What was intended when this commercial was created? What do they expect Dove to do?
being well versed in propaganda and thought control techniques, I would say that this ad is intended for all women. I'll explain;
First off there is only one real constant in the ad...White superiority, which is immediately established numerically...2 out of the four are white while the other two are of differing non-white color. Then, the superiority message is further projected when the black woman is turned white, insinuating that black women want to be white, and in continuing the racist/bigoted message, the white woman reveals, by removing her "outer cover", that hispanic women are "almost" white but not quite and should want to be white as well. Although women of color can never BE white, they should emulate whites or "pretend" to be white by using "white" products. The overall message being that white is better.
Finally, the message TO white women is that they are superior to women of color as the ad seems to depict happiness on the part of the women of color at having the ability to emulate or "be like" white women, and the white woman shows her approval of the women of color for enacting said emulation.
By the way, the ad that was shown on the news this morning showed only the black woman turning into a white woman within the four frames. I guess they were testing the waters with that one before they decided to go with the new one that had three different women. Either way it's blatant racism and bigotry. You can get arrested if you shout out racial slurs in public but it's perfectly okay for a major corporation to present obviously racist/bigoted ideas and ask you to pay for them by buying their products...Go figure.
Hi Ivan, I tried to copy the ad you are talking about but the graphic didn't show well enough. You looked at this one much closer than I did. Great analysis!
When I first saw the original one, I was looking at it as 4 different people. There was no sound so I was trying to understand the point. Then when I realized that the Dove was supposed to "wash" off the Black, I thought, "How mean and assuming!"
I can see that a person might come up with the concept; however, it had to be approved by some higher level I would think. I can't understand how it got by them.
I think it takes a really evil mind to interpret this commercial as racist. I'm a former ad writer, and the point of advertising is to sell the product. We used to have a saying, and I'll bet the advertising industry still does, "everybody's money is one color, "green."
I think they used two white women, a black and an Hispanic to include all races whose "green" they solicit. There are two white women because at one time there were more white people than people of color in this country. Maybe the alternation of the ladies' skin tones was unfortunate, but it was the more artistic. This may not be the case now, and the ad writer may have been lackadaisical in his research. If so, I'll bet he regrets it now. I saw the commercial and it never entered my evil "white privileged" mind that it was indicating that a woman of color would envy a white woman and use this product to turn her white. What did enter my mind was that the ad was trying to reach a larger audience than just white consumers.
Years ago, the industry emphasized that there were cosmetic products made especially for "women of color" because they had different needs from white women. I don't think this is true because skin is skin, but I think it was a marketing ploy to let darker skinned women know that their product needs were being met. Today I believe the idea is to mainstream to women of all races, just like advertisers are now using "special needs" children to try to mainstream them with normal children.
I wish people would stop witch hunting in every corner. Shame on evil minded persons for trying to stir up more controversy in an already controversial world. It is this very kind of thinking that creates dissension and keeps racial bigotry aflame in this country. As the song goes "give peace a chance."
If it were 4 pictures of different women, in the same pose or in different poses, it could show diversity.
The pictures seem to be chronological in stages of undress.
There are still products for women of color. Most Black women don't have a problem of too much oil in their hair. We must add oil. Foundation for the face should be closest to the person's skin color. There are products for which targeting needs is very appropriate.
I don't see that because then the white woman bottom left would be turning Hispanic bottom right in that interpretation. That is unless you are going strictly clockwise, which is a below the Equator thing. In the Northern hemisphere, water flows counterclockwise down a drain, not clockwise. This would take a real stretch of one's imagination. I think Ivan was really stretching.
When I first saw this ad, it was in motion and quickly alternating between these women taking off their shirts. I have no idea why they were undressing, but my thoughts were nowhere near assuming they had some malicious message. It doesn't make sense for advertising to purposely offend a large customer base. I took it that their intended message was that this product is great for all skin types, tones, etc.
But there are not 2 "white" women. Top right and bottom left are pics of the same lady. Bottom left, that smile does not seem genuine.
The lady top left looks very happy.
Finally, what we like to call a "white" skin is nothing of the sort. We are varying shades of grey, with blood below the skin adding to pink.
And we are very much a minority. Most people of the world have a darker version of skin, so it's time we got used to this fact and got to know at least a few of them personally. Make friends not enemies.
"But there are not 2 "white" women. Top right and bottom left are pics of the same lady."
There's a reason for that. By using the same white woman in both pics, the ad is saying that diversity is not desirable and by using said products the lesser races can fit in. At any rate, the fact of the numerical superiority remains; 2 white, one black, one hispanic, to which there is much gall applied in consideration of the fact that the so-called "minority" community now outnumbers whites in America.
"Make friends not enemies."
"I think it takes a really evil mind to interpret this commercial as racist."
Or an extremely naive one to NOT see it as racist.
"I think they used two white women, a black and an Hispanic to include all races whose "green" they solicit."
So, by that reasoning there must only be three races of people who Dove thinks can by their product? And if what you say is correct, why the racial disproportion?
"There are two white women because at one time there were more white people than people of color in this country. "
And that has what to do with the fact that the ad was made recently?
"Maybe the alternation of the ladies' skin tones was unfortunate, but it was the more artistic. "
Firstly, multi-million dollar advertising agencies don't make "unfortunate" decisions...Their livelyhood depends on not making such mistakes. Secondly, Dove executives approved the ad in order for it to be aired and, thirdly, what is it about the white numerical superiority or "turning white" that you find "artistic"?
"I saw the commercial and it never entered my evil "white privileged" mind that it was indicating that a woman of color would envy a white woman and use this product to turn her white."
That's probably because you ARE white and priviledged and have become accustomed to such. And like I said earlier, the original ad was strictly of a black woman who takes her shirt off and a white woman has replaced her. If that is not racist then there is no such thing as racism. The ad with two frames white woman, one frame a black woman and one frame a hispanic woman is simply the softer version of the same idea.
"just like advertisers are now using "special needs" children to try to mainstream them with normal children."
No, advertisers "use" special needs children simply to imply a non-existant compassion by the company in order to capitalize on a once undeveloped market. Disabled and sick kids are the new "money machine" in today's corporate America.
"It is this very kind of thinking that creates dissension and keeps racial bigotry aflame in this country."
