue would not have been an issue at all, since this kind of photoshopping happens quite frequently without society even noticing.
I wouldn’t call what Microsoft did completely racist. They are a business that needs to branch out and relate to different consumers in different communities to make profit. For instance, in the United States, most companies need to have politically correct advertisements, because if they do not, NAACP, LBGT, and other groups will lash out and sue. This may not be the case in Poland.
I searched the percentage of blacks in Poland and the first link that popped up on Google was a blog about the Microsoft advertisement. I had to laugh at this. Before this posting, I had never seen this incident, so I am glad to have read about it.
After some more digging, I found that racism is yet to be criminalized in Poland and that there is a small percentage of blacks in Poland. And as a corporation, you want to communicate with the people you are trying to sell to.
After some more thought, I think it would have been okay for Microsoft to take a separate photo for their Polish consumers, not Photoshop a white guys face on a black guys body AND miss his hands. I agree whoever cut and pasted the white guys face on the black guys’ body did a horrible job. But for most companies, this is the norm. A company, such as Microsoft, will take a series of photos to use as a corporation. Then, branch and global headquarters, say Russia or Poland, can re-use these photos and base them off of their demographic. But, if say Microsoft Poland, wanted to specifically target a different demographic and no complete picture was available, they should have hired a photographer or copied a picture of another white guy into the picture.
In my cultural geography class, we have been talking about racism and culture. In the 1960s, an advertisement ran that suggested fighting racism and intolerance, yet the focus of the advertisement was the Coke-like similarities in the logo. Many KKK groups and Nazi organizations banned and protested Coke because they were associated with racial friendly organizations. It’s called inter-textuality. The racial friendly organization used the similarities in the Coke logo to communicate with the demographic. Kind of like what Microsoft did, but with different races.
As an American, I am slightly disgusted that Microsoft used Photoshop to adhere to social norms in Poland, but as a student with a background in marketing, I think it was justified. The corporation had to do what was right for sales. Whether it was socially acceptable or morally right, that is based on your upbringing.
I liked what Philly Boy had to say, “Skin color of a person in an advertisement should not influence a buyer one way or another.” Maybe in America, but in countries that still allow racism and discrimination, having advertisements that feature the minority (in this case a black guy), is socially unacceptable and consumers are often turned off by the product.
There is a thin line between political correctness and blatant, outright racism. For instance, as you mentioned in class, when people use the term African American for a black person whose roots are not from Africa, it does more harm than good. It is annoying to them and quite frankly, I would be annoyed and/or upset with this characterization.
I thought about the issue of political correctness versus racism in regards to this particular advertisement for a few minutes and can see good points on both sides. Microsoft is a company trying to make a profit in Poland, and if there aren’t many black Polish people, this particular man at the meeting would seem out of place. Microsoft might seem out of touch. I found the comment about how the Photoshop in America would do the exact opposite thing of putting a black, Oriental, other into the picture. I have noticed several commercials where the action in an office is dominated by two or three white people having a conversation about their product with a black or Latina woman in the background doing work. I always found this odd as if black people and other minorities would want their product more because someone that looked like them was also in the picture. It seemed like giving a trophy to the person who finished 87th in the race a trophy because he finished, albeit in over 30 minutes.
When it comes down to it though, I feel this is racism, and Microsoft should be ashamed of themselves, not for being caught, but for doing the action in the first place. If they do not think Polish people will respond positively to a person of color in a commercial, I have a simple solution. Shoot another commercial. It’s not that difficult to do. This isn’t just a matter of Europeans not having the same values as Americans because this has been a problem here in the states as well.
According to the article found on this website http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Showbiz-News/Beyonce-Caught-In-LOreal-Advert-Skin-Tone-Lightening-Controversy/Article/200808215073838, there was a claim that in an advertisement for L’Oreal that they airbrushed black celebrity Beyonce to appear much lighter. This advertisement appeared in Elle Magazine. It is difficult to describe how much lighter Beyonce looks in this advertisement than she does in real life. She would easily be confused as a mixed-race person or possibly by some as white. L’Oreal denies that they made her lighter, but I don’t know many major publications that would be incredibly stupid enough to admit that in order to appeal to their audience they made a black woman into a nearly white woman.
