14593: When It Comes To Diversity, Adland Is Disabled.

Adweek published a perspective by Designsensory Director of Strategy Josh Loebner, who argued that adland must integrate disability into diversity and inclusion propaganda. Loebner used the cookie-cutter comments echoed by every marginalized group in adland. For example, he griped that advertising agencies and clients shouldn’t only recognize people with disabilities during the Paralympics—just as Blacks complain advertising agencies and clients shouldn’t only recognize people of color during Black History Month. Unfortunately, Loebner doesn’t seem to realize a basic fact: When it comes to diversity and inclusion in adland, anyone who’s not an able-bodied White man or White woman is ultimately handicapped in their efforts to move forward.

Agencies Need to Better Connect Disability With Diversity and Inclusion Efforts

Rather than only thinking about it during the Paralympics

By Josh Loebner

With the 2020 Paralympics just around the corner, brands will soon start to plan and develop disability-inclusive campaigns. But are conversations about employing people with disabilities also top of mind among those agencies and other advertisers?

For some campaigns and brand activations, the Paralympics are a regular commitment that powers up every four years, and for others, this will be a first foray into disability inclusion. While much of the focus will center on disability portrayals in the creative, now is the time to consider disability beyond the campaign and also as a component of ongoing diversity and inclusion within talent recruitment programs.

As a disabled person in the industry, I’ve seen some advancement, but many conversations are stilted with minimal insights and sputtering commitments. I applaud the ad community for taking a stronger stance on diversity in so many facets, but disability continues to be marginalized mostly to topics surrounding ad creative, with little industry education or agency employment dialogue.

Not considering outreach toward people with disabilities among employee candidates continues decades of second-class citizenry, misinformation and stereotyping toward a group that many still consider unemployable.

In an industry that celebrates creative iconoclasts, hiring managers should consider people with disabilities for out-of-the-box ideas and as daily problem solvers. Recognize that many break the rules and the mold regularly and repeatedly, things brands want to achieve every day. One in four people (or 61 million) Americans are disabled, and many could translate into employees in the advertising industry. Whether talking about a career move or consumer purchasing power, people with disabilities can make a big advertising impact.

Collectively, Americans with disabilities have an annual disposable income of $188 billion. Beyond the bottom line and dollars spent, advertising has the power to drive brand affinity and social justice.

Employing more people with disabilities means agencies and brands won’t simply be thinking about inclusion every few years surrounding the Paralympics or during a particular month celebrating a certain cause, but instead have daily advocates and ambassadors willing and able to share advice and creative ideas toward greater inclusion. Other minority groups aren’t put on pause to only be discussed and included among infrequent campaigns during sports spectacles, and neither should people with disabilities.

More people with disabilities will be in ads when more people with disabilities are hired in the advertising industry. This can be the year when more conversations, conviction and commitment takes place to elevate advertising and disability.

14254: Bootcamp Blues.

Adweek reported on the Multicultural Alliance Bootcamp held by She Runs It, presenting four “key takeaways” that are mostly standard clichéd con jobs concepts for diversity and inclusion. On the one hand, any effort designed to eliminate exclusivity deserves appreciation. Then again, the Multicultural Alliance Bootcamp warrants a few comments too. First of all, She Runs It is still more focused on promoting White women than racial and ethnic minorities. Secondly, the lead “key takeaway” regarding the Inclusion Diversity Accountability Consortium gives off an aroma of bullshit. Now there’s yet another optional measuring tool whereby White advertising agencies may sign up to possibly be deemed winners for executing what should be common practices. Finally, photos taken at the event (see below) display at least three issues: 1) attendance was low; 2) attendees were predominately female and; 3) attendees included lots of women of color. Why would women of color need to participate in a multicultural bootcamp? Talk about preaching to the choir. It feels like a clear example of delegating diversity versus engaging the culturally clueless people with hiring authority who desperately require enlightenment. It’s time to send the folks suffering from unconscious bias, conscious ignorance and blatant racism to bootcamp.

4 Key Takeaways on Bringing Diversity to the Field From the Multicultural Alliance Bootcamp

Industry panelists discussed multiculturalism at She Runs It event

By Alissa Fleck

She Runs It, formerly known as Advertising Women of New York (AWNY), held a Multicultural Alliance Bootcamp yesterday to discuss the state of diversity in the marketing and media world. According to the organization, its Multicultural Alliance “works to foster a sense of community among members with multicultural expertise and interests and to infuse multiculturalism into She Runs It’s existing programs and initiatives.”

Among the reasons diversity is so important in the advertising world is that advertising reflects our culture and society, and without inclusion, advertising will continue to perpetuate stereotypes about people of color and other under-represented groups, explained God-Is Rivera, director of inclusion and cultural resonance at VML. “We cringe at ads from the past,” she said. “We have a chance to change that now.”

And, while there should be more of an opportunity to tell these varied stories with all the digital venues and platforms available today, “diversity is probably what it always was, proportionate to the number of channels we have,” said actor, producer and activist Malik Yoba.

These are some of our takeaways from the bootcamp:

There is now a quantifiable way to measure a company’s diversity inclusiveness.

Companies need to incorporate diversity “because it’s right and not just because it’s trendy,” said Rivera. She Runs It has developed a way to benchmark improvements in diversity inclusiveness.

