JOUR 4250: Feathers, face paint and football

The term “symbolic annihilation” couldn’t apply more appropriately to Native Americans, unless were talking sports.

Native Americans as a group are basically left out of traditional media. This is a group that lacks exposure and is extremely underrepresented in our society. The importance of symbolic annihilation is what happens after the fact. When Native Americans become so underrepresented as a whole, we start to think differently of them. Symbolic annihilation is important because it links this underrepresentation to people thinking this certain group of people must not be important.

Somewhere Native Americans are actually represented, although controversially, is in the world of sports. The Florida State Seminoles, Kansas City Chiefs and the Washington Redskins are just a few team names bearing Native American symbols.

Some of these teams have been around for awhile. In fact, some people may claim they have been around so long they barely notice the controversy in it. Well, some Native Americans are raising their own voices against these team names today.

The controversy comes from the fact that many of these teams are stereotyping Native Americans. Some team mascots are shown with feathers in their hair, making it seem like every Native American wore feathers in their hair. Another stereotype may be tomahawk symbols or chants the fans participate in. This, again, goes back to stereotyping Native Americans as a whole. Native Americans who are against Native American mascots say these teams make generalizations out of an entire group and pick certain traits to be important.

In class, our teacher pulled up a website dedicated to the “Fightin’ Whities” an intramural team created in an effort to raise awareness on the stereotyping of Native Americans in sports. Apparently the “Fightin’ Whities” was an intramural team formed by students at the University of Northern Colorado in 2002. Without surprise, it caused quite the stir. That’s exactly what the students wanted, however. The students at Northern Colorado took it upon themselves to act as catalysts for the movement against Native American mascots.

So, how do the teams feel about this? There seems to be more action starting at the lower level. According to a USA Today article, the Washington State Board of Education has been encouraging state schools to change their mascots. The article said 10 schools in the past 10 years have already chosen to do so.

Changes, even at the local level, have been met with resistance. Even some Native Americans are against the movement. The same USA Today article quoted a Native American member of the Makah tribe in Washington saying the movement is “ridiculous.”

Resistance or not, the movement to ban Native American mascots has had momentum. More and more people are talking about it. Schools, for example, are starting to lecture on the subject. I have already had two classes at UNT teach about the movement. From looking at the action taking place at the local level, it will be interesting to see how it affects professional sports in the near future.

Atop the Social Media Food Chain

The fast food industry has certainly figured this social media thing out. Companies like Taco Bell, McDonald’s, Wendy’s and Sonic are great models for relationship-building techniques. These companies all lead the scene by following the same thee behaviors: engaging audiences, allowing for two-way communication and reinforcing their brands on social media sites like Twitter and Facebook.

Media Bistro, a blog dealing with journalistic news and events, posted the results of a study focused on fast food chains’ performances on social media sites. Various fast food companies were ranked on how responsive they were to customer’s comments and other social media metrics. The results can be found here.

Engaging audiences can be difficult, especially with so much information at our fingertips. We now search for what we want to read and hear rather than sifting through information or waiting for the nightly news to tell us what happened today.

Fast food companies compete for our ever-dwindling attention spans. In order to capture them, these companies are clever and creative with their social media messaging. Consumers are drawn in by fast food companies asking questions, being humorous and posting pictures. Of course we are more likely to look at pictures than read a description of a new cheeseburger coming out.

Taco Bell, for example, is a serious competitor when it comes to fighting for audience attention. A close look at some of their strategies can explain this.

On Facebook, Taco Bell posts tons of photos of people enjoying their food in interesting ways or places. The company engages consumers by holding numerous social media competitions where fans submit photos of themselves. Many of Taco Bell’s posts are funny and quirky. The company is successful because it acts like a friend you have on Facebook already. Taco Bell stays on top of internet trends and memes making them hip and not so “corporate.”

Lastly, Taco Bell captures our attention because everybody loves free stuff. They know their large, youthful audience. They also know how much appeal a free Doritos Locos Taco has to them. Right now, Taco Bell promises to give the entire country a free Doritos Locos Taco if a base is stolen in the World Series. Now that’s just too easy.

Figuring out what an audience likes, and them catering to them has always worked and will continue to work.

These companies don’t just ask questions to be funny, however. The great thing about social media is it opens up the lines of communication. Facebook and Twitter are great forums to let a company know how you feel. Some companies directly ask for your opinion. Wendy’s asks people on Facebook what flavor Frosty they enjoy more. Thousands of people reply to common posts like these. Wendy’s practically receives instant research results from a large sample of consumers all over the world.

Facebook and Twitter are also great forums for reinforcing a company brand. McDonald’s has been under heavy criticism in the past for food quality and nutritional substance. Through social media, the company has the chance to answer back and address these concerns, which is always better than staying silent. McDonald’s posted a video on Facebook showing consumers where exactly their beef comes from. The company said, “Our commitment to quality food starts at the source.”

Another example of brand reinforcement is the use of Taco Bell’s language on Facebook and Twitter. Taco Bell uses certain terms and words to attract attention from a younger audience. When Taco Bell says “bye summer, it’s been real” and posts pictures of young adults with their products, it only reinforces the theme that Taco Bell is a youthful and energetic alternative to traditional fast food places.

