Recently a friend pointed out something interesting in an Orbitz ad: a man wearing a Human Rights Campaign shirt with its unmistakable (to those in the know) logo in full view.
Is such a stealth device indicative of where the advertising industry is headed in aiming ads at the LGBT community? And do some companies have policies (official or unspoken) which preclude them from advertising with LGBT newspapers, magazines, sexy fag rags, websites or anything else whose target audience gives off the slightest whiff of alternative sexuality?
Some time back when EDGE was looking for advertisers it found a few disinterested in placing ads on a gay-aimed website, one saying flatly that they don’t advertise - despite their seemingly friendly gay demeanor in some divisions - with religious groups and gay publications. When the corporation was contacted a week-and-a-half ago, they didn’t return a call, though did tell us to “have a magical day” in their recorded phone message.
It’s a prickly subject. Advertisers won’t go on record so as not to alienate gays who (despite not being directly advertised to) might very well spend some of those precious rainbow dollars on their product. LGBT publications won’t go on record either - gun-shy about alienating potential advertisers who line their pocket with precious rainbow dollars.
Out Magazine passed on participating on this topic; so did LOGO; and so did we. (Full disclosure: the inspiration for this article came with the incident reported above, and the EDGE contact wasn’t available for comment.)
A general reluctance
That, though, doesn’t mean that there aren’t those out there targeting the lucrative gay market.Steve Deitsch - president of REVERBERATE! Marketing and Communications, which represents a wide variety of companies and brands that want to target the GLBT community. They’ve marketed and publicized LGBT-themed films, books, theater and nightlife as well as healthcare-related campaigns aimed at gay men.
As for the general reluctance among corporations to weigh in on the topic of not advertising to LGBTs, Deitsch says “There are many companies that don’t advertise or market to gays and lesbians. I would be very surprised if anyone did articulate it to you; but in some cases, such as sporting events, it may not make sense to market to gay men; but if there’s something where it does make sense and the company is not doing it, you have to ask why.”
One reason why is a proven track record of protest, boycott and mean-spirited backlash that has likely spooked many potential advertisers from entering the LGBT market. Deitsch recalls “a couple years ago when Ford - which had been marketing to gay men in several gay publications - was attacked by The Family Foundation and pressured to withdraw all their ads for Landover and Jaguar.” Sears was also attacked by the Family Foundation for Sears for marketing to the gay community.
Pressure from conservatives
Although these two cases occurred several years ago, this September 9, 2009 Edge article demonstrates that companies who support LGBTs are still viable targets for conservative backlash. It chronicles the recent decision by a Florida megachurch to switch from Pepsi to Coke because of Pepsi’s gay-friendly practices and policies.
Like the Ford incident, the dissenting organization is religious-based. The article notes that “Terry Kemple, who presides over the Community Issues Council, has persuaded the Bell Shoals Baptist Church, a Brandon, Fla. megachurch, to endorse a boycott of Pepsi. As part of that boycott, the 10 soda machines that used to dispense Pepsi products now vend Coca-Cola beverages instead.” The moral transgressions which now preclude Pepsi from becoming the choice of a new generation of Religious Right fanatics? Contributing money to the marriage equality cause, supporting Pride events and including sexual orientation in the list of employee diversity training topics.
Such incidents demonstrated Deitsch’s ascertain that while conservative backlash “is dissipating, it’s not completely gone.” He also observes that while “some companies might be afraid of backlash, some don’t market (to LGBTs) because it’s just not on their radar - and some, because they don’t recognize the potential of the market.”
Deitsch points out that gay men spend an average of 3.1 hours a week on their personal appearance - far surpassing the 2.5 hours spent by our straight female allies. Regardless of that fact, “There are very few mainstream beauty companies that market to gays. Recently, I’ve seen some stuff from Nivea in gay publications, but not Neutrogena.”
That disconnect is hard to fathom, given that “Johnson & Johnson, which owns Neutrogena, is a fairly open minded company and also very savvy when it comes to business.”