Why does this happen? It’s very frustrating to me when incidents like the Microsoft advertisement and the Beyonce “whitening” occur. Why must people be so fixated on the physical appearance of someone, when as we learned in class, it only makes up .01 of our human genome. In the future, I hope we can break through enough that these issues don’t come up, not just making a black person white, but putting in “token” black/other minorities in advertisements.
I think Microsoft, should have used better judgement in this advertisement. The fact that the ad was blatantly changed to show a white guy, is what really bothers me. Why not take a similar picture with an actual white guy? Could this have taken any longer than photoshopping the man of color out of the picture? When the original picture was taken, have another man, hop in the picture, and use that one for the polish ad. I completely understand the need for political correctness as we live in a world, where everything that isn’t “PC” is racism. Advertising is a complex world, as you try to please your target audience, and hope to attract others as well. There are other questios looming out there. Even if Poland has a high percentage of “whites”, couldn’t there still be people of color, that would benefit from the ad and the services that Microsoft is offering. Is Microsoft really going to gain more by changing the ad, than leaving it alone? That is question, that can only be answered my the same marketing “geniuses” that came up with this idea. I think this is more of issue of political correctness, than racism. I highly doubt that a Fortune 500 company, like Microsoft is racist. It may be hard to gain and keep market share if you were seen as racist in todays world. In the struggling world economy, it makes sense to try and please as many people as possible, but you also have to stick to your current customer base and remain loyal to them at the same time. There is definitely a balance, where everyone wins, and no one is offended. On the other hand, some people with never be satisfied and will always feel offended. There are two people that probably feel pretty bad about this whole advertisement, the guy who changed the photo and the colored man in the original. The guy or gal who changed the image, probably didn’t realize what the backlash of this was going to be. He may have been instructed to make the change and had no opinion on the matter. Now, the colored man who was originally pictured, might be upset. He was casted to take part of an advertisement photo shoot and there is one photo with his head missing. His likeness is used for profit, while his whole body not being there. Money is money, and sometimes hard to come by, so maybe he doesn’t truly care. I my take offense to such an action. I would be thinking to myself, “Was I not good enough?” “Is it because of my color?” Microsoft, should have put in the extra effort, to avoid the drama and press of this mishap. The advertisers and marketers should realize the impact they have on their audience, both locally and abroad.
To begin, I think its ridiculous that such a stupid mistake was made with the photo editing. A company as large as Microsoft should have enough people checking their advertisements before they go public for this to be completely avoided. Aside from that, though, I definitely do not agree with one of the perspectives suggested in the article. Suggesting that Microsoft was trying to symbolize interracial harmony and please all markets seems unrealistic. They clearly made a mistake while trying to manipulate one of their advertisements, and there should not be attempts to cover it up with excuses like that. It is their own fault for making such a dumb mistake, and they should have to take the heat for it, not be excused because they were supposedly trying to do something so racially symbolic.
Even though they made this mistake, I do not think it makes them a racist company. They are creating their advertisements to work with their consumers. If Polish people can not relate to the advertisement, it will not serve its purpose. In an almost completely white country, maybe a black man in an advertisement would seem out of place. Truly, I think this says more about the country than it does Microsoft. If Microsoft had to go to the point of completely changing its advertisement just to be able to use it in Poland, maybe we should be focusing more on the race issue in that country.
At the heart of it, advertisement really is all about manipulating material in order to please and grab the attention of consumers. If Microsoft felt the only way to do this was to change their advertisement to white people, then so be it. I personally do not really know enough about society and race in Poland to point any fingers their direction, however, I do not think Microsoft would have made a change like that unless they found it completely necessary.
I think it got so much press because if something like this had been changed in that way in a more racially diverse country, for example the United States, it would have been inappropriate. It would seem more racist because it is unnecessary for a change like that in an American advertisement. So at first glance, the gut instinct is to be taken aback by it and shocked that a company would do something so blatantly racist. However, it needs to be taken into account where this advertisement was going and what its purpose was. When its thought about in context, the change really is not so bad, it is just the nature of advertising. So while I understand where the criticism Microsoft will be getting is coming from (and I think they totally do deserve it just for making such a silly mistake) this situation just appears much worse than it actually is.