The organization just announced the winners of a new initiative it launched in coordination with Diversity Best Practices called the Inclusion Diversity Accountability Consortium (IDAC), which “seeks to ignite quantitative action that will make the marketing and media industry more diverse in its make-up and sensibility,” according to its website.

Along with Working Mother Media and Diversity Best Practices, She Runs It posted the first round of measurements and winning companies on social media with the hashtag #DBPInclusionIndex. IDAC measures companies’ success at recruiting, training and retaining a diverse workforce based on three main criteria.

These criteria are: Best practices in recruitment, retention and advancement of people from under-represented groups; creating an inclusive culture through leadership, accountability, communications and employee engagement; and transparency in willingness to share workforce demographic data.

While the organization has released stats on select companies, it will present this information more comprehensively during Advertising Week in October.

In promoting diversity, you need to think about your own circle first.

On a panel called “Champions on the Front Line,” Patty Kim, director of talent acquisition at Conductor, talked about the importance of starting with yourself and your own innate biases before trying to advocate for diversity. You need to think about your own circle, the group of people you go to for ideas, support and growth.

When Kim first did this exercise, she realized her circle was fairly homogenous in thought—it did not represent a diverse community. “You need people who really challenge your ideas,” she said. “Inclusiveness starts with yourself—then you bring it to the workplace.”

“Diversity looks different to different people,” added Ed Frankel, svp and director of talent acquisition at Omnicom Health Group.

You don’t have to be at the top to make a difference.

While it certainly helps to have an ally in a leadership position, “if you have a seat at the table, you can have influence,” said Frankel, adding that you should never give up, even if that means slowly chipping away at established ideas.

One of the best ways to do this is to tell your own story, said Francine Tamakloe, associate in the AMP development program at Spotify. “Being in the room and telling your own story inspires others and saves others,” Tamakloe said in a panel called “Women on Fire.” And while it can be easy to be inspired by others around you, it can sometimes be hard to “see the warrior in yourself,” she added.

“Define what a champion looks like to you, and be it for someone else,” Frankel said.

But don’t just be a champion for people underneath you—people above you need support as well. “It can be so lonely at the top,” said Judy Jackson, global chief talent officer at Wunderman. “You can champion people at every level.”

Small interactions can go a long way toward effecting change in the workplace.

Sometimes change comes from micro-actions, said Jackson, recounting an incident in her office when someone who wasn’t from the U.S. asked her African-American assistant about the semantics of the N-word. While initially an awkward situation, it became a positive learning experience, Jackson said, as her assistant explained the word’s history and why it was not okay for the coworker to use the term.

“She was curious, but that was a sign of change. I was proud of that moment,” Jackson said. “Change comes from being able to ask people of color about their lives.”

Hiring managers are not the ones currently out there pushing diversity, explained Frankel, highlighting that we need to think about aspects like where we post jobs. Inclusiveness might mean creating new positions in the workplace, added Rivera. “Organizations should invest in their women,” said Yai Vargas, founder of The Latinista. “They should pay to send them to conferences like this one.”

And to usher in a new generation of diverse storytellers and marketers, educators should show young people of color that there are options for kids in advertising, Jackson added, saying, “Agencies should go talk to kids.”

14252: Back-To-School Ravings.

Campaign reported on the Brixton Finishing School, another diversity and inclusion initiative designed to train young people of color on the intricacies of working in adland. According to Campaign, the project allows students “who do not have the privilege of a university education” to experience “a free, 12-week course in digital, advertising and marketing skills” under the guidance of seasoned experts.

Okay, the folks behind such endeavors are undoubtedly caring and progressive, deserving respect and appreciation. At the same time, this common diversity and inclusion tactic inspires key questions.

First, why qualify students “who do not have the privilege of a university education” for this program? For starters, the word “privilege” leads to acknowledging White privilege, which is the primary advantage—waaaaay more important than a university education—that the majority of candidates utilize to get into the field. Besides, landing a creative position in an advertising agency doesn’t require a degree. And if agencies do mandate degrees, why not target minorities in universities?

Second, why presume people of color need extra schooling to succeed in advertising? There are plenty of examples of untrained and unqualified White youth entering the field via nepotism and next-generational cronyism. Why not create a 12-week course for all the Caucasian daughters, sons, nieces, nephews, neighbors and mistresses currently receiving free passes into adland?

Third, why not simply hire people of color and, if necessary, provide on-the-job mentoring and training? Isn’t that what healthy, ethical and professional companies do? These particular questions, incidentally, go to the heart of the true problem. That is, most minorities don’t need special training; rather, most leaders with hiring authority must undergo reprogramming. Specifically, hiring managers must be schooled to actually evaluate candidates on potential versus pigmentation. Skills versus skin tones. Talent versus tint.

Fourth, how will this program address the dearth of mid- and senior-level minorities? It will be difficult to retain Brixton Finishing School graduates if they find themselves alone in the field. The existing exclusive majority could use training in fostering inclusive workplaces too.

If minorities have to enroll for special training, similar prerequisites should be placed on hiring managers to ensure they have the cultural competence to do their jobs.

Industry-funded school challenges adland’s diversity problem

Digital guru Ally Owen has founded Brixton Finishing School, a free, 12-week course in digital, advertising and marketing skills for young people from BAME/unrepresented backgrounds.