Where there is smoke there is fire. In this case a black woman being magically transformed into a white woman is the smoke...And the fire is the racism hidden behind the scene. And in reality racial bigotry was, is and always will be alive and well in America regardless of whether or not some people expose it when they see it and whether or not some refuse to see it at all. The advertising agency responsible created a racist themed ad that lessens women of color and the manufacturer of Dove products was in collusion with the ad company as they did review and subsequently approved the advertisement knowing full well it might generate a negative response from trouble making "witch-hunters". The young black woman has herself said that she was asked if she had a problem with the message and out of her desire to get paid she said she did not have a problem with it. Once paid though, her additude and response to the ad made a 180 degree turn around, which is part of the problem...People putting aside their self-respect and dignity for a dollar. But then again, that would seem to be the gist of the ad itself, wouldn't it...Go along to get along.
Remember Mary J. Blige and the KFC!
Lola Ogunyemi is not an American. She is Nigerian. She doesn't have our history and is unable to relate.
A woman featured in a controversial Dove ad says the spot is being misinterpreted.
Lola Ogunyemi, a black woman, wrote Tuesday in the Guardian that she agreed with the company's decision to apologize for its ad, which was seen by many as racially insensitive.
But she also said Dove should have defended its creative vision.
"I feel the public was justified in their initial outrage," she said. "Having said that, I can also see that a lot has been left out."
http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/10/media/d … -responds/
"A lot was left out" ... hmmmm!
Yes, I do! It's just one more example of all that "non-existent" racist bigotry. In actuality, if one thinks deeply enough about it, Mary J.'s "shout over chicken" is just another example of the "go along to get along" mind game played out in America. It tells me that if someone of her stature can succumb to it what chance did the impressionable young black woman in the Dove ad have?
I've never seen this ad or heard of it before, but what I see here is a black woman taking off her shirt to become white, then a white woman taking off her shirt to become Hispanic, and the cycle. I suppose. will continue. It seems a little silly, but other than that I don't see the offensiveness, but then I'm not black, so I want to hear your concerns. Suppose the order had been reversed and the white woman had taken off her shirt to become black, etc. Would you still have been offended? And should the order make any difference?
This is not a commercial; however, it deals with perception. Couple got prison time for terrorizing a 9 year old Black kid's birthday party. It was a 9 year old boy. What was their intent?
Advertisement is for the purpose of attracting buyers and increasing sales.
Target audience: Black women? Black women who want to be white? Anyone who wants lighter skin?
Based on how I phrased the question, would not target audience be a more reasonable point of discussion?
Surely, Dove didn't want to p*ss anyone off. Maybe they thinkk all women desire to have lighter skin?
Do all women desire to have lighter skin? Can it be discussed without bringing in the racial element?
Ethnic Hair Shampoo for Thick and Curly Hair - Best Shampoo for African American Hair - Sulfate-free Natural Oil Treatment w/ Avocado Oil for Men & Women – Ph Balanced & USA Made By Honeydew Products
Virgin Hair Fertilizer Shampoo | African American Hair Shampoo | Rapid Hair Growth | Helps Reduce Breakage, Dry Scalp and Dandruff | Natural Hair Product Contains Jojoba Seed Oil, Honey Extract, Aloe Vera Extract, T...
Jergens BB Body Cream for Lighter Skin Tones, 7.5 Ounce
sunscreen that feels silky soft for individuals with lighter to fair skin tones
foundation powders for contouring tan to deep skin tones and three...
Ads everywhere dedicated to dark, light or in between skin colors...but try as I might, could find no soap that will change a black woman into a white one. In particular, all soaps just seem to clean dirt and oil off - while there are soaps for oily or dry skin types, there was nothing found for skin colors.
But I have to ask; are you implying that there even might be a target audience large enough to justify a national ad campaign and that wants to change their skin color from black to white? That seems more than a trifle racist...
Saw a collection of old, old ads yesterday, and there was one with a little white girl asking a little black girl why her mother didn't wash her with (borax, I think, or some other bleach). Now THAT was racist, though normal for the time, but indicating that Dove soap works for all skin types is not. Why must showing a variety of colors be about turning the dark ones lighter? (Can you be positive it wasn't about darkening light skin?) Why not be about being intended for, and working for, everyone, unlike the products listed above? None of those products showed multiple skin colors...
"Virgin Hair Fertilizer Shampoo" ..... wow! Back to the head-lands down on the farm! Can your hair really take up nutrient like it was a field of corn? 100% NO! That hair is already dead tissue. One more lie designed to deceive the gullible.
Must be eating the avocado oil. You've never noticed the tiny teeth on a strand of hair?
Jonny, I use avocado oil, coconut oil, vitamin e and others. I take hair, skin and nails. It is difficult for me to adjust to my hair thinning. My hairline is gone! The rest of my hair is so thin it doesn't have the movement it used to have.
I tried a weave or two and said, "Uh! Uh!"
Dove actually could come up with a soap that has vitamin e or avocado or something. That would be wonderful for our skin. Darker skin needs more oil.
Wilderness, the whole point of "targeting" is to get a certain group to buy your product. I've seen the ads from back in the day. They lay the foundation for people to make a comparison for possible racist message. I don't think it was an intended message. I do think it was an insensitive message from someone who is clueless. Sometimes, you can try too hard.
We definitely need those products that are made for our skin and our hair!.
I wasn't attempting to apply their may be a target audience. Actually there are products for lightening skin just as there are products for tanning skin. However, they don't show a change in ethnicity to make an appeal.
That was at least the 2nd ad that Dove had to pull. I'm wondering if they need a more diverse group of people creating the ads. However, if the do that, there will be other consequences.
Bottom line, how can they reach out with a message that will have the impact they want it to have.
They cannot. As long as there are many people willing and eager to take offense when none is offered it is impossible to do anything but offend them. Which is exactly what happened - even you say there was no intent to offend, but you take offense anyway.
I see a wrong racial message but I have not expressed any anger or irritation....have I.
Of course, the ethnic products you mentioned are absolutely what we use and depend on. Definitely no offense there. Glad to have them!!!
I think you get more upset about what you think my reaction is than what my reaction really is. Calm down!
"I see a wrong racial message but I have not expressed any anger or irritation....have I."
You have certainly let it be known that you are offended by the racism "inherent" in the ad. Does that count as irritation?