In a service-driven economy, social media is a great tool when used well. Fast food companies are a portion of the service industry that have proven this to be true.

Bennett, Shea. "The Most Social Fast Food Chains On Twitter And Facebook [INFOGRAPHIC]." Media Bistro. N.p., 16 July 2012. Web. 25 Oct. 2012. <http://www.mediabistro.com/alltwitter/social-fast-food_b25438>.

JOUR 4250: A Different Time

Before last class, I never knew nor ever heard of Jet Magazine. Two of my classmates did their content analysis projects on this same magazine. One student even had a video of his parents talking about how important Jet was in their lives.

 

These students informed the class that decades ago Jet was one of the most popular magazines dedicated to delivering news and entertainment to black people at the time. The magazine was eerily similar to other, well-established magazines at the time. This happened to be the sole topic of discussion for one student’s project.

This student’s content analysis focused on the depiction of dark-skinned people in the magazine, or the lack thereof. Each cover had a very light-skinned black man or woman. The inside content was not much different. I thought it was odd for a magazine focused on delivering news to black people to not depict dark-skinned black people. Many of the images shown resembled a white man or woman. The student had to explain to the class that those models were, in fact, black.

After being shown examples of Jet’s depictions of black men and women, the class was shown a copy of Time magazine from around the same time period.

The Time copy showed mostly white men and women. The only time I can remember being shown a black person was when a picture was included of minorities in an article dealing with welfare and the downward economy.

In a class like this, I like to think of someone who has never been to America and what they would think of race differences when they just look at magazines like this issue of Time. Every other article featured white men and women. Black people seemed to be included in sections with bad news only.

The cover of the Time magazine issue juxtaposed a white American schoolboy to his Soviet counterpart. A person from another country would most likely assume that American children are friendlier and have access to more money and resources. They would think the soviet children were menacing and poor.

This class reinforced the belief that images and content focused mostly on one group can support stereotypes. One group being cast in a light completely different from another group can easily create prejudices. 

They will always have Paris

Sometimes it is best to just say goodbye. Nike proactively and responsibly dropped Lance Armstrong this week after his doping controversy. This did not necessarily come as a surprise as ethical companies tend to do what is needed to protect their values.

Nike is at the forefront of the sports world and wouldn't want to sacrifice that by hanging onto an athlete tied to doping charges. Nike made a smart public relations move by eliminating the threat of any criticism bound to come their way by keeping Armstrong around.

According to Chicago Tribune’s article, Nike initially fought for Armstrong’s contract. It was not until United States anti-doping officials released a detailed report on Armstrong’s drug use that Nike finally had no choice to let him go.

 “Due to seemingly insurmountable evidence that Lance Armstrong participated in doping and misled Nike for more than a decade, it is with great sadness that we have terminated our contract with him,” Nike said.

As sad as it may have been for Nike to see Armstrong leave, it had to be done. The 45 sponsors that dropped Rush Limbaugh last spring can attest to that.

Limbaugh was dropped after dropping the “s-word” on his radio program. In March, he called a Georgetown law student a “slut” on air. The result: 45 of his show’s sponsors abandoning him. Obviously the Girl Scouts of America wouldn't stick around to support him after that. Other notable sponsors who left included: Capitol One, American Heart Association, AOL, Allstate Insurance, Goodwill Industries and Geico.

Limbaugh issued an apology, but by that time it was too late. Although it couldn't save him, the apology was necessary from an ethical standpoint.

Last week three sponsors turned down a huge advertising opportunity as they dropped their support of the 2012 presidential debates. Philips Electronics, BBH New York and the YWCA all cut their contracts with the debates after third party candidate Gary Johnson was excluded. More than 67 million people watched the first 2012 presidential debate. These three companies opted out of this enormous advertising opportunity to stick to their values.

The fact of the matter is, some endorsements or situations are decidedly too risky to stick to. Some celebrities or athletes become risky in the sense that they can potentially harm their sponsors’ credibility. The Girl Scouts of America did just what Nike did when they said goodbye to Lance Armstrong. Both companies wanted to protect their values. They did so by cutting ties.

"Nike Drops Sponsorship of Lance Armstrong 'with Great Sadness'" Chicagotribune.com. Reuters, n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2012. <http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-nike-drops-sponsorship-of-lance-armstrong-20121017,0,5087363.story>.

Lee, MJ. "Rush Limbaugh Loses 45 Advertisers." POLITICO. N.p., Mar.-Apr. 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2012. <http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73675.html>.

McDuffee, Allen. "Presidential Debate Sponsors Drop over Exclusion of Gary Johnson."Washington Post. N.p., 3 Oct. 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2012. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/thinktanked/wp/2012/10/03/presidential-debate-sponsors-drop-over-exclusion-of-gary-johnson/>.

"Nielsen Offers Presidential Debate Viewership Stats." The Fourth Branch. N.p., 5 Oct. 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2012. <http://www.collegian.psu.edu/blogs/the_fourth_branch/2012/10/05/nielsen_offers_presidential_debate_viewership_stats.aspx>.