By Georgina Brazier

Owen has recruited 21 students, aged 18 to 25, who do not have the privilege of a university education and given them the opportunity to learn from the employees of companies such as Google, WPP and McCann London.

The Institute of Practitioners of Advertising revealed a significant lack of diversity in the industry in its latest annual survey on the subject. This inspired Owen tackle the issue by setting up the school with industry backing.

Owen said: “We believe that while talent is distributed equally among the youth of London, opportunities are not.

“The SCA 2.0 [School of Communication Arts] and Brixton Finishing School partnership will create and widen runways into our industry to support our ambition for all talent, whatever their background, to have the seat they’ve earned at the table.

“For our GDP to thrive post-Brexit, we need to focus on building a meritocracy that ensures the best people are in the right jobs.”

The students come a variety of backgrounds and range from school leavers to those who have already experienced the world of work.

Brixton Finishing School student Tremayne Bailey said he was not aware of the creative industries until he undertook an apprenticeship at a charity.

He said: “We target adults but what we need to be doing is actually starting young — teaching young people who still aren’t being taught about the opportunities in the creative industries.”

The students will graduate on 5 October and many will then take up entry-level, digitally focused roles created for the school by Clear Channel, Kinetic, PrettyGreen, Brand Advance and McCann London.

14131: Toxic Waste Of Time.

Campaign published a painfully lengthy report titled, “Too young to have an opinion, too old to innovate: lifting the lid on ageism in advertising”—with a subhead declaring, “Ageism is toxic both for the culture of the advertising industry and its creative output.”

Really? The truth is, “the culture of the advertising industry and its creative output” has thrived on ageism—along with sexism, heterosexism, disablism, cronyism, nepotism, classism and liberalism. Oh, and racism too.

Ironically, ageism is hardly the oldest toxin in adland. In fact, it’s among the newest, igniting as the industry increasingly employs the greatest diversity of generations in history. Granted, it’s a pretty exclusive diversity of generations—that is, advertising agencies are filled with White people of all ages.

The Campaign article spotlighted a Bloom event where elder statesmen and youthful newbies shared tales of bias, bad behaviors and burdens based on their birthdates.

One disturbing—albeit predictable—part of this discussion is the propensity to defend the alleged victims and denounce the alleged perpetrators. Indeed, the spirit of advocacy appears for every ism infesting adland. Why, [fill-in-the-ism] is a poisonous cancer that demands immediate and total elimination.

Except when it comes to racial and ethnic diversity.

For the BAME problem—which receives the attention typically directed towards a pesky itch—the victims are positioned as the perpetrators. There aren’t enough qualified candidates. It’s a socioeconomic issue, so we’ll need a few more decades to scour the inner cities for potential applicants. Those people are unaware of the opportunities in adland. Racial and ethnic minorities prefer to pursue careers as professional athletes and rappers. And the list goes on—with zero accountability pinned on the actual perpetrators.

It’s nothing new. And it’s really getting old.

14113: Making Mindful Mentors.

Campaign reported on an organization—Creative Mentor Network—that connects diverse youth mentees with creative industry mentors. But in one critical way, the organization appears to be extremely different than most of the patronizing mentor programs that White advertising agencies use to feign commitment to change. Specifically, Creative Mentor Network requires that mentors undergo extensive training to qualify. It’s hard to determine exactly what is involved in the training, but the very idea sounds progressive. To recognize that mentors—especially those coming from exclusive environments like ad agencies—need education and coaching to successfully engage with minority youth is remarkable. Kudos to the CMN Team for such forward-thinking awareness.

How the Creative Mentor Network is helping advertising’s diversity problem

By James Page

The organisation visits Havas and other agencies to train creatives to become mentors for college students from diverse backgrounds.

The not-for-profit organisation, founded by former teacher Isabel Farchy, aims to connect creative talent with young-people from diverse backgrounds. Through this, Creative Mentor Network hopes to make the advertising industry more accessible as a career for rising talent.

Farchy said: “In the creative industry there is a habit of recruiting through networks, so it can just be a lot more opaque from the outside and a lot harder to infiltrate. I really wanted my students when I was a teacher, but also now the students we work with, to understand that there were real opportunities in the creative industries”.

The London-based network has worked with numerous agencies such as Havas to train employees to become mentors.

Elliot Harris, creative director at Havas who is mentoring a teen, said: “I would love to think that by the end of this course… that there is a much broader set of experience he has had that will allow him to make some choices before he moves into the next stage of his education”.

The mentors at Havas have introduced their mentees to different departments at the agency, allowing them to get a wider understanding of the advertising world.

Creative Mentor Network believes that the course is just as beneficial for agencies as it is for the college students. Farchy said: “Agencies obviously gain the opportunity to do something practical about the diversity issue and also to offer training and development for their employees”.

She added: “When our partner agencies are looking to recruit, particularly for junior roles and for internship roles and for apprenticeship roles, we’re able to put them out to our alumni and its a really amazing opportunity to recruit much more diverse talent”.

The organisation has an alumni of over 200 students.

13757: The ASA is ASS.