Diane, it's not so much upset, as just sad. You have repeatedly said, in spite of the views of others, that all you can see is a particularly vicious form of racism; an "obvious" indication that black women do/should aspire to be white. And when you come back to redefine the OP, it's still all about black becoming white - no attempt I can detect at actually trying to understand the ad at all. Just a continued insistence it is racist, and that kind of insistence (racism is always there, waiting to be found, whether intended or not, whether hurtful or not) is harmful to you, to the company and to the nation. IMO.
But I give. I cannot seem to get what I'm trying to say through. Through a lifetime of actual, real racism and through the perception of offense and racism when there is none intended in later years. One can always find offense if that's what is wanted, but that message is lost in the pain of years of persecution and discrimination.
As a young professional woman I had to learn to communicate clearly, and support my position, while remaining even tempered. You are entitled to your observation. Possibly it is tinged with your own emotion of having been passed over for jobs that were given to women or people of other ethnic groups.
I've seen more pronounced racism in my day, when I was less confident, less educated, and had no support system. I can see racism and call it what it is, especially realizing that it has no impact on me unless they have something I need.
I don't need to use Dove. I am able to purchase it if I want it. It's great to be able to have the choice. It's like the Montgomery bus boycott. The Black people walked everywhere rather than ride the bus. It had an impact on the bus transportation income. Then Black people were allowed to sit on the front of the bus.
If Dove wants Black customers, they need to find a way to attract them that is appealing!
"If Dove wants Black customers, they need to find a way to attract them that is appealing!"
Or find black customers that don't turn everything into being about race. That don't keep the "race card" on the top of the deck, ready for instant play. That recognize that others probably aren't nearly so "sensitive" to perceived wrongdoing.
I'll leave you alone - I'm not going to convince you that this wasn't racist, and you aren't going to convince me that there is anything to be upset or concerned about. You seem like a great lady and, outside of this penchant for that race card, one I can learn from and appreciate.
Or find black customers that don't turn everything into being about race. That don't keep the "race card" on the top of the deck, ready for instant play. That recognize that others probably aren't nearly so "sensitive" to perceived wrongdoing.
I'll leave you alone - I'm not going to convince you that this wasn't racist, and you aren't going to convince me that there is anything to be upset or concerned about. You seem like a great lady and, outside of this penchant for that race card, one I can learn from and appreciate.
We have reached an impasse. I say racism exist. You say it doesn't, even though I provided a couple from thousands, possibly millions, of examples on YouTube.
Others concerned about racism
1. Chancellor @ University of Florida that told students that Richard Spencer is a racist.
2. George W. Bush who spoke of the divisiveness that is going on now.
3. John McCain who recently spoke of the divisiveness that is going on now.
4. Hate Rising: White supremacy's rise in the U.S. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hate-risin … ssignment/
My analogy (at length) - Just because you are well, it doesn't mean that I am not ill.
Constantly posing "the race card" is a sign of people who have those tendency and push the conspiracy narrative.
If Dove and other companies that want to attract Black customers listen to the those who put their potential customers down for advice, they will go out of business. It will be just what they deserve.
Thank you for deciding to leave me alone. It doesn't make sense for us to continue this same discussion on every forum. When I see topics that I am unable to discuss with forum leaders, I don't comment.
Who is the target audience here?
WHOSE IDEA WAS THIS?
The Weeknd Blasts H&M for Racist ‘Monkey’ Ad: I’m ‘Shocked and Embarrassed’
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-weeke … mbarrassed
Okay this one I can agree is absolutely ridiculous. Like, it smacks you right in the face. How a bunch of people saw this and didn’t see the problem, or decide to point it out... yikes.
Let me ask something, please, simply because I am curious. As I said, when I first saw the ad, it was in motion and not still frame pictures. Would this have the same effect on you as the still frames? Meaning, would you still interpret it the same way?
More so, in fact, as when the ad is in motion and there are but two women involved there is no mistaking what has happened...A black woman has turned white. And to what end would that message be leading to?
The model says it leads to all skin being important. They turn into each other as a way to promote the beauty if all women. Her words:
https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfr … t-a-victim
That is just one of her replies...The one that she hopes will not prevent her from getting another "modeling" gig. It's all good, though. I was simply giving my "evaluation" of the ad from a propagandist/psyops viewpoint. The thing about a psyop is that it is intended to promote something not readily acknowledged by the target audience. It initially promotes confusion in order that if any one recognizes the deception that it can be spin-doctored out of a bad situation...Just like the ad.
And I suppose you believe in all the backmasking allegations of the 1960s and 70s. It is the people who see conspiracies under every bush who keep racism alive. Maybe the people who don't see it as racist are the ones trying to get along with all others, not the ones stirring up controversy.
"It is the people who see conspiracies under every bush who keep racism alive."
Well, actually, it's racists and those who deny it exists who keep racism alive. Those who expose it when they see it are actually working to get rid of it. Which are you; Racist, denier or exposer?
This is not a clear or even insinuated display of racism, however. It was a poorly edited commercial. Some people perceived it a certain way, and I won’t tell them that it’s wrong because we’re all entitled to feel the way we feel, but please let’s not pretend that not reading into it the same way means we’re denying racism.
I actually just sent a personal message to Dianne because this topic is interesting to me.
I grew up with people around me who were different from me in culture. It was my normal. So even though I am white and do not deny that tqcusm exists, I don't go looking for it or immediately take offense to something as intended racism. I was taught by a civil rights leader in her own right that fighting ignorance and fear begins with yourself. I took that to mean that there is no need to fear or to assume others different than myself are bad, including racist. To give benefit of the doubt. To judge people based on how they treat me. To understand other cultures to appreciate them. To get along. It's really not that difficult. Society and continued thinking instead of just doing is the problem, in my opinion. If it's internalized, there is no initial thoughts of malice when we see things like this commercial. That's why my thoughts were more like what a stupid commercial and why would women want to turn I to each other rather than love who they are?
"To give benefit of the doubt."
Therein lies an enormous part of any answer. Those that actively search and look for offense will always find it; those that give benefit of doubt seldom will. If we simply assume, for instance, that others that are different are automatically racist we will find racism in everything they do whether it was intended, or even present at all.
I was not looking for anything or thinking of discrimination. I saw the 4 pics in my twitter feed before I saw concerns about it and didn't think anything of it one way or the other. Then I saw the animated version.
