or why do the advertisers think they do? Remember the lawsuit a couple of years ago against some beer company for marketing towards blacks. What was that all about? If I have a product that I want to sell to a select group of people to maximize my ad dollars then it that a crime?
I don’t know about blacks but have you seen the “I am Canadian” beer campaign by Molson? It was aimed at an entire country. Talk about a corporation undermining a culture. What’s worse, the guy doing the commercial is now famous as the star of that TV show “ED” on American network TV! Hey…I bet he never drank any of that beer. Perhaps that’s why we Canadians are doomed to play second fiddle to the US economy - it’s that damned Canadian beer!
It may be that blacks, as a group, do not have the expendable income as whites. Malt liquor is a cheaper high, more bang for the buck you might say, than a Budweiser or MillerLite. Marketing knows this so they peddle the more expensive less potent stuff to the guy who can afford to drink longer and spend more, and the cheaper stuff to the guy with the least to spend…
As a side note, I’m beginning to see fewer whites and more blacks in McDonald’s commercials. What’s up with that?
Budweiser:
Blacks: “Wassssssssaaaaaaap?”
Whites: “What are you doing?”
Asians: “Wasabe!”
Oh, those cunning little devils…
First it was ‘Feminine Cigarettes.’ Ack.
Alcohol? How can alcohol be racially specific?
I don’t believe it can be. Companies actively targeting racially demographic audiences for BOOZE might as well dispense with pleasantries and show their underbelly at the start:
’Try new SOUL-LIKKA in the new 80 OUNCER: "Fo’ HOMEYS who aint gots time ta AXE fo’ mo’ when dey jockin’ some crackah’s crib!"
or
If y’all ‘re lookin’ t’ kayull off thayum layust fyoo bray-een cells afore beatin’ on th’ dawg ‘n slappin’ the wahf arayund, y’all need’s tuh cart a kegger o’ TRAYLER TRASH brew tuh yer stoop n’ set a spell!
When I saw the sign on Capital Hill in Seattle for GAY BINGO, I was perplexed–do gays play Bingo differently than everyone else? So I popped in–and no, they played the exact same way. Except the male caller had a nun’s outfit on, and the card-fairies–Self proclaimed, mind you!–all traipsed purposefully from table to table in sequined tutus.
I suppose the sign was to let people know what they were in for, as more of a ‘This Bingo Crowd is not the Usual Bingo Crowd.’
But alcohol? ‘This Beer is not the Usual White Guy Beer. This is for the Discerning Brother.’
‘Surgeon General’s Warning: This Brew Affects African Americans Differently Than Caucasians.’
Now, poking fun at national barriers seems acceptable–but as long as the marketing points the finger purposefully toward the ‘fun’ end. Look at the ‘Foster’s’ campaign, fraught with comparisons between America and Australia–but usually to the Aussie’s ‘detriment’ in that they all end with the viewer laughing at how crazy the Aussies are.
The Aussies I know agree: Aussie’s are nuts, but in a lovable way.
The Budweiser ads do the same thing: ‘Blacks’ are hip, ‘whites’ are not but try to be, and the Chinese are enthusiastic and misunderstood.
In order to pull this off, the demographic audience is not ‘black’ or ‘white’ or ‘Chinese’ but beer drinkers who appreciate outrageous behavior. Note there are redeeming qualities to all parties being parodied–enthusiasm, and a commitment to having a good time.
They know their target audience–Budweiser has a shrewd marketing campaign nearly every year without fail–and they advance on results from test audiences long before those 30 second spots hit the screen, with long and horribly boring questionnaires including such questions as ‘Did you find it offensive,’ ‘Would you be more likely to buy this product if it were sold by A.B.C.D.’, and ‘What appealed to you most’?
But I contest they do NOT target a ‘black audience.’
How many people do you know or have seen utter ‘Waaaassssssaaaaaaaaap?’
Myself, just about every male between the age of 15 through 40.
Regardless of race.
Just my $.02
Most African Americans don’t like Malt liquor, from my observation. It’s more a class or cultural issue than a racial one. Yes, malt liquor is popular among some inner city young black males, but so too is it with some poor Latino males and even some fairly wealthy white college students.
It provides a cheap high, has a tough-guy rep, looks “bad,” and makes a public statement some find quite appealing. Notice the wide mouths on the 32 and 40-oz sizes. Not exactly a sipping drink. Just like some people are drawn to muscle cars (or muscle guns), some go for muscle drinks.
Are you really surprised that alcohol manufacturers segment their markets much the way clothing, cosmetic, and automobile manufacturers do?
It’s in their DNA… it’s the Malt Liquor gene. Just like how Asians have the Rice gene, Australians have the Fosters gene, and Eskimos have the Fish Eyes gene.
Maybe it has something to do with the sweetness - most black guys I knew had a sugar tooth, always put lots of sugar in their coffee, tea, whatever.
daddymack,
then you are saying that the ads are targeting poor people. well if that is true then wouldnt they target the largest group of poor people. IIRC there are more poor whites than any other group?
tsun…,
I am not surprised at the marketers approach of targeting a segment of the market, what I am surprised in is that there was a lawsuit about it that made them back off.
Also surprising is the fact that the ads work. In advertising if something is not effective then it will be pulled.