The BBC reported the Advertising Standards Authority is drafting new rules to fight advertisements that display stereotypical gender roles in the UK. It’s another example of diverted diversity—aka the White women’s bandwagon—running over racial and ethnic diversity. After all, the ASA should know that minorities are underrepresented in advertising campaigns, yet the organization is not drafting any rules to address the inequality—or spanking the White advertising agencies that extend the discrimination with biased hiring practices.

13752: Why Diversity Advertising Sucks.

Another indicator that diverted diversity—aka the White women’s bandwagon—has run over racial and ethnic diversity in the advertising industry can be seen by comparing diversity campaigns. That is, gender diversity advertising receives maximum attention, resources and budgets. Why, the work in this area wins major awards—and even inspires the birth of awards. Racial and ethnic diversity advertising appears to be executed by junior-level staffers from the mount room—or mailroom—who are required to use royalty-free stock photography. In the end, diversity advertising perfectly reflects, well, diversity in advertising.

13457: Adweek’s Old Argument.

Adweek sought to explain “Why the Ad Industry Job Market Is Tougher Than Ever for Senior Employees”—aka advocating for elder White admen and adwomen via doddering diverted diversity. The report opened with the following nonsense:

The advertising industry has a diversity problem. That much is no longer in dispute as a growing number of clients either suggest or insist that their teams employ more women and people of color.

In recent months, however, some have turned to another, arguably more pervasive form of discrimination: ageism.

An arguably more pervasive form of discrimination? Well, sure, White people are undoubtedly arguing ageism is more pervasive. However, the numbers—which companies like Omnicom refuse to reveal—show ethnic and racial discrimination is waaaaay ahead of generational discrimination. Need proof? Look at the ratio of senior minorities in the field versus senior Whites, provided it’s possible to locate any senior minorities. Hell, senior Whites likely outnumber all minorities in the industry. Sure, the job market might be tougher than ever for senior employees. But it’s still much easier than what minorities continue to experience.

Adweek closed with a quote from Carrot Creative wonk Adam Katzenback that read, “The saddest thing is thinking you’re not needed anymore. There’s going to have to be some serious societal discussion about the declining value of human labor.” Um, tell it to minorities who’ve been forced to think they’re not needed—period. Then have a serious societal discussion about the declining value of human dignity.

Why the Ad Industry Job Market Is Tougher Than Ever for Senior Employees

And what agencies can do to combat ageism

By Patrick Coffee

The advertising industry has a diversity problem. That much is no longer in dispute as a growing number of clients either suggest or insist that their teams employ more women and people of color.

In recent months, however, some have turned to another, arguably more pervasive form of discrimination: ageism.

“I’m a 45-year-old woman with 20 years agency experience who was laid off from my senior media position,” read one response to a recent Adweek blog post on the topic. “I have been unable to secure even an interview, let alone a job, for four months.” Another reader wrote, “This is one of the few industries where wisdom counts for nothing.”

“After the [2008] recession, we lost a lot of people in the 40 to 50 range because those were the big salaries that the agencies could cut,” noted 4A’s president and CEO Nancy Hill. “And those jobs are not coming back.”

A business that perpetually caters to the young has seen its hiring practices shift accordingly. The Bureau of Labor Statistics found that “advertising, public relations and related services” employed 192,000 Americans over 45 in 2010, and the average age of an industry professional was 40.7. Five years later, the 45-plus total had risen by only 6,000 while the median age dropped to 38.8.

“In many instances, these are people who spent their careers working on traditional packaged goods and financial services [accounts], and they had not been exposed to digital media,” Hill said. “If you’re in the middle of downsizing … you’re going to [favor] the most current skill sets.”

Yet even digital-only agencies with house Spectacles and craft beer taps sometimes find themselves lacking something only those with fuller portfolios can provide.

“We wouldn’t be where we are without the people who had the right experience at pivotal times,” said Adam Katzenback of Carrot Creative. The Vice-owned agency’s president continues, “We weren’t set up for success on things like procurement that often require outside resources, because we just hadn’t dealt with them before.”

Katzenback, in turn, had no real mentors. “One of my first bosses told me, ‘There are no retirement parties in advertising; no one gets that far,’” he recalled. “That has to change within the industry.”

One solution for aging creatives involves moving into client-side gigs from which they might eventually advise up-and-comers on an unstable job market. Hill also speaks of an executive who got laid off during the recession, then accepted a much lower-paid digital job. “They ended up hiring him full-time at a regular salary,” she said. But he had the financial stability required to handle the initial cut; most lack that luxury.

Where, then, should agencies invest? “Training, training, training,” said Hill. “I can’t say that enough.” Others, like Dentsu’s 360i, work internally; 360i University caters to both senior- and entry-level employees.

“In any discipline, it’s hard for a 50-year-old to find a good job,” said Richards Group founder Stan Richards, who entered the business in 1953. “I would have no problems with hiring a 50-plus copywriter knowing that we can turn him into a person who is comfortable on the digital side within six to eight months.”

Richards focuses on recruiting talent early and instilling loyalty. “We hire roughly 40 kids a year straight out of college, and at any given moment we have somewhere between 35 and 50 interns,” he noted. The shop also requires each new employee to pick an older adviser. “If we do that the way we’re supposed to, we’re going to keep people a very long time,” he said.

Retention will only become more challenging in the years ahead—which could be welcome news for veterans who can prove their worth but not for those the business deems inessential.

