For some years now, brands have created controversial campaigns when it comes to talking about minority and/or vulnerable groups. There are at least two that come to mind out of the blue: Indio’s #ProudlyIndian campaign, which was heavily criticized for the type of people who appeared in its images, where they clearly did not represent the end of their campaign. Another one where “Mezcal de Oro de Oaxaca” was advertised and an image very similar to the previous one, where classism and racism were perceived. In fact, in both cases, these cases are remembered as a negative case in advertising in Mexico.
Precisely in June, many brands “get on” the Pride. Some campaigns seem very innovative to me, as Doritos Rainbown’s was in its time, in addition to its communication in networks that seemed very successful to me. There are also others like the one from Absolut that seemed to me to be very well resolved. In general, a sense of inclusion is appealed to and of course it must be celebrated. If there is something that I always celebrate, it is the inclusion at all levels of agencies and brands. Controversies aside, I think advertising has been changing for the better, in that sense.
Within this context, there is an effect that seems curious to me. Again I want to emphasize: controversies aside. But there is something I particularly noticed this year: many of the brands have included the LGBT+ flag in their logos as part of an inclusive organizational culture. This in itself is “applaudable” and “celebrable”, as companies, of course. [valgan los neologismos, por supuesto]. What strikes me is that we as agencies are always subject to the guidelines global: to all the brand use manuals: very often we have suffered for not modifying the proportions in the logos, and entering into the values and communication of the companies with whom we have worked. Except when it comes to getting on the Pride.
It seems to me a curious effect precisely because the same brands and global companies modify all their guidelines in favor of inclusion. It’s not bad, of course, it’s just something to note.
Precisely during the week I had a face-to-face meeting with the team from my agency, Los Magicians, and a brand that we have been carrying for some years. A global corporate with very strict rules on digital communication and graphic communication, with its untouchable colors. But coincidentally, the silhouette, the logo, was in the middle of an LGBT+ flag, which contravenes all communication.
In this sense, my analysis is very superficial: I want to think that all the rules can be broken in favor of inclusion and the global organizational culture. In the end, this is what adds up, and these changes are what truly create a sense of identity within companies, even if they are global.
However, we must not deceive ourselves either: the indiscriminate use of the flag is not by itself “getting on correctly”. It is the same effect as when brands get on trends just to get on. And in fact, in the brands, the rejection of the attendees by the brands that seek to “profit” with the movement has been seen.
I have always said that social awareness and openness towards inclusion is an incredibly wonderful trait of the new generation. And I think it will be one of the greatest contributions they will have at a cultural level and, of course, advertising.
In any case, as I have said before, I am glad that brands, agencies and companies join any inclusive action. For everyone in the industry and to change social paradigms.
It is the most valuable, in any case.