Senate This Is An OUTRAGE!

How Corporations Are Turning Political Outrage Into Profit

I figured the all-caps would be attention grabbing aaaand since I don't see a current thread here, I'd like to discuss our current day outrage culture. This was partly inspired by a friend on facebook who's rightly pissed off at Gucci's attempt to create a half-blackface sweater about it. From Nike, to Gillette, to Gucci, it seems our purveyors of fashion or business in general have the idea that they can leverage social outrage into lifting their stocks--and they're right. Gucci's stock is up. Nike's stock went up. So too did Gillette's.

In a very real sense they're keeping you angry to their benefit. So, I'd like to discuss what can be done about it (if any) and why they're doing this.

This is not to say that all outrage is fake. Some outrage over egregious actions is necessary. Specifically related to Trump, but most of the outrages today are to some company's or political party's benefit.

In general, before I get outraged these days I look at the company's stock or who stands to gain by being pissed off. If the company's not hurting from back publicity, then I generally assume that it's manufactured. Or about an issue that's entirely unimportant to my every day life.

Next, look at who's being outraged. Like with Gillette or Nike, they specifically targeted men who hate feminism and/or being told how 'to be a man' and flag worshiping conservatives. So the pushback was fairly strong and got their name in the media which created a stronger pushback from liberals. All of those people burning their Nikes and razors were frickin' stupid, but it worked to their benefit.

Next: Does this company advertise that often? Gillette...can anyone remember their last commercial before that whole 'We Can Do Better' business? Odds are no. But the outrage worked and was ineffective in hurting the company.

Why do we keep doing this to ourselves when we know this is what they expect? I'm fervently trying to get this point across, but so far no one is listening. Perhaps it's time we wake up from our outrage stupor?

 

@Fire_Ice_Death
Personally, I have to admit that I find an inexplicable pleasure in reading or even answering to the comments that appear to me particularly dumb or annoying. So, assuming that there are other people like me in the world, I can understand why this fact is often used as a powerful advertising device.

Concerning Gillette, I'm fine with 'We can do better'. What I find outrageous, though, is their insistence in improving their razors. They come up with a new blade every six months. Just give me a break, I could make my face smooth and tender like a newborn's belly when the razors had just two blades. Then they added another one, and presented it as the big deal of the year. We have arrived at Gillette 5, or something. How smooth is my face supposed to be to motivate the additional improvement of a ******* razor?
And don't make me start with the toothpaste. The art of making whiter the white.

 

To put it bluntly, we are in a age of people getting offended at everything. EVERYTHING.

On the left side: Many comedians won't go to colleges for that reason because someone will complain. It's not that the jokes are even offensive, it's that people are too overly sensitive, and sensitive about nothing. Faux outrage at everything and anything. On social media they're called "SJWs" because they feel they have to be outraged at everything that comes up; even if it isn't supposed to be a real thing.

I remember that llama chase a few years ago where a couple llamas escaped and they had to be tracked down. Someone made a tasteless meme of they shot the black llama cause he had a gun, while leaving the white llama alone. Now obviously this was a sick joke, yet people took it as real for awhile. All it took was a little research and you'd find the truth. Just like the whole Covington fiasco. Social media destroyed those boys but then the truth came out that it was the others who was the aggressors and now all the media has now had to backtrack, and could be facing a huge libel lawsuit.

Now this gets attributed to being "snowflakes" as the term is coined. Especially to millennials.

For conservative side: lot of pushback is aimed at these companies because its targeting them unfairly. Gilette, Nike, etc are pushing a narrative in a way that paints them as bigots, heathens, deplorables, etc. And they're tired of it. Tired of being marginalized and discriminated against. Tired of the values being made fun of when commercials they make don't even do the same to them. It's like you can't make fun or say anything against liberal policies but conservatives are open season, and the double standard is horrendous.

 

Autumn, some people used to be offended if someone with darker skin so much as looked at them.

 

That's come back again now, unfortunately. Only aimed at a different color now mostly. The fact that anything of it is back sucks.

 

I'm gonna say what I said last time: Gillette makes money from people buying razors. The "in" thing right now is talking about toxic masculinity. Gillette has a financial interest in getting beards considered toxic masculinity. The people in charge of the ad campaign are not going to feel the effects of it. It's blue collar guys who they are attempting to shame into purchasing their product. And if we help them do it, are we any good? Be better.

 

Autumn, are you trying to insinuate that white people today in 2019 are under the same kind of social oppression that poc have been?

 

itt FID is outraged at outrage.