In 1980, my boyfriend called my employer to tell them that I wouldn't be in to work that day. I was taken to emergency during the night and was writhing in pain. The employer wanted "me" to call to tell him. I had just had an ng tube pushed through my nose and landed in my stomach. I was given a heavy dose of pain medication. Still, the hospital called back so my employer could hear my voice. Just because they were at work and feeling fine did not mean I wasn't almost dying.
I had been sick over 2 years, had 80% of my bladder removed and replaced with intestines. The doctor said the lining had come out of my bladder. I had had surgery on both my knees. I have a denerative bone disease. The doctor said my knee damage was comparable to athletic knees. My employer thought all of this was in my mind.
Bottom line, I couldn't be sick because they felt fine. There I go with one of my war stories! Not all white people are racist or discriminate. However, it is not our imagination. Why are there Ku Klux Klan, Nazis, white supremacists, etc. These people are not showing their racism every day so everyone can see it. People in Arkansas were recently surprised to see that a guy from Arkansas was in the group that beat the Black substitute teacher in the parking lot. People that knew him were surprised.
Everyone is different and has different experiences. I have no idea of what it is like to be white or challenges they face. White people have no idea of the challenges facing Black people. Just because you are not a racists doesn't mean that there are no racists. They wouldn't taunt or harm you. Why? Because you are not the target of their hatred.
But what is the "war story" indicative of? That they felt that way, or you were treated poorly, because you are black? I'm sorry, but that conclusion is completely unsupported by your story - it's what I mean when I say that those looking for discrimination/racism will always find it.
Yes, there is overt racism like the supremacists (as well as covert and unintentional racism) but that does not mean that every bad action has race at its core. People do and say stupid things, unthinking things all the time but it is not indicative of racism.
I did not say it was because I was Black. The point is. They didn't believe I was dying. They thought I was feigning illness. Remember, I talked about the surgeries over a couple of years.
The point is: Just because you don't think there is any racism, doesn't mean that there is no racism.
Let me understand. There was no indication of racism in your story (and you agree), and the point of the story is that because I don't see any doesn't mean it isn't there?
I'm sorry, I'm just not following that line of reasoning at all. Except to go back to if you want to see racism, you will. Though I suspect that whatever you are trying to get across is still going right over my head.
Because you are well does not mean that I am not sick.
Because you do not experience racism doesn't mean that I don't.
Everyone's experiences are different because everyone is different.
Maybe I'm getting it. Maybe.
Sounds like the definition of racism changes with the person: what is "racist" to one is not to another. This I reject: what is "racist" is "racist" and that one makes far more fuss than another over truly minor matters doesn't change that. Applying a label does not change the action. On the other hand, what is perceived to be racist will absolutely vary person to person, and is exactly what I'm saying.
I cannot personally address what it feels like to be treated differently because of race because I am white. However, I think I can perhaps empathize and "see" racism more easily because of my lifelong experience as a woman.
When you're the only woman among a group of men on the city council and one calls you "sweetie" in a public meeting, is that sexism? When you speak, and cannot finish your thought because you're repeatedly interrupted by the men, is that sexism? If you stand your ground and return "sweetie" with a pointed reply, "why, thank you, sugarbutt" and are then accused of being snippy, is that sexism?
You might be one of those men who thinks all of those incidents are no big deal, but when you are attempting to function on a level playing field and you are consistently and repeatedly demeaned by a thousand small cuts, it has a lasting and far reaching effect.
I make this statement for the benefit of others who might be following this discussion. Based on years of reading your thoughts here, I don't think you are willing to see the pervasive racism in our society, and especially not wiling to acknowledge the pernicious effects of systemic racism upon people of color.
TY Pretty! You are understanding what I'm trying to say. My only point is: "There is another side."
"When you speak, and cannot finish your thought because you're repeatedly interrupted by the men, is that sexism?"
No. Boorish, rude, disrespectful, discourteous, uncivil; it is all of these and more, but not sexist. Unless you're speaking of the assumption that they are doing it because they're male and we all know males don't want to listen to females? That would be a very sexist attitude of course, but merely interrupting someone is not. Not even when one is male and one female.
There are definitely men who are sexist. Pretty is not speaking of an isolated incident. The sexism (like any "ism") is a pattern of behavior. I've experienced that too!
Sure are (sexist men)! And sexist women, too, who decide that any male ignoring them is a sexist...because they are ignoring a woman. Doesn't work that way, and any woman that makes such a call is very likely more sexist than the rude male.
Just like racism, the world isn't all about sexism...unless one actively looks for any possible excuse for offensive and ascribes any perceived affront as obviously sexist. It isn't. More often than not, it is merely rudeness. IMO, of course, but then I try not to apply labels based on my own attitudes.
Problem is that someone that is rude or not taking great care to be PC is declared racist. And sexist. And a homophobe. And anti-Christian. And ageist. Pretty much anything and everything that is anti whatever the label we apply to ourselves...because they're rude or, often, simply not using language we would like to hear. Sometimes, as in the ad this thread is about, simply because they didn't present a message as we would like have seen it. We as a people have become incredibly sensitive to being offended, and very often it results in perceived offense that was never offered, never intended and even never even there.
Wilderness, It looks like you are very offended!
I'd like to get back on the impact of the ad. So would you say that the ad is not PC?
To some it is not PC. They have spun it into what it was very obviously not created to mean, declaring as they did so that it was an intentional act of racism. Whatever happened to "That can't be right - I wonder what they really meant? Oh, I get it now!"
Others never had a problem at all; the "meaning" ascribed by some never occurred to them.
And still others looked in puzzlement: "What?" I don't get it."
So was it PC? Is it even possible to satisfy everyone, not giving offense even to those that actively search for it? No, and no.
It's gotten to the point that if you make a cat food commercial, including black, white and yellow cats, you will be a racist because there wasn't a red one. And if you dye one red so that you're not racist anymore, you'll not only be set upon by animal rights activists and dog lovers but attacked because race was a consideration!
IMO, race has long been a dividing factor in our country, and we're doing everything we can to make it worse, not better.
I don't think it is fair to talk about cats because ... cats are not human beings. There is no comparison.
If you mean that it is wrong to be offended by the Dove commercial, I say it is because you don't know what Black women, particularly dark skinned, Black women have gone through.
I don't know about other countries.
Here in American
1. Slaves lived in the slaves quarters. The light skinned ones are moved to the massa's house and become "house ni**ers!" Because they are actually related to the slaveowners. They are treated better than the slaves that live in the slave quarters.