Time to shine for CEOs

CEOs seem to have it harder with social media’s rise in popularity. People want to hear what organizational leaders have to say, and now they are actually able to. Twitter and Facebook are just two mediums people can connect with CEOs around the world.

Corporate blogs have been recent examples of CEOs asserting their attitudes and company news to various publics. These company leaders have embraced the benefits of effectively communicating and are not scared to do so.

For whatever reason, many company leaders shy away from opening the door to two-way communication. Many may see two-way communication as an opportunity for shareholders or disgruntled customers to take revenge and fight back using their words.

A quick look at BIC Pens being attacked after releasing pens targeted to women is a great example. The company was mocked and embarrassed when consumers became upset at the description of the pens. The pens were marketed as being more sleek and had colorful ink options for women to write with. Al in all, sarcastic comments on Amazon gained popularity, poking fun at the stereotypical nature of the product. Now an entire Tumblr page has been set up just for these comments to be displayed. The page can be viewed here.

The point is: people are talking about your company either way. The benefits of a CEO operating a company blog far outweigh not having one. Blogs enable CEOs and other organizational leaders to directly get a point across to multiple priority publics. Blogs even humanize a company. Consumers can connect with a company better when they actually know a little bit about the man or woman behind it all.

Bill Marriott, CEO of Marriott International, operates a fantastic blog. The blog connects readers with the heritage and family values Marriott Hotels was built upon. Blog entries from Bill Marriott uncovering his father’s diary entries from the 1920s to Marriott International’s breaking news gives readers a great look into Marriott’s brand.

Blogs give company leaders like Bill Marriott the freedom to post whatever they want. Mr. Marriott chooses to focus on family values and corporate social responsibility, like investing in sustainable products and behaviors.

Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks, is the epitome of a CEO not shying away from attention. His blog breaks many of the unspoken rules other business leaders live by: not speaking about politics. His blog is filled with business tips and opinions on political policy and political parties. For better or for worse, Mark Cuban has made a name for himself, and blogging has certainly supported this.

Visit this list to see more examples of CEOs operating blogs.

Whether it is addressing a crisis, announcing news or just reinforcing a company’s brand, blogging is worth the effort for CEOs and business leaders. People have easier access to a greater range of media and are connected now more than ever. There is no better time for business leaders to step up and give a company a voice. 

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-bic-pens-for-women-that-everyone-is-laughing-at-2012-8?op=1

http://www.prdaily.com/Main/Articles/40_of_the_best_corporate_blogs_to_inspire_you_12645.aspx

Picture: http://www.marriott.com/culture-and-values/jw-marriott-jr.mi  

Hey, where’d all the women go

A lack of cultural awareness has resulted in some companies to completely embarrass themselves around the world. Here are some examples:

• Pepsodent Toothpaste reaching out to Southeast Asia, not knowing some of the natives chew certain foods to purposely blacken their teeth
• A sunglass company advertising animals wearing sunglasses in Thailand, not knowing the people view animals as lower than humans and would never wear the sunglasses worn by animals
• Chevy Nova not selling well among Hispanics because it translates to “no go”
• Visit Kwentessential for more examples of cultural mishaps

These are just a few examples of some cultural fiascos, additions to an ever-growing list. Newer markets are being sought out as we become more globalized. It is important to remain culturally sensitive and aware of different ways of life as companies and their public relations departments seek new audiences.

No company wants to embarrass themselves on a global scale. It is important to remain culturally sensitive. It is also important to always stick to company values. Ikea demonstrated what harm straying from company values can do.

Ikea Saudi Arabia’s catalogue is a recent example of cultural sensitivity backfiring. Trying to stick to the fundamental values of the country, Ikea Saudi Arabia removed all women from its catalogue, drawing criticism from its parent company.

Ikea, the Swedish furniture company, spoke out against Ikea Saudi Arabia, a franchisee of the company. A statement was released saying the catalogue “clashed” with Ikea’s values, as they do not support any form of discrimination.

This situation is a bit different from the Pepsodent example above. This is an example of cultural sensitivity going against the values of a company. With values so different than the rest of the world’s values, of course there are going to be major differences and troubles associated with marketing and public relations. It is the up to the company on how they will handle these differences and how well they will stick to their own values

This could have all been avoided if Ikea’s values were more consistent throughout the entire company, including franchises. Ikea Saudi Arabia still bears the company name, therefore damaging the company as a whole. If this wasn’t the case then why would Ikea be commenting or apologizing?

Journalism, marketing and public relations professionals cannot harp enough on the importance of value-driven goals. Communication goals should always parallel the values seen in organizational goals. Ikea obviously did not communicate its values well when the Saudi Arabian catalogue was released to rest of the world.

Sources:

Molin, Anna. "IKEA Regrets Cutting Women From Saudi Ad." N.p., n.d. Web.

"RESULTS OF POOR CROSS CULTURAL AWARENESS." Kwintessnetial. N.p., n.d. Web.