Just saying, if you're gonna make an ad like that, have some actual Jamaicans/West Indians in the commercial. [YOUTUBE]lAPEpDrNdRo[/YOUTUBE] [YOUTUBE]ue4LhLUp4CU[/YOUTUBE]. Was there one Black person in that VW commercial?? If there had been a BM/BW looking at the White guy talking in that Jamaican accent and then either shaking their head or rolling their eyes, I think there would have been fewer negative responses to that ad.lol THis is the kind of commercial that's produced when there are NO Black people involved in the creative process IMO. BTW it may not be as ingrained, but you do see people do shit trying to 'represent' Jamaicans in ways that are offensive IMO. I've seen more than a couple of people at concerts back in the day who were actually wearing some shit like this.:shock:
I think a lot of people missed that point. Again if it were someone white dpeaking in a chinese accent I dont think people would be as light hearted about it.
no one is disputing that. Just weird that they didnt use a white Jamaican. Then again it seems like they knew exactly what they were doing
you sound real ignorant right now...... the point is the media doesn't see fit to have actual black ppl in commercials but can caricature their culture and stereotype it. your thirsty ass would have been excited if they had a picture of a negro....
Feed A Child I didnt want to start a new thread, so I'm putting this video in here. [youtube]qkR_MXdwkqk[/youtube]
I see what they are trying to do with the commercial and they need something strong to resonate with the audience. It's intentions weren't racist, but it come off as such if you look to the bigger picture on what the commercial is talking about - neglect of children. If we put as much effort and resources into helping out children around the world as much as we take an overly perverse attitude of treating our dogs like human, then we could actually make a difference. Bottom Line: No. Not racist.
its provocative to a point and if the backround to it would not be revealed it would open a bunch of controversy discussions i think. their choice using a black child is very obviously done by the fact that hunger is still most present on the african continent. they could have used an indian, asian or south american child aswell- the message would have been the same but not so plain. i dont think it s racist. i think it s sad.