Backfire

By now, it's been well and truly proven that the Internet allows advertisers to get away with marketing campaigns that would never get past TV network censors. But sometimes even an ad destined for social media can crash and burn.

Like this Australian attempt did earlier this week.

Reports yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald:

The short film, made as part of the online "Clever Film Comp" organised by Toyota in conjunction with advertising firm Saatchi & Saatchi, shows a father and a young male having an innuendo-laden conversation about a date with the young daughter.

The ad is for the Toyota Yaris, a small car sold mainly to young female buyers.

<SNIP>

One of the conditions listed in the competition's rules is that videos submitted for the $7000 first prize must "not be immoral".

After a tally of viewer votes pushed the ad into the top ranking, the competition’s Facebook page filled with remarks describing the winning film as juvenile, offensive, and promoting incest.

"I have written and lodged a formal complaint with Toyota's Australian head office regarding this specific competition entry/winner," one Facebook entry says. "I would encourage those who feel the same to also write formal complaints to Toyota. This is 2009! Women should not have to be dealing with this vulgar objectification."

<SNIP>

Toyota spokesman Mike Breen said he could not say how many complaints the car maker had received about the video, but the company was sorry if it had caused offence.

Of course, all of this guarantees the ad goes viral.

So why am I posting it?

Because it goes to show that it's not just sex that sells. Sexism does too. Still.

You'll find the competing entries here.

Comments

[Jim M]

I don't get it but would guess the 'clever film' is supposed to make having no legitimate values at all look OK bluejay.

[MensRightsNow]

Google search Dec 15/2009

"men's rights"...509 000 000

"women's rights"...57 500 000

.....the worm has turned...

[John Merritt]

Good Evening Antonia and my friends from Canada. I enjoy your posts because they are thought provoking when they are not insightful/inciteful.

In the parlance of emergency fire services, they use 'backfires' to work to their advantage. To some they may appear to be hazardous to one's health, but to the welfare of the firefighters and the occupancy of the structure or habitat, it is meant as an ends to a means.

In the art of advertising are 'back handed' messages be drawn but are supposed to make you think of each ramification or nuance either as a means to provocation or message. Thank you once again Antonia for your short, sweet and too the point messages.

[Antonia]

Actually I get 482.000,000 for ''women's rights.''

Still, we all know men have more rights than women.

So what's your point?

[...pat.]

Juvenile, yes. Sexist, yes. I don't see the incest angle, though. Am I misunderstanding or not hearing something clearly with the accents?

[Antonia]

Pat,

I am guessing it's inherent in the father's apparent relish in the ravishing of his daughter.

But I agree with you. It's certainly not in your face.

[The Stygian and his Shemitish Dogs]

Esteemed and Beautiful Moderator,

You're quite right ....
There is something very much not-quite-right about the "father's" attitude., and he almost seems to want to join in ......

and the Frankensteinian eyes ....

I don't own a vehicle, i hire them when I need one. I used to enjoy driving the Yaris ... I'm not sure any more ....

Pat Pet,

In the context of yesterday's post your naivete is ... touching.

[PaulR]

I suspect it was intended to take place in the universe of the Ricky Gervais movie, "The Man Who Could Lie", where everyone is absolutely truthful in social interaction.

In this spot, the daughter is obviously a fully cognizant and enthusiastic partner to her suitor, and equally partaking in the frank conversation (she's "ready to go!"). Who says she isn't the one to do the ravishing?

While it is shocking and brazen, I'm not sure how that is sexist, much less incestuous (a father's interest in his daughter's safety is incestuous???), unless one belongs to the trunk of "feminism" that views depictions of women's sexuality as either an impossibilty, or as a de facto byproduct of men's predatorial nature - an ironic renaissance of Victorian chauvanism.

[Antonia]

For once I agree with you: that is, regarding the depictions of women's sexuality etc.

However, what's sexist here is how the driving the car is not unlike rape.