What do you mean by “deliberately withheld the commercial from American audiences”?
The fact that they are West Indian is not what the ad is about. At the start of the ad they are noisy and active and Mick is not able to enjoy the cricket. After he hands them the KFC - silence. Have a look at the whole campaign here and the same theme is repeated several times. He leaves the mixed race crowd to get a better seat and placates the security guard with KFC, he sends his future in-laws out back to eat KFC so he can watch the cricket, he feeds his flatmates KFC so that he can listen to the cricket.
I’m just worried that someone will post a Dolmio ad to youtube.
What points do you think we’re dodging??? You’re twisting everyone’s words and making no sense at all at this point.
It’s no secret that Australia had a great deal of historical racism. Pick anywhere that two different skin colours were present and you’ll have racism.
And In my experience many Americans can’t even find Australia on the map, so I really doubt they know about “The Stolen Generation”. And as I said before, we don’t expect them to. But you expect us to know about some stereotype involving African-Americans (lots of those in Australia, incidentally!) and Fried Chicken.
And it still doesn’t change the fact you brought it up and have so far been entirely unable to explain what a flawed Government policy from 80 years ago in relation to the Native Inhabitants of Australia has to do with an ad for a fast food outlet involving an Australian and a group of West Indies supporters having a good time at the Cricket. In Australia. Not America.
KFC in Australia a pretty independent operation from the one in the US from what I gather. They have their own “image”, do their own advertising, and basically send the cheques to the head office. Just because it’s an American-owned company doesn’t mean there’s someone with a name like Bud McHusky Jr in Louisville giving everything that happens in their overseas business a Rubber Stamp of Approval.
Even your thickest Aussie can differentiate between “West Indians” and “African-Americans”. Especially at a Cricket match. :rolleyes:
And I wasn’t familiar with the “Black Americans like Fried Chicken” stereotype before this thread. It’s just not as universally known as you’d like it to be and I’m sorry you can’t understand that.
How- besides not showing an ad on US TV about a subject most Americans have no understanding of (Cricket)- are they “making sure their ads weren’t seen in the US”?
Just that. They made sure that their ads weren’t seen in the US and as soon as someone made an unauthorized copy available, they first denied a bit… and then removed the ad. Now, KFC Australia is managed by Yum International. Based in Dallas. If you believe that whatever exec, living in Dallas, had no clue that blacks being soothed by fried chicken is a racist trope, that’s your call. I don’t buy it.
Martini: I get, I really do get that you’re totally unable to understand my very basic points even when I clarify in great detail and repeat them again and again and again. I have no idea how to help you. I’m sorry.
Perhaps you could take time out of your busy making-things-up schedule to read the rest of the thread. Yum! Brands operates restaurants in 100 countries. Do you really think the US management team have time to individually approve 100 ad campaigns?
You’re not “repeating them again and again and again”, though. You’re just changing the subject, missing the point, and insulting people who disagree with you. Perhaps the fact almost everyone else in this thread is disagreeing with you might suggest that your position is the incorrect one in this case?
I don’t really want to chime in much in this ‘debate’ for many reasons, but I have to contest this point above you keep trying to make, about it being a major American Company, so they must have known.
KFC is owned by Yum Brands Inc (I didn’t even know Pepsi had divested itself of the group) which is an American owned company True.
However just like all large multinational companies, the business in each country has a large measure of autonomy in running the local business and its own local management structure, which does not have to report back to head office in Texas for every little thing, including things like ad campaigns.
In case you’re wondering, KFC Australia’s CEO is Albert Baladi, who is actually not an Australian, but is European (specifcally Swiss I think, but can’t be 100% on that) and he lives in Sydney. So sorry but no devious American executive who secretly knew all about the sterotype either.
Less frothing enthusiasm for the melee, more point.
We know Americans have decided that portraying anyone with dark skin as liking fried chicken is racist. You have failed to demonstrate why we should give a damn about your outdated taboos.
Beside RNATB’s point regarding Yum execs, I’m still mystified by your assertion that “They made sure that their ads weren’t seen in the US”. Strangely enough, it’s quite common for multinationals to tailor their marketing to suit regional markets. Do you really expect an Australian KFC ad to air in the US ordinarily?
RNATB, given your track record of misunderstanding pretty much even the simplest of my statements, I shouldn’t be surprised that you now view a statement of fact as “making things up”. Thanks much for taking the time to post at me, maybe you should stop being so generous with your gifts though.
Oh, and:
I truly am baffled that you’re unable to understand that repeating something multiple times is repetition. What the heck causes your lack of comprehension?
