Shush now, Rasch. The adults are talking.

In reply to this comment by rasch187:
What I don't like about this ad is how exited everyone is about watching cricket, a game that lasts for 7 days is never going to create that level of exitement.

No, kymbos, I don't want to hear why cricket is the best game on earth. I've played it and watched it, and it's the most boring activity on earth, closely followed by watching paint dry.

>> ^dag:
I think the fried chicken stereotype could apply to anyone of very dark complexion here in Australia. I have heard it used towards aborigines here.


In my 29 years in Australia, I have never heard the Fried Chicken thing applied to aussie aborigines.

The ad plays on the "exhuberance" of the West Indie crowd (they go off with drums and music at the cricket): he is able to settle them down with yummy product - which happens to be chicken. It's not a play on the American stereotype, the ads are too stupid to be that clever (I've seen others in the campaign).

I'm shocked people are even making the link, as that requires you to equate the Native Americans in the West Indies, with the African Americans in America. They are separate population/culture/country, so it seems you could only do such a ludicrous equation on the basis of skin colour. And Im not being trite, but that would be racist.

It's disappointing to see the Americans fire up, because it seems isolationist and self-centered to pressume this certain strain of cultural poison that is endemic in their own country, must be endemic everywhere else.

And it does seem silly to see Aussies fire up. Just because the KFC thing is not present in any meaningful way here.

Its like getting up in arms about an advert which shows a man patting a child on the head, because in parts of Korea its considered an insult ("you are lower than shit" IIRC)

Regardless, have you guys seen the other ads? they are fucking terrible. I hope the entire terrible campaign gets pulled.

I put up a new link - I guess the original one didn't like hotlinking.

Also - reading your nvm makes it unfunny

In reply to this comment by lucky760:
All I see is a black box with large white text: "Visit creepygif.com to view this GIF animation."

I'm guessing that wasn't your intent.

[edit]
nvm- tried it again and now I see a black boy saying "That's racist."

In reply to this comment by SlipperyPete:
http://www.creepygif.com/images/full/10.gif

edit: wish I could embed!

I think what escapes everyone here is that advertising clearance processes are many layered, this ad would be conceptualized and sold to the client before any single frame of film would have been shot, there is endless back and forth.

It's clear that they thought either it would be funny or rather would create enough controversy to garner more name recognition, since we are not really attacked KFC in any way just the insensitive nature of the advert.

Am sure this is was deliberate.

Lucky760, this is precisely what I mean by not being able to view this ad outside of your own cultural prism. You're clearly not a cricket fan, and I'm guessing you're American? Windies fans are celebrated around the world for the way they spectate, and Australians are certainly not stereotyped (not even by ourselves) as quiet, civilised reasonable cricket fans.

To the audience the ad was marketed to, it portrays a fan who's gone to his home game and found himself in the opposition cheer squad. How to get out of this awkward situation? Share your lunch, and make sure it's KFC because everyone loves it.

I'm not saying it's champagne stuff, but I am saying that is what they intended. Now, how a multinational brand managed to overlook the internet and its reinterpretation elsewhere is beyond me.

There is a solitary white bloke sitting still trying to enjoy the cricket tournament, but he can't focus because he's surrounded by a noisy, boisterous crowd of black folks jumping up and down, flailing about, and banging on their drums. The announcer asks, "Stuck in an awkward situation?"

To what situation does that refer, a) the relaxed white guy surrounded by an annoying crowd of black people or b) simply the white guy surrounded by black people?

And the white guy's solution which is "too easy" is to tame the beast by tossing a bucket of chicken at it. See, the white guy was content to just relax and watch the match, but the black folks couldn't be calmed without throwing a stereotypical black delicacy at them...

Considering all that I just typed, I don't see how the ad couldn't be interpreted as having a racist tongue in its cheek on at least one level: white people are civilized and black people are wild animals who can't control themselves without keeping their mouths and hands occupied with food.

Whether or not the "black people love fried chicken" stereotype plays into it, the commercial seems to be making a pretty clear message about KFC's perceived difference between white and black people.

Or something.

You know, it must be rough for a company that sells a product that is used in racial slurs to market their product. I feel bad for KFC.

>> ^kymbos:
Good point on the irony of those very quick to proclaim racism assuming that all dark skinned people are African Americans.


Hi Kymbos

It's not so much an assumption, more so an assignment of race (and accompanying stereotypes) based purely on colour of skin. If it had been portraying a Pakistani (Pakistan being the other touring cricket team this season) supporter group the race assignment from American critics (and accompanying sterotypes) would have been just as inappropriate.

The good thing is I realise not all Americans are that ignorant, and TBH it's been a media beatup to a certain extent. There seems to be a distinct lack of news in news today......Thanks Rupert.

I just watched the ad again and it looks like they did cleverly sneak one white guy into shot (the racist bastards)so I guess, considering there are about 12 people in shot (plus the Aussie wanker) the ratio of 11 - 1 black West Indians to White West Indians is representitive of the Team actually touring at the moment.