“The saddest thing is thinking you’re not needed anymore,” opined Katzenback. “There’s going to have to be some serious societal discussion about the declining value of human labor.”

13313: Don’t Think Much Of Gallop.

Advertising Age published a painfully lengthy portrait titled, “Cindy Gallop Doesn’t Care What You Think”—which is fine, as most clear-headed citizens don’t care what Cindy Gallop thinks.

Gallop is among the more prominent White women bandwagon enthusiasts. Don’t mean to be a female provocateur basher, but prominence doesn’t translate to credibility, despite the adoration of her +46,000 Twitter followers.

For example, Gallop gulped, “I really want to push back against the narrative that women opt out. No woman has ever said, ‘No, don’t pay me more money.’ No woman has ever said, ‘No, I don’t want to be the one in charge so I get to decide how I experience all of this.’” Um, yes, they have. In fact, plenty of women have declined a higher pay scale or bigger title for reasons covering everything from work-life balance to simply seeking to reduce exposure to the insanity generated by the industry. Sorry, but Gallop sounds like a Boomer dinosaur when spewing such uninformed proclamations. It’s true that no woman has ever said, “Please discriminate against me, subject me to sexism and inappropriate behavior and/or pay me less money than male counterparts for equal work.” Yet many have opted against advancement. Women today have greater choices and lead multi-faceted lives. Plus, the industry today is not nearly as attractive as the post-Golden Age of Advertising that Gallop experienced.

Ad Age wrote, “The push for 50-50 gender balance for employment, at all levels and within all departments, is [Gallop’s] goal.” Why is it that White women (or biracial women, as in Gallop’s case) can get away with demanding percentage increases, while minorities who make such requests are vilified as racial quota revolutionaries and Affirmative Action activists?

Ad Age also wrote, “Ms. Gallop believes once an agency has as many women as men in all roles, the issue of sexual harassment goes away. ‘You instantly manage out all of those issues. Because there isn’t the bro-y atmosphere that encourages men to only see women in two roles: secretary or girlfriend.’” Wow, what bizarro universe is Gallop living in? First, expecting equal gender numbers to eliminate sexual harassment is tantamount to believing a Black U.S. President erases racism. By golly, we’ll soon be dancing in a post-racial and post-sexual harassment society! Second, accusing men of viewing every female associate as a potential administrative assistant or girlfriend is pretty ignorant. In contrast to minorities, White women in our industry are not relegated to the roles of receptionist, cleaning lady, security, mailroom attendant or Chief Diversity Officer.

Plus, why is Gallop suddenly such a fiery change agent? Her professional legacy to date hardly warrants the label of diversity champion; rather, she’s a diverted diversity champion. Did BBH transform into an inclusive Mecca under Gallop’s watch? With all due disrespect, Sir John Hegarty displays the classic symptoms of White privilege and cultural cluelessness. And BBH is a no-show at the parties for progress. It would help Gallop’s cause if a few good adwomen acknowledged her as their inspirational mentor, crediting her with their ascension in adland. Are there any minorities in the field who directly benefited from Gallop’s original or born-again benevolence?

Is Gallop to diversity what Donald Trump is to democracy? On the one hand, rabble-rousers are always welcome to condemn the exclusivity festering on Madison Avenue and beyond. At the same time, is Gallop really the figure everyone wants to lead the charge? And to put it all into perspective, Trump boasts +11.1 million Twitter followers.

In the end, Gallop—like Trump—has not earned this blog’s vote. Which is fine, since Gallop doesn’t care.

13312: Census Senseless Selection.

Advertising Age reported Y&R was picked to be the lead White advertising agency for the 2020 Census. No word yet on which minority shops might be tapped to receive Census crumbs—despite the original RFP stating that the winning agency must have access to “expertise and experience in communicating with and marketing to historically undercounted populations. These populations include such groups as African Americans/Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, American Indians and Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders.” Of course, the Census didn’t bother counting how the various groups are underrepresented in the halls of Y&R, and apparently doesn’t care that the agency is owned by a holding company based in the U.K. Only in America.

Y&R Tapped as Lead Agency for 2020 Census

WPP Shop Will Help Census Utilize ‘Emerging Technologies’ to Market Its Efforts

By Maureen Morrison

WPP’s Y&R has won the 2020 Census account after a review, according to people familiar with the matter.

The U.S. Census Bureau in late January issued a final RFP, with a projected completion sometime in August. Representatives for the Census, according to people familiar with the process, reached out this morning to agencies involved to let them know that Y&R won. As many as five agencies were finalists.

More than likely, a host of other agencies will be involved, handling media and multicultural marketing, among other disciplines. According to one person familiar with the review, agencies presented partner agencies and subcontractors in the review, though it was not immediately known what agencies would be working in tandem with Y&R.

Representatives for Y&R and the Census Bureau did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The bureau, for the next census, is looking to address marketing differently than it did for the 2010 Census, given how dramatically the media landscape has changed since then.

According to the RFP from January: “The communications industry has changed dramatically since the conduct of the 2010 Census, principally due to changes and advances in technology, communications mechanisms, and consumer expectations. The Internet, wireless technologies, and mobile personal devices have opened new communications channels and media that have empowered consumers with increased connectivity to marketers. The Census Bureau fully intends to harness these emerging technologies and channels as part of the 2020 Census Integrated Communications Contract.”