[quote=“Martini_Enfield, post:266, topic:523886”]
You’re just changing the subject,[.quote]
Again, just because you can not understand a simple, repeated point doesn’t mean I’ve changed it.
And finishing with the bandwagon fallacy. I’m not surprised at this point.
David Novak, Yum!’s chairman, president and CEO:
*Management overseas is fairly decentralized, explains Novak, who says: “You can’t run China from Kentucky. Self-sufficient teams with local knowledge and expertise make things happen.”
*
NYSE Magazine
It’s really hilarious to see the American hosts in the original clip yammering on when they don’t have the slightest clue what is going on. No, the ad isn’t racist and it’s a good example of how context matters when evaluating these things. The same way, for example, how the swastika is a perfectly acceptable in many cultures.
Well, there probably are a bunch of Australians who are aware that “blacks like fried chicken” is a stereotype in America. But I think the point is that it’s not a stereotype in Australia. The average Australian isn’t going to look at the ad and say, “Oh, blacks and fried chicken.” He’s going to look at the ad and think “West Indian supporters” (especially because there’s a whole series of ads about Mick using KFC to help himself in cricket-related situations.)
That’s the thing about advertising. For it to work, it has to reflect the biases and stereotypes of the place it’s airing. Australia has its own set of cultural beliefs and codes, and ads that work here won’t necessarily work there, and vice versa. You find that a lot with advertising. If you look at ads from around the world. There are all sorts of ads that seem offensive or strange to Americans but aren’t in their own country. Every country just has its own cultural baggage.
Your inability to make a simple, clear point it seems, for a start. Go on, humour us, please. Summarise the point you’re trying to make, succinctly and clearly. No more name calling, insults, or implications that we’re thick. Just say exactly what it is, without resorting to “No, I’ve already made it!” One more time, for those following along at home.
What you have spectacularly failed to do, FinnAgain, is show how an African American stereotype known in the USA has any relevance at all to an Australian ad about cricket featuring West Indian cricket fans.
What you REALLY don’t seem to get is that this was an Australian ad for Australians about a sport popular in Australia. It has fuck all to do with America, stop trying to make it so. And stop with the “withheld from Americans” bullshit. It wasn’t withheld from Americans anymore than it was withheld from the French.
Here’s an analogy you may possibly get. If an ad showed in Australia with some loud obnoxious New Zealand tourists in it, should Americans be offended because it plays on the loud obnoxious American tourist stereotype?
This is just getting silly.
If that’s the case ,then why did KFC even comment on it rather than saying “We have no control over them” and why would KFC’s Austrian division remove the ad if Australians didn’t mind it? Come on, this isn’t exactly rocket science.
You misspelled evasion, but okay.
I’m beginning to understand, you are mystified by a simple fact. This is starting to make sense.
No, I am pointing out the fact that it wasn’t allowed to be shown in the US and the problems started when an unauthorized copy made it to the 'net.
Now this is just getting surreal. He was talking about the Chinese menu. You seem to have forgotten to quote the rest of the paragraph, Just one of those coincidences.
In fact, he goes on to point out that brand-consistency is a focal point of his efforts.
Of course, he also goes on to state that the plan includes the entire global operation from the top down including their operating and employee philosophy.
I knew he was talking about China it’s in the quote.
Then why act as if a quote about managing the Chinese menu was really about brand-control for the entire world? Or was there some other reason you posted a quote that really only applied to KFC in China in a discussion about KFC in Australia?
Having made several points several times, repeated it several times, elaborated on it several times, hell no I refuse to take your bait.
And as you’re now inventing “name calling” and “insults” (hit the report post button except we both know mods can’t issue Warnings for your imagination), I’m really, really not going to take the bait.
As for “implications that you’re thick”, all I can do is point out that when I’ve done things like clearly state that it’s not unreasonable for Americans to know about another nation’s country and had you respond that my point was that every single person on the globe should know some fact or another. Obviously you failed to understand a shockingly simple point for some reason or another. You can come up with your own explanation, but it’s not my job to figure it out.
You can complain that I won’t, again, repeat myself. That’s your call.
I’d like to see a cite for the “fact” that the ad “wasn’t allowed to be shown in the US”.
I’m a fan of Australian comedian Shaun Micallef, yet AFAIK, none of his TV shows have aired in the US. Has his material similarly been intentionally kept from US audiences?
This thread is now six pages long. Surely you can’t think it unreasonable to state the point you’re trying to make so that people who haven’t waded through all six pages can follow along? It seems like a perfectly reasonable, honest, good-faith request to me.