Gillette: In search of a dialogue

Akvile Puluikyte

In a previous blog post, Marit looked at a (not that) recent advertisement by Gillette, in which they tried to challenge the masculinity norms and ask a question: “Is this the best a man can be” as opposed to their slogan of 30 years promoting their products as being “The best a man can get”. The commercial challenging toxic masculinity, bullying and sexism also marked the start of Gillette’s three-year commitment to donate to organisations that help men worldwide.

As Marit has already noted in her blog, the advertisement received both positive and negative comments. While the positive comments encouraged the brand for talking about such issues, the negative comments were much bolder, resulting in boycotts of the brand and a backlash on social media.

The role of social media

In their article, Sung and Hwang say that the new media technologies have influenced the way people receive information. They argue that now the public is no longer just a passive recipient of information as they were seen some time ago. Now with the help of social media, people are active communicators capable of seeking and generating information online. When Gillette launched their new campaign, so many people were talking about it all over the world, generating content on all social media platforms. However, as social media allows us to generate any kind of content, it was no surprise that the negative comments were also seen on every platform.

Is this a dialogue?

In her previous post, Marit argued that Gillette were expecting for their new campaign to create a discussion. After all, negative comments still attract attention to the brand and raise awareness about what’s happening. I think that with such issues that are portrayed in the ad, it is very important to talk about it, however, is social media the best place to do that? On one hand, social media allows everyone to share their opinion and create a two-way discussion. However, in their article, Ihlen and Levenshus, argue that even with the help of social media, corporations cannot foster a real dialogue with the public. They say that the way companies communicate is more of a placebo for a dialogue, and a true dialogue is still only an ideal. Indeed, as another article by Romenti,Murtarelli and Valentini highlights, companies are usually more interested in understanding how they can use dialogue as a tool, that can help to manage the public and reach a consensus online, rather than try to create a real dialogue with the public.

For me, it’s so important that our society is finally talking about these such issues as toxic masculinity and that such big companies as Gillette are leading the conversation, however, at the same time it looks like they are not really participating in it. I personally believe that Gillette was trying to start a dialogue and a conversation about toxic masculinity, but doing that on social media is very risky, as not everyone is heard.

What is your opinion about this issue? Can companies use social media to create a real dialogue with their audiences? Tell me in the comments below.

References:

Ihlen, O & Levenshus, A. (2017) Panacea, placebo or prudence: Perspectives and constraints for corporate dialogue. Public Relations Inquiry 6(3), p. 219-232. https://doi-org.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/10.1177/2046147X17708815

Romenti, S., Murtarelli, G., Valentini, C. (2014) Organisations' conversations in social media: applying dialogue strategies in times of crises. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 19(1), pp.10-33. https://www-emerald-com.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/insight/content/doi/10.1108/CCIJ-05-2012-0041/full/html

Sung, M., & Hwang, J.-S. (2014). Who drives a crisis? The diffusion of an issue through social networks. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 246–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.063

About the author:

Akvile Puluikyte is an international student at the University of Amsterdam. She finished her Media, Communication and Cultural Studies bachelor at Newcastle University and is currently in the middle of her Masters’ in Communication Science with the specialization in Corporate Communication.