The RFP also said that “the total estimated value for the full lifecycle of this contract” is about $415 million. It wasn’t clear what the fee would be for the lead agency, or other agencies involved.

One of the Census Bureau’s biggest challenges for each census is getting people to respond—especially those in hard-to-count populations. The RFP said that the winning agency will need to have, either from a subcontractor or itself, “expertise and experience in communicating with and marketing to historically undercounted populations. These populations include such groups as African Americans/Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, American Indians and Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders.”

The RFP goes on to say that “racial and ethnic group is not the sole indicator of hard-to-count and non-respondent populations. They also tend to be characterized by renters, high unemployment, low education, low income, difficulty reading or writing in English, the young and mobile, the older population, and household crowding, among other factors.”

For the 2010 Census, more than a dozen agencies were contracted to handle the work. Interpublic’s FCB, then called DraftFCB, was the lead agency on the campaign, though other IPG shops were involved, including Asian-American shop IW Group and Jack Morton, an experiential agency. GlobalHue also played a role, creating work aimed at African-Americans.

13030: Why Droga5, Y?

Adweek spotlighted a new campaign for the Y by Droga5—and it’s offensive on so many levels. Here’s why. The campaign depicts underserved communities in unflattering ways. But what do you expect from Droga5, a diversity-adverse, culturally clueless White advertising agency? One spot features a voiceover saying, “I’m here, can you see me? Because sometimes it feels like I’m invisible, that this whole place is invisible.” Wow, that’s probably how a Black person might feel if they landed at Droga5. “A large part of the creative concept behind these spots is to recognize that mainstream media often does not focus on the positive aspects of communities similar to those shown in the ads,” explained Droga5 Executive Creative Director Kevin Brady. “We did hours of interviews during the shoot to get a sense of how people felt about where they live, what they wished was better, and what they thought the solutions could be. It was important for us to maintain a high level of authenticity when portraying the communities in the spots.” Um, Droga5 doesn’t recognize or focus on non-White communities—especially when seeking job candidates. But hey, they immersed themselves for hours, gaining enlightenment and feeling qualified to portray the ‘hood with authenticity, ultimately producing a patronizing pile of poop.

12890: Three Million Dollar Baby.

Advertising Age reported the gender-bias lawsuit targeting Publicis Groupe and MSLGroup settled for $3 million, which is a lot less than the $100 million in damages from the original filing. But hey, it shows White women are still doing much better than minorities, who have failed to collect a single crumb for the institutionalized discrimination they face in the field.

Publicis Settles Class-Action Gender-Bias Suit for Nearly $3 Million

MSLGroup’s Monique da Silva Moore Originally Sought $100 Million in Damages

By Alexandra Bruell

In February 2011, a former employee of Publicis Groupe’s MSL Group started a class-action gender discrimination complaint against the Paris-based holding company and MSL, Publicis’ umbrella unit for public relations shops. The lead plaintiff, Monique da Silva Moore, was seeking $100 million in damages. Today, it was settled for nearly $3 million.

“The settlement, which resolves the claims of the named plaintiffs and pay and pregnancy discrimination claims of 101 other female MSLAmericas employees, has been submitted to the District Court for approval,” according to a statement from the plaintiffs’ law firm Sanford Heisler Kimpel. “Defendants Publicis Groupe and MSL Group have not conceded or admitted liability in connection with the settlement and deny that they have engaged in any wrongdoing,” added the statement.

“We are pleased to have resolved this matter, avoiding the cost of further litigation,” said MSLGroup in a statement. “We are confident that our workplace policies and practices are lawful, correct, and non-discriminatory. The Court has made no determination that any policy or practice was unlawful, and the settlement agreed to by the parties does not require any changes in our policies or practices. We continue to be fully committed to the fair, equal and respectful treatment of all of our employees.”

When they filed the suit, Ms. da Silva Moore and other female public relations employees in the U.S. claimed that they were denied equal pay, promotion and other employment opportunities by Publicis and its PR group, MSLGroup. Ms. da Silva Moore, a former global healthcare director for MSLGroup, had worked for the PR agency for 13 years.

Jim Tsokanos, MSLGroup’s U.S. president at the time, stepped down over a year after the claims were made. He was then succeeded by the company’s Chief Client Officer Renee Wilson.

Mr. Tsokanos’ alleged behavior was described in a version of the original suit.

Despite ongoing inappropriate conduct and complaints, Tsokanos was promoted to Executive Vice President and Managing Director of the Company’s largest office in New York and ultimately to President of the Americas. In his new role, Tsokanos continues to make comments about the appearance of female employees often discussing their “looks” in front of other employees and during meetings. He is also known to take young female employees out for drinks frequently. Human Resources has never taken any action to end President Tsokanos’ ongoing inappropriate conduct.

In 2008, President Tsokanos proudly announced to many in the company that he “need[ed] a big swinging dick to lead the Midwest” while searching for a candidate to fill the head position for the Midwest region. The comment was widely circulated around the company.

MSLGroup has since made additional leadership changes under a new structure overseen by Arthur Sadoun, the CEO of creative agency network Publicis Worldwide.

Here, an original version of the suit:

12617: Dumb White Women Depictions.