2. Enmity develops between the slaves and those in the house because of the difference in treatment.
3. During Jim Crow in the south, Black people that looked white were not allowed to sit on the back of the bus with their darker skinned family members. It would look like white people are sitting in the back of the bus.
4. When I was in school, the light skinned girls were considered the prettiest, became cheerleaders, participated in assemblies, were selected when a selection needed to be made. This was not the fault of white people. It was a stigma carried on from slavery.
5. When it was time to integrate office, the light skinned Black people were hired for those positions.
6. The entertainment industry tries to be on the side of cultural diversity; however, they don't extend it to jobs in the entertaiment industry. Those jobs, too, go to light skinned Black women with long hair or really nice weaves.
7. When I started teaching school, I saw that this extended to the Hispanic culture. The Hispanic boys seemed to worship the lighter skinned Hispanic girls. They called them "white" girls.
Much has been done in attempts to lower the self esteem of dark skinned Black women. I, however, have found my niche. I wear bright, bold colors and people compliment me on my beautiful skin and the contrast. When I was a child, I was told that those colors were too "loud" for me. Now, I strut!
Less than/not good enough
There are lots of things that are done to try to make people feel like they don't measure up.
1. Too short
2. Too tall
3. Too skinny
4. too fat
I wouldn't say it is PC to try to make any of them feel like something is wrong with them. The ad, to me, says, "You can change your dark skin to white skin by using Dove!" It may not be racism. It definitely conveys that there is something wrong with you that you can fix by using Dove.
I am glad I am a compassionate person and not a perfect person. You don't have to agree with everything that one does. However, it is good to always consider someone else's side. It's just what you do when you value people as human beings.
"I don't think it is fair to talk about cats because ... cats are not human beings. There is no comparison."
You missed the point, The comparison isn't about cats; it's about perceived racism in an advertisment. Racism that was never the point and never intended.
But you didn't live in slave quarters, you weren't part of the enmity between field and house workers and you didn't sit in the back of the bus. To continually drag up what happened to other people long, long ago just isn't reasonable. Remember it, don't let it happen again, but don't pretend that there haven't been great strides since that time.
I get that that's what the ad says to you. To me it says "This is not a race-specific product (of which there are many, and rightly so); it is intended for all colors and types of skin". One is offensive, one is not - what makes you choose the one that offends you? Did you, personally, say to yourself that "No, that can't be the message", or jump on the chance to exhibit anger?
"However, it is good to always consider someone else's side. It's just what you do when you value people as human beings."
Agree 100%. Did you consider the "side" of the ad creator? That there was no offense intended, that there was nothing racist there to them?
Diane, I really do understand that there is considerable "implied" racism (for lack of a better term) in the country. But to live your life constantly being offended when none is offered, well, I don't see it as in your best interests or the best interests of the country. Out of many social media posts I didn't see a single one that said "Hey, Dove! If looked at just right, like this, your ad might be construed as racist - you might want to take a closer look at it". No, they immediately went into attack mode, declaring evil racism is the result of being white. It's not helping, and a big part of the reason it doesn't is that someone, somewhere, will always be offended at any and every action that can be taken. We will ALL be offended at one time or another; how we respond says a lot about whether that offense is justified or not and whether our response is justified or not.
"But you didn't live in slave quarters, you weren't part of the enmity between field and house workers and you didn't sit in the back of the bus."
I absolutely did sit in the back of the bus. I did drink water from the colored fountains and go to the colored bathrooms.
I tried to lay out background for you. It is often not verbally articulated but it is acted on. You have never been nothing but a white male no nothing about women's struggles or those of other ethnicities. You have no desire to understand.
I try to post in a way that is non-accusatory, interesting to discuss and allows others to speak what they feel. You think the ad is PC because it doesn't impact you. However, I'm sure you are able to testify when you thing white men are getting the short end of the deal.
Thank God I am me!
OK - you did sit in the back. And I was instructed not to sit in the theater balcony unless I wanted to come down over the edge...it was reserved for black people and they would not take kindly to whites in their seats. And not to go to that bar, but to use this one...as the one was for black people only and I'd come out with a knife in the back. I watched as black folk, in a clear case of discrimination, got jobs based on the color of their skin, and women because they possessed a vagina I did not. Amerindians got free college while I worked 40 hour weeks as I went to school, because of the color of their skin.
I got over it. It's dead and gone - none of that exists anymore outside rare and backwoods corners of the country. Now we fuss and feud over an ad that, if viewed in just the right (or wrong!) light, could be construed as showing that Dove soap can wash the melanin from skin even as we all know that no sane advertiser is going to say anything so stupid.
" I watched as black folk, in a clear case of discrimination, got jobs based on the color of their skin, and women because they possessed a vagina I did not. Amerindians got free college while I worked 40 hour weeks as I went to school, because of the color of their skin."
I realize that when a Black person or a woman got a job, that meant that a white man did not get it. The condition that led to them getting the jobs was because the employers were not hiring BECAUSE of their skin or sex - NOT because they weren't qualified. I never read stories about people getting jobs and then not being able to perform them. I'm sure there were a few but that with any job and any person.
What happened is that more people started competing for the same jobs on a pseudo-level playing field. It will very likely get worse. There are many fields were there is a shortage of people but the jobs require more technical or formal training. Those that look for positions that don't require a high level of training or education, will have increasingly more problems.
Uber is a fairly recent phenomen; however, driverless cars will cause transportation to go the way of sales clerks.
It isn't going to get easier for white men. It isn't going to get easier for anyone. The thing to do is be the most qualified and them have some other quality that will help solidify the job. Employers are even valuing experience that much. They want people who are innovative and think outside the box.
I honestly don’t understand this. And I’m not trying to dismiss your feelings about it, but actually trying to understand.
So, what do you think the message is when the white woman turns into a darker skinned woman?
Do you think that Dove’s intent with the ad was to imply that white skin is superior to darker skin, and again, how does the white woman turning into a darker skinned woman fit in with that intent?
Or do you think it was just a poor edit that resulted in some people drawing conclusions that were not intended by Dove?
"So, what do you think the message is when the white woman turns into a darker skinned woman? "
I don't see skin changing color from application of soap - melanin doesn't work that way and we all, including the writers, know that. "Have you stopped beating your wife?", if you understand the reference.