Throughout my life I have lived in a city that hasn’t had much of a racial issue. Not many blacks went to my high school or any other racial group for that matter. When issues came up about racism I didn’t really have too much of an opinion; I didn’t have a problem with people of other color as long as they weren’t bothering me. That was my thinking for not only people of different color, but also people that were my skin type. However, this story really bothers me! From my perspective, a commercial is shown on television to advertise a product or some form of good. Thus, whenever I watch a random commercial, I listen to what’s being presented, not who is in the commercial. If you created the same commercial except one of them had a black guy instead a white guy in it, I wouldn’t be able to recognize the difference unless someone specified it to me. However, I do believe that in some cases people who create commercials have good reasoning for which they choose to be in their commercial. Most of the time it is going to be a commercial that deals with some cultural issue, and with racism being a hot issue in the present day, I wouldn’t blame them for trying to stay away from the topic. I just wish we lived in a world where all colored people were treated equally, even if our cultures are different or one race makes more income than another.
I also think that location plays an important role in the racism issue. As we all know, there are plenty of immigrants who reside in the United States and most of them come from a European or Mexican community. Thus, when there are advertisements in Florida and advertisements in Maine, most of the time the people in those ads are going to be of different color. While Maine usually attracts a Caucasian community, Florida consists of mostly Mexicans, Spanish, Asians, and whites. I have no problem with this because more people will become attached to the product in the commercial if a similar racial group is presented in it. But needless to say that when a commercial is intended for the entire audience (all racial groups), there should be no debate as to who is in the commercial and who is not!
I don’t have a very good understanding of how other countries perceive racism and its effects on communities, but if I were the judge of making a decision for this particular commercial from the article, I would no doubt choose who I think is best for the ad instead of deciding bases on color. It just fathoms me how global this issue really is even though we don’t seem to do much about it. Maybe it’s my calling to do something about it!
This blog entry really amused me. The best part about the Microsoft add was that they didn’t change the color of the hands! Like really? You go through all of this fuss so the Black guy becomes a White guy and the Microsoft photoshop guy misses the hands; so hilarious. This mistake is obviously going to get a lot of negative attention. Getting back to is this mix-up racist or not, I would have to say no. The point of advertising is to sell a product. In the United States the population is very diverse, so the people in the adds are more diverse. In Poland it’s predominately White, therefore the people in their adds are mostly likely going to be Caucasian. In my Marketing 212 class today, I learned that the whole point of advertising is to make the consumer see themselves as enjoying and using the product. So why, if the area is dominant in a race, would their be an advertisement with a different race? I mean, I know that I am White and in an advertisement with a different race I tend to think that the product is geared toward being made for that race. It’s not a conscious thing, but honestly that is just what happens. Business men and women are going to do whatever it takes to make money, and using appropriate people in advertisements for a particular area just makes sense. It’s a simple strategy of marketing!!! The media loves screw-ups like this because they can blow it out of proportion and make a great story to intrigue people when really it makes perfect sense. So, basically, the huge issue I have with this article really has to do with the media more than the advertisement. There is nothing like good old racism to stir up attention. And with our “First Black President” (which that title drives me insane seeing as he is HALF WHITE) in office, Whites “suppressing” African Americans are usually the best stories to target in the media. The typical way in which Americans respond to these actions really annoys me. They get all mad and boisterous when really it should be something to simply laugh at. One of the most successful and highly prestigious companies put out an add where the skin colors don’t match on a man, why can’t we just find the humor in that and move on? Nope, we had to make it a huge racial thing and not take it as a marketing strategy. A hilarious thing that was written in the article for this blog was the fact that someone said they thought it was the company trying to achieve “interracial harmony” This person should write for The Enquirer because that is the biggest load of crap I’ve ever read. Overall, this blog entry was awesome and really gave me a good chuckle, which a really wish more people would have done.
