View Single Post
Old 11-10-2017, 11:42 AM #13
user104658 user104658 is offline
-
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 36,685
user104658 user104658 is offline
-
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 36,685
Default

I would have given them the benefit of the doubt and assume that someone just "didn't think"... however... #1 the fact that the shirt also changed from brown to white makes it pretty conclusive that they were well aware that this was a "skin colour thing" when making the ad and, also, I don't believe for one second that NO ONE at their HQ didn't say "Accidentally or otherwise this has racist undertones and won't go down well". Someone pointed it out, somewhere along the line, before it went public. No real question about that. They chose to run it anyway and that says a lot in itself.

Not about them "being racist" - but just as I said above. They knew it would be controversial, they knew the press and social media would run with it. It's free advertising.
user104658 is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote