-David Ogilvy
Subliminal Matters: selling men's underwear or lust?; sexy ads are acceptable when done tastefully; is there a double standard between sexy ads featuring males versus females?; David Beckham gets a pass, the girl in the General Pants ad was trashy?
Location: Superbowl Ad for H&M
Ad Review: Well I'm sure if you read the previous post, "Sex Sells...not in Australia" you might know where I'm about to take this review. So this ad by David Beckham has received rave reviews. Ellen DeGeneres even managed to creatively pop it into
her talk show even though it had nothing to do with the topics that day. Bottom line is, people loved it. David Beckham was/is all the rave and doesn't mind that he's eye candy. My question therefore is, why is his half naked ad better than the General Pants ad.
Granted the girl in the General Pants poster does look extra sexed up we can still say, so does David. Maybe you'd say he doesn't have anyone taking his clothes off, but even so, he still has on less clothes than the girl in General Pants. When women do these type of ads the ad and the woman gets strongly criticised, yet when men do them with a fit body and symmetrical face they receive adoration.
Just for the record, I didn't find the General Pants ad tastefully done, but the similarity between these two ads made me want to know, what makes an ad that's full of lust and sex appeal tasteful? Is it the audience?
No comments:
Post a Comment