Campaign published another White woman whining as MediaCom Chief Strategy Officer Sue Unerman complained about the ways White women are depicted in advertising. Hey, minorities are barely depicted at all.

Is adland’s gender politics dated?

By Sue Unerman

“Um, excuse me, but the client would like to see him with his top off.”

The first and only casting session I ever attended was for the Ajax house-proud hunk. I had been involved in every stage of the pitch and idea. It was for a new cleaning product that did not require a second wipe: after you sprayed your kitchen surface and wiped, there was no need to do so again with a wet cloth.

The agency that we were pitching with showed us early ideas that involved what mums and housewives could do with the time saved. As I remember, they included learning French and playing a round of golf.

I was fresh from doing some research into mums in the UK. I had spoken to those working only in the home as well as those with full- and part-time jobs. One thing was clear: they were not going to learn French in the time saved from wiping a surface. Indeed, many of them were already “saving” that time because they didn’t do a second wipe. (Who does?)

But the benefit would sell and an ad campaign would ensure that the product had shelf room. After I explained my problem with the concept to the rest of the team, the creative director asked: “What is it that housewives do want, then?” I replied: “For someone else, anyone else, to do the cleaning.”

From this came the idea of the “house-proud hunk”. The ad showed a hunk (obviously) cleaning someone’s kitchen with the slogan: “Save him time cleaning — get him new Ajax!”

I went along to the casting session, where the client said to me, in a whisper, to ask the producers if the models auditioning could take their shirts off.

Years later, once again we seem to have gone backwards: cleaning ads no longer feature fantasy hunks doing the housework for hard-pressed housewives but housewives dancing with joy after cleaning their own floors or scouring the house so it could be ready for their “prince”. A recent poll from News UK found that the ad industry is “still portraying women in subservient roles while men are depicted as powerful”.

Who cares if the advertising is effective at selling stuff? Well, women care, for a start. One of the most notable points in my research was that women notice how they are depicted and feel criticised and judged by it much more than men do. Reflecting women’s real roles in life will lead to a competitive advantage versus other brands — so, if I were writing ads, that’s what I would do.

As Richard Huntington, the chief strategy officer at Saatchi & Saatchi, said of a recent Mumsnet study: “Advertisers are still stuck in the rut of seeing mums in the role of cook, cleaner and nurse — while dad has fun playing outside and getting messy with his kids. We need to focus less on the drudgery if we are to reflect the reality of modern mothers.”

Sue Unerman is the chief strategy officer at MediaCom

12615: White Women In Ad Tech.

Adweek published a report titled, “In Spite of a ‘Boys’ Club’ Industry, Women Are Advancing in Ad Tech.” If it’s like other advertising industry divisions, the biggest benefiters are White women. And the graphic accompanying the piece (depicted above) is in stark contrast to the infographic recording minority representation in the field.

12546: UK Bitch Session.

At Campaign, “Portraits of a lady” presents more White women whining. Now the UK Mad Women are arguing that they’re not just underrepresented, but unfairly represented too—despite enjoying roughly 50 percent representation in the field. The clueless complainers include Lindsey Clay, and the 3 percenters are joining the revolution too. It’s only a matter of time before somebody invites Patricia Arquette to the bitch session. Of course, no one is mentioning that while White women are allegedly underrepresented and unfairly represented, minorities aren’t represented at all.

Portraits of a lady

As Kate Magee heard at last week’s Wacl event, advertising continues to represent women unfairly.

I want you to get it out. I want to see it. I want to feel it, hold it, put it in my mouth,” the young woman says in a close-up to camera.

No, this isn’t a scene from 50 Shades Of Grey but from an ad shown on daytime TV last year for the e-cigarette brand VIP.

It was an example highlighted at last week’s Wacl event in the House of Commons, where the audience agreed conclusively – after fierce debate – that the depiction of women in advertising today still lags behind the reality.

Yes, there has been huge progress over the past 25 years – just look at the brilliant Sport England campaign “this girl can” by FCB Inferno – but there is still much more to be done.

The lazy use of outdated stereotypes and unnecessary sexualisation aside, what’s often most damaging is unconscious bias.

The chair of the Account Planning Group, Tracey Follows, highlighted a recent Apple ad for Siri in which men asked work-related questions while women requested a reminder about grocery shopping.

It’s this type of bias that is powerfully exposed in the “#LikeAGirl” ad for Always by Leo Burnett. And also why the Thinkbox chair, Tess Alps, argued that Mother’s “epic strut” ad for Moneysupermarket.com is a feminist statement. The spot shows a man flouncing down the street in hotpants and high heels.

“By making a man behave like women are expected to behave all the time, it shows how ridiculous it is,” Alps said. “We might not always be able to change the culture, but we don’t have to adopt the worst aspects of it.”

Partly, the bias is a result of the “male gaze”. If the majority of creative directors in charge of depicting a woman are men, can they – however well-intentioned – ever truly reflect a woman’s experience?

The problem is not usually an individual ad but the accumulative effect of what advertising says about the role of women in society.

One of the most interesting ways to redress the balance came from Thinkbox’s chief executive, Lindsey Clay, who suggested the creation of a Bechdel test for advertising.

The Bechdel test, originally used on movies, asks whether a work of fiction features at least two women who talk to each other about something other than a man. Sounds simple, but you’d be surprised how many films fail the test.