 

Always love a good dose of irony. In the first half of your post, you complain about those offended by everything, usually people from groups that are regularly discriminated against. And that's faux outrage...but the poor oppressed conservative (I assume white, straight, cis, usually Christian man, in this context and judging from your other posts) is the real victim here? Come on, man.

 

Sometimes something offensive happens (that is justified as being offensive)... but it shouldn't be labelled an "outrage."

Sometimes things are labelled an "outrage" even when it really shouldn't even be offensive.

The market tries to exploit tribalism, anger, fear, and other deep-rooted human emotions because, when we are emotional, we are more likely be less rational and buy whatever they're selling.

“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”

 

I will say that I am quite pleased that we live in a progressive society that is becoming more and more accepting.

 

I definitely think corporations will go with whatever they think will bring in the money. The world is ruled by evil corporations. When can we know the world isn't? When they stop destroying our planet. And that depends upon when we stop falling for their BS or buying their products out of need.

Seriously, most rich people do not give a **** about the rest of us or about this planet. They lie lie lie.

 

I guess it's a matter of when it's worth it or not. But that is a subjective matter.

Anyway I think very poorly of most corporations and just imagine a bunch of rich narcissists wanting to have positive social media feedback which correlates with more sales. They want to be liked. They don't care about their deeds, but they certainly care about image. A righteous image is in their best interests.

And it's not entirely their fault. The entire "first world" is basically complicit in their evil.

 

Oh oh I forgot to post this earlier while I was soapboxing but I think it's the height of irony that the OP of this thread is also the guy who gets outraged at people who don't buy into the Russian infiltration hysteria.

 

No. It’s time to examine the fact that companies are turning us into jerks for profit by using social outrage. Is it a worthwhile endeavor and does it make us worse as a society?

 

Well I don't want to trivialize it but I think it's trivial.

 

Meanwhile, a few thousand people concentrate $30Tn of riches and get to grab hundreds of billions more thanks to various breaks and incentives every year. In one country.

 

But when are companies not manipulating everyone in some fashion? It's what they do. I mean, it's marketing. And marketing is pretty much always this fake thing to get people to want a product. And most companies want to keep a positive image and hide their dark underbelly. Like Nike is for social justice issues in the material world but makes their shoes by exploiting people in other countries. It's just how they all are, and how we are, and how this society is. And that dark truth is what all these corporations want to keep out of the sphere of reality for consumers (not to suggest that's the only dark truth...).

I think this article is good regarding Nike: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2018/09/nike-kaepernick/569371/

Yes, Kaepernick has a dream, and Nike sells dreams. I personally think it's great in its own little bubble outside of the rest of the stuff Nike does. And it's not all terrible. It's just a violation of people's rights to make them stand for the anthem and not allow them to protest. And it's funny in that one thing corporations really like to do is get their employees to act like corporate drones, which is what the NFL is doing in this case. I see that as fundamentally wrong (especially when its asking employees to stand for politics they personally disagree with) and I don't think corporations should be allowed to control people's behavior like that. So Nike that probably does control the behavior of its own employees across the board is promoting the opposite and that hypocrisy amuses me. It's amusing because like most corporations everything about Nike's image is just a big fat lie. But I suppose at least in this ad campaign they are standing up for something that's right. And maybe in the end there is a real dream about a world in which we can have shoes without people being exploited to make them, where everyone can live free. (Bring on the robots to make all this stuff for us.) Maybe in the end the ideal is worth something.

 

yeah , I mean we're talking about the advertising industry , they'll do whatever they can to get in people's heads .

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/p-g-ch...-toxic-masculinity-in-gillette-ad-11547467200

Gillette is another "evil corporation" and so the same thing applies to it as Nike (try to promote a social justice message, but the dark underbelly exposes a company that is not virtuous and their virtuous ad campaigns are akin to covering **** with perfume). I personally am rather offended by the toxic masculinity ads and it's because I'm just sick of throwing "toxic masculinity" in the face of all men at all times. I do find the play on words funny: "Is this the best a man can get?" But I overall find it annoying. It's like because this is a product we sell to men, we will use our ads to tell them all what is wrong with them from our corporate high horse (when we haven't morally earned such a position in the first place). It's just kind of pathetic.

And I don't know I think if I was a guy I'd just want to shave my facial hair, not turn shaving into a deep philosophical question about what my facial hair represents and how I am casting it away every day as though I'm becoming a more pure human being. I guess there actually is an association between being hairless and pure, as I feel this way about shaving my arm pits--but also hair is part of the human body and not something we should be ashamed of. I just don't like social shaming of the masses from a company that should be ashamed of itself for its own moral impurity by the same standard. So my general feeling is, "Shut up, Gillette!"