I shamefully confess that as I was reading Olga Federenkos’s piece “South Korean Advertising as Popular Culture” the video of Shia LaBeouf screaming Nike’s slogan “JUST DO IT” persistently played in my head. As I was reading, I could list ad after ad that has broken into the colloquial nature of everyday life and how they are politicized.
I immediately thought about the Gilette’s pre-SuperBowl advertisement that went viral as it was Gilette’s hollow response to the #MeToo movement by rejecting toxic masculinity. Social media was filled with furious comments by offended. Then, Vox reporter, Kaitlyn Tiffany, raises the question: do brands have beliefs? Federenko would argue that brands do not have beliefs but rather producers attempt to use the ideology of “longing for moral virtues to override the contradictions of capitalist modernity” (Federenko, 353).
Gilette’s approach to their SuperBowl advertisement was a long shot to highlight itself as being culturally proficient on one of the biggest platforms for their target audience. Both Gilette’s choice to steer from their messages of ideal manhood and the infuriated responses by consumers are counterexamples to which Theodor Adorno and Anson Rabinbach make –– that the culture industry and pop culture is upkeep of the status quo and that “conformity has replaced consciousness” (Adorno, Rabinbach, 17).
Men become offended because the advertisement is a presentation of lived-in realities as Federenko points out. The men who were offended felt the need to respond as did when Womenlink protested “olleh” ‘s campaign. By both groups responding to the commercials, they recognize the power of advertising as a part of culture. As the “Think Casual” campaign was produced as a form of women’s empowerment, Gilette’s commercial follows suit. As Federenko argues the “Think Casual” campaign became more than a discourse of female sexuality but a political discourse from various angles.
In thinking of Korean commercials, I found this viral Moms’ Touch Burger commercial that bases its narrative in the “power of makeup”. A man is horrified to find that when the woman’s makeup is removed reveals a heavier and barefaced woman. The blatant misogyny and infantilization of women are abhorrently clear. I wonder if the advertisement’s producers intentionally portrayed overt misogyny for their irrelevant product in order to garner more views and therefore profit. In any case, the commercial further demonstrates that brands’ sense of morality is arbitrary. Just as Gilette suddenly changed its marketing strategy by deploying a more culturally aware commercial, the Mom’s Touch Burger could potentially do the same method depending on the context of the social and political climate.
Works Cited:
Olga Fedorenko, 2014, “South Korean Advertising as Popular Culture,” The Korean Pop Culture Reader, 341 – 62.
Theodor W. Adorno and Anson G. Rabinbach, 1975, “Culture Industry Reconsidered” NewGerman Critique, no. 6: 12 – 19
The Politics of K-Pop 
I think it’s very important, the question that Vox reporter, Kaitlyn Tiffany, raises, i.e. “do brands have beliefs?” And I agree with Frederenko in that the producers attempt to use the ideology of “longing for moral virtues to override the contradictions of capitalist modernity” (Federenko, 353). That was my initial thought whilst seeing the Gilette Superbowl commercial — that the content, even though appropriate, seemed to be a capitalist move on the part of the producers of the advertisement to bank on a message that one would call “current” or for the time being, politically correct. I say so because the advertisement differed vastly from its previous creations so it seems almost conveniently and strategically planned given the timing of the situation in the U.S. regarding the #MeToo movement, and in that way, conformity really has replaced consciousness (Adorno, Rabinbach, 17). However, this makes me raise the question: When KPop stars are paid to promote products, there comes a risk with it, so how do they deal with that? For instance, if they are promoting a product or service that turns out not being as they say it is, is the star held accountable for that? Recently the FYRE Festival made headlines for attempting to pull off one of the biggest scams and during the marketing process of this festival, the organizers spent thousands of dollars in paying the biggest supermodels to advertise the festival to increase absurd tickets sales. When the festival didn’t turn out as planned and was revealed to be total deceit, the models were sued for large sums of money, i.e. they were held responsible for the false promotions. So for when KPop artists promote certain brands or products and deliver false advertisement, is there a system that holds them accountable for it? If so, is it the artist themselves that deal with it, or (in the case of idol groups) does the management company?
LikeLike