"Do you think that Dove’s intent with the ad was to imply that white skin is superior to darker skin, and again, how does the white woman turning into a darker skinned woman fit in with that intent? "
No, that was clearly not their intent; see above answer. And if you see a white woman turning black (beyond tanning) then you have a very vivid imagination; as there is no such action taking place (there are clearly at least 2 women pictured), this question is again a case of "Have you stopped beating your wife?".
"Or do you think it was just a poor edit that resulted in some people drawing conclusions that were not intended by Dove?"
Hard to say it is a "poor edit" when the message that Dove Soap is a good thing for all skin types is pretty plain. That some people imagine that the message is "Dove soap will turn black women into white women" is absurd, and the idea that a major manufacturer is spending money to alienate half the nation by claiming white is superior to other skin colors is even more so.
Did you catch that? You have, several times, implied that the message is about race and how Dove can "correct" your race. It obviously isn't, but your questions assume that it is, even to the point that the wording you use denies the responder (me) the ability come to any other answer. IMO, the problem here isn't with the ad, the writers or the management at Dove. It is with super sensitive people all over the country that do their absolute best to "find" racism (or sexism or homophobia or anything else) in everything they see.
I was directly asking Diane about a particular comment that she made, hence the fact that I quoted a specific part of one of her posts.
I’ve said at least a couple of times in this thread that I don’t feel the ad was racist or that the intent was malicious, so I was asking those questions to clarify why someone who does think it’s racist thinks that is, and whether or not it was intentional. So I don’t know who you think you’re talking to but it’s directed at the wrong person.
I don't get the white woman turning into the dark skinned woman. Is that from one of the pictures not displayed here?
The ad is not a set of pictures. The ad is a video. This is part of the problem, a lot of outlets and articles are only showing the part where the black woman turns into the white woman. There’s more. And the commercial that was supposed to air in its entirety actually includes something like 7 women with different skin colours turning into each other. This was not strictly black to white.
I showed the pics and said there was an animation on it. The only time the Black women appears is when she is taking off the sweater. She is never shown without the sweater.
This is not the animation that I saw but it does show the Black woman wearing and removing the sweater. She never appears without the sweater.
That doesn’t really address anything that I’ve asked you.
I didn’t imply that the first woman is in it again. I said the white woman turns into a woman with darker skin. The white woman only appears right before she turns into the woman with darker skin... so what does that mean? Based on the idea that it’s in order of superiority, is the ad saying that the last woman’s race is the most preferable?
My point, only point, was that the Black woman was considered in a negative light with the option to wash herself to become white. The video is on a loop. A complete unlooped sequence starts with the Black woman being unacceptable becoming a white woman. That is the purpose of the single pics - they provide the story board.
Black woman begins + other pics + white woman end
...no. It doesn’t end on a white woman. Did you watch the video that I linked to? The last woman is not white.
Or since you seem intent on referring only to the photos you posted, the woman in the 4th picture (the last one of the “story”) is not white.
You see what you want to see. What I said is factual. There is no white lade with a brown sweater on. There is no Black lady shown without a sweater. There's history behind this that you are not aware of.
I see what is literally there. The white woman removes the dark brown shirt to reveal a light shirt. The darker skinned woman then removes the light shirt to reveal a darker shirt. This is factual. I am trying to ask you what the white woman turning into a darker skinned woman means to you and if it’s as suggestive of racism as the black woman turning into the white woman.
I don't see a white woman turning into a Black woman. Period. Shades - I don't know if it is part of the cleansing process or someone from a different ethnic group. Some say Hispanic person. I don't know that the person is Hispanic because the color is between the Black and white women.
As we look at what is there, we make assumptions or observations. Yours and mine differ.
Wilderness, as a young, naive person working in a predominately male field populated by well-educated, polite men, that is exactly how I was and still am willing to wave off these incidents: as rudeness. That does not change the fact that the rudeness arises from an age-old cultural expectation that men are more knowledgeable, more capable, more rational, calmer, and better leaders. It is hard to break deeply held beliefs, beliefs that are so ingrained that one often doesn't even realize they are there.
But, over time, a woman knows the difference between an a$$hole and a sexist a$$hole. We are surrounded by both.
I know you will dismiss our years of enduring a thousand little cuts as no big deal. Fine. Then I hope you will understand when we roll our eyes at old white men who feel persecuted. It is hard for us to relate to that, just as it is hard for you to understand and accept that what you perceive as trivial is another little cut on top of the thousands we have already endured. Those cuts have just as much of an impact as one big slash.
This is all I am going to say to you on this subject. As I stated before, if only you could be female or black for a year.
+1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000-what you are saying Prettypanther is falling on some people's dead years. There are those who proclaim that their paradigm is the only legitimate paradigm. These same people deride those who have a logically different paradigm. Prettypanther, there are prejudicial people who refuse to see otherwise. If it isn't their way, it is WRONG to them.
You have not mentioned an instance of PC wrongly being labeled as racist. If you can provide an example, I might agree with you.
You may have minor concern about Ebola or AIDS because it is not affecting you. People are dying from it.
Some kids are bullyed at school and hate to go. Others are popular and love school. Their experiences are totally different.
It appears you are making this personal. If you haven't experienced racism, that is good for you. It doesn't negate the experiences of others.
I would like to read an example of PC which is being decried as racist.
THANK YOU but that point falls dead on certain people's ears.
If there are no racists, why are there stories about racists in the news? Why are police arresting them?
Home / News / Arkansas /
Investigation into Arkansas-based white supremacist group leads to dozens of arrests, authorities say
By Jeannie Roberts
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2017 … s#comments
Allow me to repeat myself: "Yes, there is overt racism like the supremacists"
But when people demand that everything around them be PC, with the definition of what is PC changing every day, it becomes ridiculous and quite obvious that too many people are carrying a chip (or a log) on their shoulder, actively looking for something to be offended about.
Can you give me an example of PC? I'm sorry. I guess I drove right over the statement.
What can you point to, and I'm sure there are some examples, of PC that has been categorized as racism?
Perhaps a good example is an advertisement that anyone - any person in the country - could in any manner, or with any possible spin, interpret as saying that a black woman can wash the black off with Dove soap.
If truth be known, it's not Dove or any other soap that washes anything off. It's the water that "washes off. " but the manufacturers don't want you to know that. Lies come at us from every direction and they are mostly spun so as to make a quick buck out of ignorance ..... and prejudice.