I see nothing wrong with Microsoft’s changing the picture to better promote their company. Advertising is all about reaching the customer and encouraging their interest in your product so really the only mistake Microsoft has made here is forgetting to change the color of the hands to match the white head. Would it make sense to advertise let’s say diapers with pictures of teenagers? In reality, not including a woman or a person of color may simply be a more effective way of advertising to a specific audience. In this case, I think racism is not really an issue. When it comes down to it, Microsoft is turning away black customers or promoting any sort of anti-color message. Instead, they used marketing and advertising tactics to create a more efficient and more likely to be successful marketing campaign.
If this ad was being used in India, I am sure the people in the photograph would be brown-skinned rather than white just as if this was to be used in Tokyo, the people would look more Oriental. This media stint is just another example of how people will use anything to start up controversy. There really has not been any sort of demeaning behavior displayed by any of the parties involved so why create such a hoopla over it?
I think it’s kind of ridiculous to make this a racial issue. In fact, it makes Microsoft look kind of stupid for overlooking such an obvious detail. Instead of crying over the race issue, we could be laughing at what this billion-dollar enterprise so quickly overlooked. I think a lot of race issues arise from insecurities. Maybe, the criticism should actually be of the person who changed the photo and how they made such an obvious mistake rather than the fact that there is a white man instead of a black one.
In reality, America is a money making enterprise, people use every way possible to make more money no matter how they earn it. You could argue that changing a person’s skin color on an advertisement is racist if it were being used in a diverse racial area however, this advertisement is for a white locale. White people like white people, they’re comfortable with themselves. If you want them to buy your product, you’re going to have to make them comfortable and let’s face it, a black guy isn’t going to make a bunch of white people comfortable. Especially if there aren’t used to seeing black people.
Ask yourself, if you could replace a face on an advertisement to bring in more revenue that you’d benefit from, wouldn’t you agree to it? Maybe when you’re on the inside it’s business practice. When you’re black and on the outside, maybe it’s racist? Oh and as for “interracial harmony”, try mixed race, not mixed limbs.
When the question is a sensitive as this one asking the difference between political correctness and blatant racism, there are several points to consider. What is interesting to me is that I have actually discussed this same advertisement in regards to the issue of racism in another class I have this semester. We first need to understand that different regions across the globe have differing opinions when it comes to what is racist and what is simply politically correct. In America we strive to be politically correct to preserve the delicate social balance between people of different ethnic backgrounds. That is why this advertisement portrayed a white female, an Asian male, and a black male. This shows the big three ethnicities Americans often think about and it was a way for Microsoft to “cover all the bases.” However, the culture in Poland is vastly dissimilar from ours in America. Poland is a very white community and an advertisement with a black man would be misinterpreted and not as easily accepted by the potential market. Because there is a lack of black people in Poland, the people there would think that this advertisement was not directed toward them and that Microsoft did not intend for them to be among the buyer market, and they would therefore be turned off from buying the initial product. I do not view this as a racist action, despite the fact that Microsoft did indeed apologize, but as an intelligent advertising and marketing strategy. I do not believe that Microsoft intended to offend anyone or any race in particular. It was simply trying to appeal to a wider range of buyers in order to increase their profits. Isn’t that what marketing and advertising is all about?
Another concern from this advertisement is the apparent oversight in altering the man’s hand along with his head. Microsoft, being a company in its field, should have ample resources to alter images successfully and make it appear realistic. I do not agree that the hand purposefully remained unaltered in an attempt to depict a unity and combination of races – I think that is reading too far into a simple error. This may not even be a simple oversight. This could possibly be because of constraints such as time, money, or effort. The professor of my other class in which this was discussed failed to even notice that the hand remained black. Perhaps this is what Microsoft considered as well when they published this advertisement – that the general public fails to notice the little things in their hurry to capture the big picture and move on. Well Microsoft, that was a big fail.
If one were to ask a Polish citizen what they thought of this issue, what would be their reaction I wonder? I think that we as Americans find this such a despicable issue because we are living in a time for which political correctness is strived. We expect there to be a broad representation of several of the races living in this melting pot, and that is what the American add illustrated. Poland, however, does not have such a wide range of races and ethnicities, so I doubt that this issue would receive the attention it has in America.