From my point of view I find the shampoo ad where the dude with dreadlocks trys a shampoo which straightens his hair to be a more stereotypical view of West Indians (and more offensive) which should cause more outrage than the KFC one; but hey that's just me. If you find the image of a lazy, skankin' to regae, cooool dude (till he loses his dreads to a straighening shampoo) not a stereotype then maybe you're of a different mind to me.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I can't imagine that the producers of this commercial didn't realize that there might be some racial overtones in handing out a bucket of fried chicken to a group of Africans. Maybe it is my Americanness. I'll wait for more Aussies to chime in.
>> ^kymbos:
I'll suggest you are not separating your own cultural history from the Australian context, something that's almost impossible to do. As an Aussie living in Australia, I'll assert that the fried chicken thing is not well known, nor have I ever heard it applied to Indigenous Australians, which would be quite ridiculous were it done and clearly made out of complete ignorance of its origins.
Perhaps you mix with people more worldly than most Australians, or at least more familiar with American culture and history than most.
I think an American seeing that ad has an immediate and emotional reaction that is quite different to an Australian. What I'm saying is that the internet has no context, so things can be interpreted very differently depending on the viewer's cultural background.
Do you really think the ad was made intending to suggest that all black people like fried chicken, so feed them KFC should you meet some?

I'll suggest you are not separating your own cultural history from the Australian context, something that's almost impossible to do. As an Aussie living in Australia, I'll assert that the fried chicken thing is not well known, nor have I ever heard it applied to Indigenous Australians, which would be quite ridiculous were it done and clearly made out of complete ignorance of its origins.

Perhaps you mix with people more worldly than most Australians, or at least more familiar with American culture and history than most.

I think an American seeing that ad has an immediate and emotional reaction that is quite different to an Australian. What I'm saying is that the internet has no context, so things can be interpreted very differently depending on the viewer's cultural background.

Do you really think the ad was made intending to suggest that all black people like fried chicken, so feed them KFC should you meet some?

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I think the fried chicken stereotype could apply to anyone of very dark complexion here in Australia. I have heard it used towards aborigines here. I need to get my cricket tragic mate @mofodoobs to chime in. >> ^kymbos:
I'm particularly interested in your view for that reason, Dag. But does it matter that they aren't African Americans? The ad depicts a fan who has found himself surrounded by opposition fans, but who defuses any potential tension by sharing KFC with everyone. The ads were shown while the West Indies were touring for the cricket. If it had been England, there is no doubt that the ad would have had English fans (the Barmy Army).
The point is, African Americans loving fried chicken is an American stereotype and an American sensitivity. Should it be an issue for an Australian ad for an Australian audience? Does context matter? I think the problem is that no ad is local anymore, with the internet and all.

I'm particularly interested in your view for that reason, Dag. But does it matter that they aren't African Americans? The ad depicts a fan who has found himself surrounded by opposition fans, but who defuses any potential tension by sharing KFC with everyone. The ads were shown while the West Indies were touring for the cricket. If it had been England, there is no doubt that the ad would have had English fans (the Barmy Army).

The point is, African Americans loving fried chicken is an American stereotype and an American sensitivity. Should it be an issue for an Australian ad for an Australian audience? Does context matter? I think the problem is that no ad is local anymore, with the internet and all.

Hell, westy, are you in the UK? Are you coming down for sift-up london on saturday?

In reply to this comment by westy:
they would never do this in the uk ! :'(

>> ^Skeeve:

Further, the Least Harm Principle suggests that living a vegan lifestyle actually kills more animals than if we subsisted strictly on ruminant animals. So I think I'll stick with beef


Skeeve, I just read a quick summary of LHP and it has some pretty obvious holes in it:

- It counts exposing rodents to predators (when crops are harvested) as "killing" them. Obviously, predators would be eating rodents anyway. A loss to mice is a gain to buzzards.

- It bases deaths of wild animals caused by agriculture on decline in numbers compared to before the area is farmed. This is pretty flawed, since animal numbers would plummet when the land was claimed but level out afterwards. Some of the animals would move nearby and some would cut down on reproduction rather than dying in some great massacre.

- It goes by pure numbers, counting a fieldmouse the same as a cow. Now I don't want to see mice getting squished, but an animal with a pinhead brain does not have the same capacity to suffer as a large grazing animal like a cow or a pig. Otherwise you might as well count aphids in the death toll. (I appreciate that this was countering a hard-line vegan argument, so I suppose the equal treatment is valid in that particular context).

- It lists pesticides as a cause of death, but seemingly ignores the possibilities of organic farming. When was the last time you met a vegan that was keen on pesticides?


Sorry, that was really preachy. I'm kind of riled up because I'm lacto-ovo vegetarian and therefore indirectly responsible for those chicks getting minced. Not a nice feeling.

P.s. Props to Throbbin. I have a great deal of respect for people who have killed for their meat. If everyone had to slaughter an animal before they could buy KFC there might only be a small increase in vegetarianism, but at least there would be a large decrease in hypocrisy.