Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
Can you elaborate on what problems you have with it? It seems like you have a warped idea of what these depictions are meant to do. They're not "poster children" like you say, they're supposed to be honest reflections of members of society.
Inclusion, specifically, is meant to show marginalized groups that they aren't forgotten by the broader society. I'm not trying to bait you into saying something, but do you think that this is a bad thing?
Bah, I don't care if the models are sexy or not. All advertising is evil and is designed to manipulate us and hack our brains. I try my best to avoid / ignore it when it's possible to do so.
That's what I find really funny about this. Advertising supposedly has been using extremely attractive people for years because attractive people makes you want to buy the product more? But now they're using less attractive people which would mean the advertising is less effective?
I don't really care either way since I hate ads too, but it seems counter productive other than to appeal to the "look we're hip too" corpos.
Yep, it's all about checking certain boxes. It's tragic how normalized disingenuous statements and imaging have become in this post-truth world. We're "family" to our employers. Large faceless corporations that exploit workers and destroy the environment tell us that they "care" about us. Disenfranchised people become window dressing. Props for commercials.
You'd think there would eventually be a major cultural backlash against this kind of bullshit. But I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime. At least not one big enough to make it stop.
At least we get some funny satire out of it. Roger Horton, Ryan George, The Onion, SNL, etc.
Good point. And I wouldn't be surprised if all the odd-looking models are intended to draw our attention even more to the ad. If so, clever.
If that's true, then AI-made ads will be SUPER effective!
Hmm.. Yup, unpopular.
yep. That's why I came here. And if I recall correctly, according to the old website we abandoned, those who disagree with unpopular opinions must indicate such by UPVOTING the atrocious opinion. Difficult to do, I know.
I liked the system the "10th Dentist" reddit page had. Upvote if you disagree, downvote if you agree. It made the most unpopular stuff the top of all time for the sub. It worked surprisingly well and kept it from being all "unpopular opinion: I know it sounds crazy but I kinda like ice cream"
This post screams "I'm being oppressed!"
Interesting. Shouldn't ugly people be allowed on ads? Will the children become ugly by looking at them?
There aren't any laws pushing for it so isn't it just the free market economy at work? People want to see how clothes look on objects that look like them. Most people are ugly and overweight in the "western" world. Look, if changing what a model looked like moved the revenue needle one way or another, companies are going to do it.
You seem to be confusing a culture of inclusiveness with a culture of marketing gimmicks.
Because experts decided that was optimal to catch your attention. The fact you are here asking this question is proof enough that it worked.
To be truly inclusive they should represent every minority. I've yet to see a Target ad with furries or anime-like characters mixed in with token black guy and old Latina.
...and by the time they start openly welcoming these additional minority subgroups there will be new ones they'll be missing.
Okay but furries and anime people don't walk around like that 24/7. That is their party mode. They're already having fun on their own terms in their own leisure time. To include such visual stimuli in advertisements would distract from the advertisements.
It’s getting a little out of hand.
How is that, exactly, and what consequences do you envision?