I find this situation rather amusing. At first I felt like many others seem to have felt and thought that this was a joke. I understand that racism is a large issue in Poland and that there are not many black or other “races” there. It’s not like the US were I don’t think I go a day without seeing someone for a different ethnic background. When I think about what Microsoft did for this ad I am really not that surprised. All they are doing is what every other business in the world is doing and advertising to their audience. If your consumers are mostly white and from what I understand racist against blacks then why not remove the black gentleman. I’m sure Photoshopping someone else into the image is much, much cheaper than paying for a completely new photo shoot, and from a business aspect who doesn’t want to save a buck. I think that this happens more often than people would like to admit, it’s just that Microsoft got caught.
I feel that Microsoft did nothing wrong in this situation. Let’s flip the scenario. What if they had removed a white gentleman with the black? Would this have been such a big issue? I think it would barely been mentioned. It probably would have never made it to the news like this did. Isn’t race a two way street? Shouldn’t I be offended right now because they chose to run an ad in American that did not feature a white male. They made sure that they pleased the gender and race first. I feel that the first thing that happened at Microsoft was that said, alright who will be the most pissed if we don’t include them in this ad?
If you think about different policies and the way they look at race in other countries it’s probably not that big of a deal. I think back to when I took French classes in high school. I remember that not only did every photo have a minimum of two other races other that white, they all also had a picture of someone with a disability. Whether the person was in a wheel chair or on crutches there was always someone. Even in the short educational movies they always featured something of this nature. They were constantly trying to politically correct and not offend another person. If I tried to never offend another person I would be a mute. I’m sure that I am always offensive to some person at some point and I know that I am never politically correct.
I think the world would be a boring place if everyone was always politically correct. If you were required to feature a representative of different races for every advertisement published to the public. I can’t help but think of the “token black guy,” but what if that turned into the token Asian or Latino. At what point do you stop. When do you say, this is too much. And what happens when you move from race to other things, such as the people with disabilities.
I understand the Microsoft did not take this photo shoot. The probably bought this image off of some other company for a particular price. And rather than buying a second photo, or having to take the time and money to make a new ad for the polish market they took one of their old photos and cut out a guys face. I don’t even think that people would have noticed the different color hand if the image that ran in the US hadn’t been almost exactly the same. I personally don’t feel that this was a race issue but rather a money issue. They are just trying to maximize their profits by meeting consumer appeal.
While reading this article I surprisingly didn’t find myself as upset as expected myself to be. I’m currently in an intro to marketing class so I can understand in principal what it was that Microsoft was trying to accomplish. To be successful in the business world you need to effectively reach your target audience. The target audience in this instance was in Poland and Poland is significantly white. Microsoft did their market research and found that this audience would respond most positively to middle aged white men, presumably of Polish heritage. Professor Richards argues that, “So someone at Microsoft decided that a black man in an advertisement directed at Polish consumers is not a good idea. Or perhaps I should say "a black man's head," since his hands were fine.” The only mistake that Microsoft made was that they tried to take a shortcut to save time and money.
Later in the blog Professor Richards says that taking out the Black man in the advertisement was racism. But, in my opinion, this isn’t racism at all. Had this been an advertisement for a predominately black country and everyone in the advertisement was black, or had black men’s heads “photoshopped” onto a white man’s body, would there be an outcry about how the advertisement was racist towards white people? I’d have to speculate that there wouldn’t be. To say that calling this advertisement racist is a stretch would be an understatement. It was strictly business driven, just like an advertisement for Sean Jean or Jordan that is aimed at the Urban, predominately black, culture. The marketers at these two companies know that to sell to their target audience, their ads need to contain minorities and urban culture. I can’t stress enough that this issue has been blown out of proportion, if there is any argument or issue; it is that Microsoft showed poor business practice.
Now at the same time, I would feel different about this issue had both of these advertisements been run in America. I say this because in America we need to be politically correct, but abroad that isn’t necessarily the case, or at least the standards, regarding what is acceptable and what is not, are different. Therefore, who are we to say that a commercial with all white people is not okay in Poland? Again, with that statement, I’m brought back to the fact that the only thing wrong with the ad is that someone took a shortcut.
Some may think that this outlook is insensitive and maybe even racist, but if you would take a step back and look at the big picture, it is easy to see that there really isn’t any racism going on. It was a strategic marketing move that was poorly executed.
Post a Comment