Litigation abounds–it’s as American as apple pie and special independent prosecutors. The lawsuit you mention, IIRC, stemmed from a long-held belief by African American leaders that the alcohol industry was deliberately targeting AA’s, as part of what some leaders believe(d) was/is an ongoing campaign of “genocide.”
It’s difficult to prove “efficacy” in advertising. Many firms have full-blown advertising campaigns without really knowing just how effective they really are. Even many advertising professionals will confide that ad campaigns do not create demand so much as raise public awareness. Of course, Joe Camel might have something to say about that.
Alcohol abuse destroys families, sure enough. But last year alone, IIRC, tobacco claimed more than 400,000 American lives–and I haven’t heard of any lawsuits against Kool.
You’re joking, right?
I do not know if this applies to malt liquor, but there are many examples of former slave groups and/or natives having been provided with undesirable foods during slavery/colonial times, and maintaining that food in their culture, even after they could afford “better” foods. Chit’lins in the South and saltfish in the West Indies come to mind.
Sua
Same reason my white friend does, I suppose: they’re cheap. $0.99 for a 40oz.
Are all blacks cheap? No. Are all whites into Heinies? No. Maybe you just notice it due to surroundings.
Myself, I’ve always taken Milwaukee’s Best for a cheap buzz, after the first few you don’t even notice anymore. Or sometimes even the infamous Black Label, though that is somewhat more difficult to find. Where I am now, in Cambridge–home of Harvard-- I have a hard time finding either. My beer has evolved to living the High Life, or maybe–on a splurge–some Bass Ale which is what most would consider an actual beer. Rich bastards too good to drink Black Label!
Now that I’ve provided that background, here’s the REAL answer to the question: They don’t, anymore that whites like picket fences.
[sub]But about those Newports…[/sub]
Maybe it is because most poor (it’s not necessarily poor but those with less expendable income, there is a difference) blacks live in concentrated neighborhoods in the city while poor whites live in sparse neighborhoods in rural areas outside the city. Poor blacks are more concentrated and much easier to reach than the poor whites. This fact is why so many negative stereotypes are attached to blacks that are traits of whites as well because of the acssibility of black negighborhoods to the national news agencies. I have very little doubt that the Malt Liquor ads are targeted at blacks, and these ads create the misconception that blacks love the stuff. You would be surprised at how TV shapes the reality of so many people both black and white.
By the way I don’t think it is wrong for Ads to be targeted at any particular group. It is up to the consumer to decide if the product being peddled has any value. Poor does not imply stupid, and in America you have the right to be stupid.
Approach someone you work with in passing (preferably not a close friend) and ask this question (offered by aynrandlover):
[quote]
Are all whites into Heinies?
[/quotes]
Record your reactions and post them here to support your theory.
Right after that, find me–and lend me a clue, because apparently all of mine have fled in regards to proofreading my CODE.
I meant: lawsuits resulting from mass perceptions that the manufacturers of Kool were attempting to single out AA males.
If so, I stand corrected.
The hole deepens. I stand corrected. Got a blue Bull on ya?
I like how you presented you ideas. I hear people talk like that but I didn’t know that it was a written language.
At any rate marketing does not necessarily target groups because of stereotypical reasons. If sales of a product to that demographic is lower than the norm then add dollars may be a bit more productive in that area than ones where sales have leveled off. Generalize ads that target a wide group of people have their place in fostering and maintaining brand loyalty, but ads targeted at specific groups (markets) are where new customers are gained.
Budweiser makes Michelob and wasn’t it targeted at the black community?
That is another important thing to remeber. It’s not really relevant how many inner-city black people actually drink it, if something is promoted as being popular in the inner-city, than many suburban kids will buy into it, just to seem more street-wise and cool, which is a very good market to exploit.
Man, I know I’m gonna get cite-blasted for crawling out on this branch without citations, but I think the urban black community is one of the more unified consumer communities in America. I think there is a lot of competition within that market as a result.
Someone, and I wish that I could remember the guy’s name said something like, “I can’t buy a house, but GM will sell me a car any day.” And we’ve been doing the wallah in the back of the Impala ever since.
Cities are the easiest and cheapest places to distribute a product, and therefore are more profitable. An unfortunate fact of life is that American cities have vast populations of black people. It makes for an appealing marketing target. Cities are also a cheap place to test-market new products, which is why such anomalies as Miller Clear, Cool Colt, and Bright cigarettes were inflicted upon the city of Richmond, VA.
The Budweiser commercials are an interesting thing to me for a number of reasons, but the one most relevant here is that they look to me like an attempt to break into the inner-city beer market.
I remember once touching a nerve with my not-so-enlightened father as a kid when I asked, “Dad, how come black people only show up on commercials when ‘The Jeffersons’ are on?” His non-answer was, “well, you know who Billy Dee Williams is, don’t you?”
Bottom line, to me, is that this particular demographic is one of the best understood out there. If you win over that sector of the market alone, you stand to make a buck. If you can use that market as a bully pulpit to spread the word, you’re on the trail of some real profit. And since a significant proportion of Americans now accept black people as people worth listening to, ads targeted specifically at the inner city folks can also “splash” into other markets.
Hell, I’ll take Richard Roundtree and his King Cobra over Orson Welles and his pisswine any day.