It used to be considered derogatory to suggest black people had different, race-specific likes and dislikes about cars, as cars were once upon a time just cars – just as we once agreed to hope (most of us) that people would one day be considered just people.
Well, never mind that.
Hyundai has “enlisted” a very specifically “black” marketing agency styled – with interestingly disingenuous non-specificity – Culture Brands – to “connect” with specifically black consumers through “authentic, uplifting campaigns.”
All of the foregoing in quotation marks because as with everything said by the Left – and that is who and what we’re dealing with here – etymological deconstruction is required to understand the meaning and so the intention of the words used.
“Culture Brands” means specifically marketing aimed at black people. Not just people. Herewith the company in its own – more direct – words:
“Yes, we’re marketers, but we like to consider ourselves culture shapers and shifters. We use our cultural fluency to inspire multicultural audiences by ensuring they feel seen, heard and valued in a culturally relevant and responsible way. . .”
And who is this “multicultural audience” the company speaks of? It is one specific “culture” – and it specifically excludes another one, not mentioned much less included. Not even in token. So much for the “inclusiveness” the Left often waxes orgiastically about, almost.
It is interesting to note that the Left equates “culture” with race. That “culture” is an elaboration of race. That is to say, we are not just people but inherently different people – defined by much more than just the color of our skin. Or – rather – that our skin color is what defines who we are.
Ergo, cars – which ones we like and don’t – are also about “culture.” Which is to say, they are about race. One in particular. Only we’re not supposed to talk about the race-obsession this reflects, the way it reduces just people to just widgets, according to their race.
Whoops, their “culture.”
The result is an ad campaign titled OKAY Hyundai – which is very exclusive, in that there is only one race included. Perhaps Hyundai imagines only that particular race might be interested in the car it’s trying to sell to them. Certainly, the reverse is implied by the commercial – and would be expounded upon with extreme unction, probably, if the ad campaign only featured actors of one other race. That would be “racist,” of course. Or at the very least, “insensitive.” There would be calls for “awareness” – of what was missing – along with “sensitivity” training.
The irony is lost on these people.
“Insights into the vehicle target were honed through research and real time polls leveraged through Because of Them We Can®. OKAY Hyundai contains cultural references and nuances embedded into the creative messaging which is part of the Culture Brands recipe.”
And what might some of these “cultural references” and “nuances” be?
Eunique Jones-Gibson (of course) who is the CEO and Chief Creative Officer of Culture Brands explains: “OKAY is defined as a word that is used to express assent, agreement, or acceptance. In the African American community, placing OKAY before something is the quintessential way things worth noticing are acknowledged. Together, it’s the perfect nod to Hyundai and to our prospective buyers.”
In other words – in straightforward words – black people have black-specific language and it must be used, specifically and consciously, to market things to black people, exclusively.
Imagine a “brand” of a different color employing similar “creative messaging.”
Then there is this “messaging” – from Ford – about how “we” (decryption follows) ought to be “celebrating” women, without whom cars would lack heaters, windshield wipers, turn signals, brake lights and GPS. Because men – those Neanderthals – would otherwise have kept such from ever being offered.
“For the first time ever, we’ve completely reimagined the automobile,” intones the male voice-over. “Introducing the men’s only Ford Explorer… with no windshield wipers, no heater, no turn signals” (the male voice turns soy and snarky here) “wait, no rearview mirror? No GPS? Are you kidding?” (the soy voice whines, with suitable femininity). “Ah. It’s missing all the parts created by women. Wow. Whose great ideas was that”?
Where to begin deconstructing this?
In fact, the earliest cars did have – or at least, offered – windshield wipers. The Model T Ford, for instance, came standard with them (as well as a rearview mirror) 100 years ago. Not because women ran Ford at the time, either. Rather, it was because men and women appreciated being able to see where they were going as well as what was behind them. Just as men and women appreciate the self-starter (invented by a man named Kettering) as well as the automatic transmission, also developed by men, to make cars easier for everyone to drive.
But the lecturing is all about how stupid – how stagnant – men are. That, absent the direction of women, we’d all be Fred Flintsone’ing it.
It is precisely because of the direction of women and those who who support women directing things – as opposed to people deciding things, for themselves – that there are no longer alternatives. For men – or women. As once there were, when people could buy what suited them, irrespective of sex or color – because it is what they liked and wanted.
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
My eBook about car buying (new and used) is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here. If that fails, email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com and I will send you a copy directly!