Despite the fact that gays have higher incidents of anxiety, sleeping disorders and depression, “Very few health care companies actually target gay men for these conditions.” One product you will see targeted to gays? “Abreva, for cold sores.” So listen up, corporate America; gay men with disposable income are about more than just unsightly oral herpes outbreaks. We’re also appearance-obsessed, high-strung, depressed insomniacs - and there’s gold in them there hills!
How much gold? William Kapfer, Executive Vice President of Community Marketing for Edge Publications, notes that “Considering that gay buying power is set to hit $835 billion by 2011, it’s shocking that some companies aren’t capitalizing on this valuable audience. I can only say that for those corporations who embrace this formerly overlooked market in - the pay off includes a bold and loyal segment with money to spend.”
Kapfer notes a relatively recent corporate marketing strategy in which “companies develop new approaches to communicating their investment to the LGBT consumer, ways that extend beyond the traditional advertising approach - both in print and online.”
As for the general reluctance among corporations to weigh in on the topic of not advertising to LGBTs, Deitsch says “There are many companies that don’t advertise or market to gays and lesbians. I would be very surprised if anyone did articulate it to you; but in some cases, such as sporting events, it may not make sense to market to gay men; but if there’s something where it does make sense and the company is not doing it, you have to ask why.”
One reason why is a proven track record of protest, boycott and mean-spirited backlash that has likely spooked many potential advertisers from entering the LGBT market. Deitsch recalls “a couple years ago when Ford - which had been marketing to gay men in several gay publications - was attacked by The Family Foundation and pressured to withdraw all their ads for Landover and Jaguar.” Sears was also attacked by the Family Foundation for Sears for marketing to the gay community.
Subtle strategies
The latest trend, he notes, is product placement - the tendency to move away from in-your-face ads, where the product is the star.
Product placement, a subtle, often unacknowledged presence of LGBT content in an ad, can be seen in this spot from Orbitz in which one of the golfers wears a shirt bearing a Human Rights Campaign (HRC) logo.
Brad Luna, director of communications for HRC, explains the genesis of HRC content in the ad. Orbitz, a company that rates 100% on HRC’s Corporate Index, “contacted us and asked if they could use our logo. We keep a close hold on who we allow to use our logo, but we saw it as an opportunity to leverage our brand with an audience who may have not seen it before.”
Luna says it was also an opportunity to get the HRC brand noticed by those who already support the organization, in a matter-of-fact manner which - by not calling attention to itself - further normalizes and mainstreams the presence of LGBT content within the wider culture.
HRC has received no conservative backlash from the ad. In fact, “It’s been one of the most heard about things we’ve ever done” with comments to the effect that “It’s nice to see a logo that’s so widely known in the LGBT community out there in a mainstream way.”
Deitsch observes that the mainstreaming of gays reflects not the evolving attitude of the culture, but an evolving attitude among gays themselves - in which gay identity is no longer front and center in their lives.
“It used to be years ago, and is true also for people who came out 20 or more years ago, that being gay is their identity; whereas those who came out more recently are tending to see being gay as part of their life, not the defining thing about it.” Gay identity, then, becomes more integrated into society, “not self-separated. You can see that happening in cities; there used to be the Castro, Chelsea, Hell’s Kitchen; and yes, there are still gay things there, but gay people are spreading out and the gay neighborhoods are not so gay anymore.”
As a result, as gay people become more assimilated with the rest of society, Deitsch notes that “ads are starting to reflect that. It’s interesting what Orbitz did. Incorporating gay imaging and messaging into mainstream ads is taking a much bolder advertising stance than ads that are just advertising in the gay marketplace.”
Luna says this subtle marketing tactic is “indicative of what we see across television, whether it be in sitcoms or reality shows or advertisements. Members of the gay and lesbian community are being infused more and more into mainstream entertainment. It’s reflective of the fabric of society.”
Hopefully, Luna is right. The day may be just beyond the horizon when the presence of LGBTs comes and goes with no special mention of how special their presence is. On that day, we’ll have lost the luster of social outsider status - but we’ll have gained the ability to live in the same manner enjoyed by our heterosexual counterparts. Until then, by all means, flood the inboxes of boycott-loving hate groups with critical emails - and keep enjoying the great taste of gay-friendly Pepsi as you travel on a trip booked by Orbitz