I'm fine Di. In South India right now, researching a certain aquatic fern. The people here are lovely, down to earth, all shades of brown from coffee to dark chocolate, friendly, healthy food, full of family life, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, you name it, and they all co-exist with mutual respect and acceptance. With a pinker skin I feel almost out of place, but that's my misconception, of course. I don't advertise my unbelief, they would think it weird and I have no wish to argue...just accept them.
I don't know about PC but it is pretty ridiculous.
I use to consider purchasing the products that thicken your hair. Most you have to order online and give a credit card number. I'm not falling for that one either. Well, I did once. When they get your credit card number, they are off and running.
I'm still stuck on the Chicken King!!! Tyson? I just Googled, hoping to read up on this - very interesting.
Drugs have definitely been a major disruptor - especially 1970s/1980s.
I've gone to Arkansas every year since I left in 1973 but never heard of this. Of course, you media types knew all kinds of information.
So does the ring still exist?
I saw you had a FB link on your profile page so sent you a message there.
Diane, I had to delete my post. I answered your question privately.
I don’t think it’s racist, and no it’s not because I’m white, I’ve seen people of all colours also say they don’t feel it’s racist. So take that as my opinion and nothing more.
If you watch the full commercial there are three women that all get the same amount of camera time. The black girl takes off her shirt and turns into the white girl. The white girl takes off her shirt and turns into the brown girl. A lot of the gifs only show the black girl turning into the white girl to push the “racist” narrative, likewise the screenshot posted here shows the white girl twice (which some of you have confused to be two separate white girls) to make it seem like the focus is on her/white skin. It’s not. It’s really important to view the commercial in its entirety and not just take a snippet, or assume that this screenshot is the way the ad was actually framed, because again... it’s not.
The point of the commercial was to say that the dove skincare products are for all women of all colours. Perhaps the concept is lacking in some ways and I think it’s a weird commercial but to say it’s racist is really a stretch. Unfortunate given there are plenty of contentious race issues that actually exist and deserve the attention this commercial is getting.
It seems that each of us is getting a different msg from this add. Good thing, makes us think beyond the square. Let's have some more to discuss.
This true. It's not the full add or the idea. This is what I just read from the model in the commercial:
https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfr … t-a-victim
Why does it have to be a go along to get along mentality? I don't remember that commercial, though. But I grew up with friends from several different cultures. Kids simply don't think this way. All this talk of division started as I got older and left my hometown. We certainly weren't blind to history growing up, but we were also taught about other cultures as a way to celebrate differences. I loved learning about customs and traditions of my friends. I still do. I see no reason to many things in a racist light that may not be. It's common now to see people taking offense to poor word choices. There are no doubt issues in society that need to be addressed, but we also make it worse by not getting along. Not by going along, but by getting along while disagreeing, too.
As for Dove apologizing, I think it's good that they did. And explaining themselves probably would have made it worse and sounded insincere.
I don't see this as people not getting along. Black people were offended. Dove responded by removing the ad. When I first looked at the 4 pics, I didn't get it. When I saw it animated, the story I saw was "Use Dove to wash off the color and become white." It isn't true and doesn't make since.
If we had gone along to get along back in the 1950s, in Little Rock, Arkansas, I would have never seen the 2nd floor of major department stores or had the opportunity to ride on the front of the bus. I would be entering the homes of white people from the back door. Dr. Martin Luther King peacefully protested. Thank God for the ability to speak up when you feel bullied, lampooned, or otherwise unfairly treated.
I found my ability to communicate unfairness particularly helpful in the last 7 years. As an older, more experienced, higher paid teacher, I was harrassed and unfairly evaluated because the principal could hire two young teachers for what I was paid. When I received my evaluations, I wrote rebuttals to everyone for three years. The principal thought my choir students wouldn't like me because I was old. He didn't realize the bond I had with the students. I shared all of my evaluations with the students and they critiqued all of the lies. Many of my former students are my friends on Facebook. I taught them how to document, articulate, and resolve issues in a productive manner.
It is good that Dove was responsive and immediately pulled the ad. Not everyone is the same and, therefore, not impacted the same based on stimuli. I'm sure they didn't consider the ad offensive. It may mean that they need more diversification in screening ads.
Dove apologizing for something they knew would be seen as racist is like a criminal saying he is sorry right before sentencing...They are both only sorry because they got caught, not for what they did.
I think of "Truth in Advertising" and can't understand it. I know companies do ridiculous thinks to sell products. Example: Carl's Jr sexualizes advertisements to sell hamburgers. There is insurance for "zombie apolcalypse." There are actually a lot of dumb commercials. This one wasn't trying to be dumb or silly. It was neither. Someone should be losing a job.
I believe that in the best interest of actual race relations in America, nothing should be done to Dove or the ad agency. Why? Because such blatant racism by corporate leadership simply lets us all know that racism/bigotry is alive and well and if one or all of them are publicly brought to bear all of the other racist/bigot executives/companies will be more sneaky about it making it more difficult to expose them. A simple slap on the wrist will pose no deterrent and so they will continue to do it giving people the opportunity to see who they are. This way all the deniers and those with "blinders" on to it can continue to deny its existence if they choose but the rest of us will know better. For far too long there have been WAY too many people (whites) who insisted such racism/bigotry doesn't exist in America. The proof is in the pudding, no?
This does not show the animated sequence. The animated sequence is 1) top left, 2) bottom left, 3) bottom right and 4) top right.
I don't think the order makes a difference.
What is the purpose of Dove, cleansing! The top right (white) one shows her clean after taking off the shirt. Her process is complete. There is no picture of the Black person after cleansing.
I thought I was responding to Jo. Sorry Ivan!
You know I feel the same way about Donald Trump becoming president. His presidency has brought meaning conversations to the forefront that might otherwise not have happened.
I think, in part, the disconnect between some whites and racism is a generational thing. What I mean by that is what I said earlier in another comment. I grew up with friends from all over the world by the time I reached high school and it was normal to me to see people for how they treat me as opposed to skin tone or where they are from. Those things were mere details to me that often make people more interesting. I first realized it was a much bigger issue when I moves to college and did some student teaching and learned of some issues still being addressed, including race and poverty.
It may also be a regional thing. People tend not to see things that are not as prevalent in their own lives.
But back to Dove...I don't use the product so I can't verify this.... I heard someone say that on the product somewhere it says "for normal to dark skin" as opposed to something like "perfect for light to dark skin" or "all shades'. If this is the case, it does drastically alter the way I perceive the commercial. Because even if this is unintentional and not meant to be anything outright offensive, it still remains entirely insensitive and off the mark.
Shan, when I was in the shower, I thought about "Normal to Dark skin tones!" Soooo, I looked it up. Based on this fiasco, there is no excuse for the current ad. After at least 5 years, it is still a struggle.
Ivan, YES! Someone should be fired. See below
Dove is in hot water thanks to a questionable label on one of its lotions. Possibly advertising should be created in the US rather than Europe.
On Tuesday, a woman posted a Twitter photo of Dove's Summer Glow Nourishing Lotion, that featured the classification "Normal to dark skin," implying that light skin tones are "normal" and dark skin isn't. Ugh.
Twitter user @hatfulofalex rightfully tweeted her outrage, saying "Dear @Dove , What skin colour is 'normal' ?!?" Her tweet has since garnered more than 15,000 retweets and more than 12,000 favourites.
Dear @Dove , What skin colour is 'normal' ?!? pic.twitter.com/Fw69pdWxDs
— alex (@hatfulofalex) August 26, 2014
It's an unfortunate (and racist) choice of words for the beauty company whose marketing campaign focuses on "real beauty."
A Dove spokesperson told Boston.com:
"Dove is committed to representing beauty of all ages, ethnicities, shapes and sizes. We believe in celebrating real beauty and in raising the self-esteem of women and young girls globally. Our European team was already aware of the mistake regarding labeling on Dove Summer Glow Body Lotion bottles. This was corrected during the summer of 2012. Many of our lotions focus on moisture as the key benefit and in some cases we label them ‘normal to dry skin.’
The Dove Summer Glow Body Lotion is a gradual self tanner that also moisturizes. It should have been marked as “fair to medium skin” or “medium to dark skin” depending on the skin type it focuses on. In this case, there was an oversight from our team and we accidentally combined the phrases. As soon as our teams in Europe discovered this error, they began the process of relabeling the bottles. We corrected the language in our other communication vehicles where possible. As always, we appreciate the feedback and support from our community."
But it seems as if the original offensive packaging, which resulted in a Twitter firestorm two years ago, is still being sold.
A quick search reveals that Summer Glow "normal skin" products are still in circulation and sold on sites such as Coles Australia, Amazon.uk, Amazon.com and Dove Australia.
Naturally, the Twitterverse isn't pleased.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/08/28 … 30996.html
it's all good. And actually, your reference to "cleansing" is excellent! It never crossed my mind but, Wow, what a very astute observation! Cleanse yourself of yourself to become more like the superior race! I guess the new "ethnic cleansing" is being perpetrated within the minds of it's victims.
Diane, I certainly agree with you that the ad should be pulled not because some people think it's racist, but because most people think it was a dumb commercial anyway. I see a lot of commercials that don't seem to convey any kind of understandable message. I think that says a lot about ad writers today. I don't understand why companies are willing to spend millions of dollars on vague messages.
I haven't read through all the comments before posting this. I saw the ad and was puzzled. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. I kept thinking surely the advertisers don't mean to convey this message....?
So, in 20 words or less, what do you think the message was Pretty?
Just when I think I have seen it all...
I watched multiple versions/portrayals of the ad. My impression was that the ad intended to say the product was good for all types of skins. Period!
I think, that the controversy is a bunch of malarky promoted by folks with an agenda, and latched onto by folks looking for a reason to be offended.
Surely the accusations that I am a white guy insensitive to the perception of the portrayal that other "offended" folks see, and don't have a clue what the ad really said will come, but geesh!
Maybe it was a dumb ad in the PC world - where froggy folks are just looking for a reason to jump, but in my insensitive white guy world - it was just an ad message that it was good for all skins.
On this thread, the worst offender, in my opinion, is Ivan Todd, with this racial dissection of exactly how and why this is a racist assault on people of color by white people of power. Bullshit!
White people are superior! From the black woman to the white woman showing that white is superior and "cleaner!" Or that all black women really want to be white women! Double bullshit!
I hope you check this out Live to Learn, it is a martini night, and I hope there is nothing fuzzy about my disdain for the racial denigration thrown at this commercial.
This controversy is the biggest crock of PC BS I have seen in a long time, and if anyone found a reason to be offended by it - then, well... it's not quite that much of a martini night, so I can't finish that sentiment.
Haven't seen any of the ad except what is pictured here but if the women are taking off their shirts it seems like the target audience is being overlooked. It's men. Men are the targets. Men of any and all colors.
I would say the target was financial gain! Where we can state artistic vision and concept, it remains a disappointing ploy to engage discussion across many target audiences. It appears this vision, although covert, is met by our attention to it.
In the timing of its generation, I do find it sensitive and confusing to the masses, thereby, causing conversation and controversy.
However, from a marketing sense, they have accomplished their goal.
Personally I remain disappointed by the covert ploy, my opinion. Flash point advertising that streams controversy is an,“ oops I’m sorry that was not the meaning or intent.” This doesn’t negate that they got things riled up.
I believe they knew, in the least, that it would create discussion with various interpretations, some negative and some positive. Hence, their goal was achieved.
From a worldly perspective, again with the temperature of the social climate we are experiencing did we need the controversy in this timing?
by ga anderson 6 years ago
Racism is the trendy charge these days. I believe it is over-used and frequently misapplied.I know that racism applies to race and not ethnicity, but that hasn't stopped many from applying the racism charge, so I include it here also.Many of the accusations I see should have been accusations of...
by Terrex 7 years ago
Is a white woman refusing to date blacks the same as a black woman refusing to date whites?It seems there is 'back privilege' in the dating scene and racism against whites. As a non-white, non-American person observing this, it seems really strange that this racism is so widely accepted.
by Ellana 7 years ago
Why is it that white men and black women are the least likely to date out of their race?
by Holly Pedneau 5 years ago
"The Help" was written by a white woman. Did this change your opinion of the book?
by ilmdamaily 13 years ago
A question to all the North Americans on the forums:Is race really a "big thing" in the US? The general impression I get from news, movies and just general social interactions with American citizens is that race seems to play a significant role in the national psyche. If you are a US...
by Krystal 8 years ago
What are your thoughts about the removal of the Condederate flag?The South Carolina Senate gave its final approval Tuesday to removing the Confederate flag from the Capitol grounds. What are your thoughts about this? Was it fair? Was it appropriate?
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|