Clay suggested judging whether an ad showed a woman who was not in a domestic setting, not playing a nurturing role and not defined through a sexual relationship with a man.

It’s a thought-provoking concept but, as the debate showed, things are not always clear-cut. Procter & Gamble’s brand director of northern Europe, Roisin Donnelly, said that businesses cannot afford to offend women in their ads because they won’t be effective if they don’t engage with the consumer. She then cited research revealing that UK women still handle 75 per cent of the housework and 88 per cent of the childcare.

Frightening statistics, but if 70 per cent of females say they feel alienated by most ads (research pointed out by Follows), then perhaps women don’t recognise, or want to recognise, the reality.

Advertising is aspirational and has the power to change behaviour. So it is also within the industry’s power to show a more equal society in ads.

As the equalities minister Jo Swinson put it: “Does advertising want to reflect what reality is, or lead us to a new reality?”

Wacl’s House of Commons debate: Why now, what next?

Lindsay Pattison, president, Wacl; worldwide chief executive, Maxus

I’m loving the current zeitgeist for more empowered, diverse images of women in ads. Always’ “#LikeAGirl” and Sport England’s “this girl can” both sassily and really effectively invert damaging stereotypes. Meanwhile, L’Oréal (a client) recently appointed Helen Mirren as a UK ambassador.

Our debate highlighted that, while we’ve come far, it is, as Tess Alps summed up so eloquently, “not job done”.

Examining our own business is a helpful lens and one that shows the need for Wacl, aged 92, to still exist. As our vice-president, Lindsey Clay, pointed out: while we start out in advertising with a 50/50 gender split, as we “progress” only 25 per cent of senior management roles are held by women. Not a great start.

And it’s far, far worse when we delve into disciplines; the lack of senior female creatives is a massive issue worldwide. On 12 June, the 3% Club (reflecting the percentage of executive creative directors stateside who are female) will come here to help raise awareness and inspire more creative talent, so that the people conceiving ads bring a realistic, empathetic view and also reflect the market.

We’re making a big effort to attract and support female chief strategy officers too; as an organisation, we will try to encourage more super senior female planners to help us deliver true insights and thus effective comms. Misunderstanding female consumers from a business perspective is lunacy; two-thirds of the world’s purchase power is wielded by females – that’s $12 trillion!

What else can we do? We can call out any lazy, unhelpful hangovers of casual sexism and gender stereotyping as a priority – we can all raise our hands and our voices. It’s our industry and we should all take responsibility.

Wacl’s goal isn’t to create an undue advantage, but we do want a level playing field. Let’s reflect reality – or, better yet, an achievable improvement on a society where only 23 per cent of our MPs and five of our FTSE 100 chief executives are women.

12305: Cultural Wealth Gap Increasing.

From The New York Times…

Minorities Fall Further Behind Whites in Wealth During Economic Recovery

By Tanzina Vega

The wealth gap between minorities and whites has continued to increase in the midst of the economic recovery, according to a report by the Pew Research Center that was released Friday.

According to the report, which analyzed data from the Survey of Consumer Finances from the Federal Reserve, the median net worth of white households in 2013 was $141,900, about 13 times that of black households at $11,000.

In 2007, when the recession began in the United States, the median net worth of white households was $192,500, or 10 times that of black households at $19,200.

For Hispanics the numbers are similar, albeit slightly higher, than those for blacks. In 2007, the median net worth of a Hispanic household was $23,600, and in 2013 it was $13,700.

“The gaps are big, and they are also persistent,” said Rakesh Kochhar, the associate director for research at Pew’s Hispanic Trends Project and one of the report’s authors. In the last 30 years, net worth for white American households has hovered around $100,000, or six to eight times as high as net worth for blacks, Mr. Kochhar said.

The survey has been conducted every three years since 1983, with the largest wealth gap between blacks and whites recorded in 1989. That year, the median net worth of white households was 17 times as large as that of black households and 14 times that of Hispanic households.

Wealth is defined as the value of an accumulated sum of assets that could include income, financial products like stocks and bonds, retirement accounts or real estate subtracted from the debt that is owed against those assets. It is built up over time and tends to increase with age, Mr. Kochhar said. This in part explains the widening racial gap, because blacks tend to earn less than whites and have less assets than whites do to pass on to future generations.

According to the Federal Reserve data, the median income of minority households fell 9 percent from 2010 to 2013, compared with 1 percent for whites. Homeownership, also a factor in the creation of wealth, fell 6.5 percent for minority households from 2010 to 2013, compared with 2 percent for whites.

A “legacy of discrimination,” including lower levels of education and depressed property values in certain minority communities, has played a role in the widening wealth gap, Mr. Kochhar said.

A slight increase in net worth of Hispanics over blacks can partly be explained by geography, he said. Hispanics are more concentrated in states with higher home values like California, New York and Florida; blacks may own homes in Southern states with lower home values.

While all American households have lower assets, the decrease has been more significant among minority households, the report said.

The Hispanic population is also likelier to be younger and likelier to be immigrants, who often take 20 to 30 years to settle into a new country before beginning to accumulate wealth, Mr. Kochhar said.

12141: Millennials—The New Minority…?

Adweek published a bunch of articles on Millennials. Advertising Age spotlighted the Nielsen Top 10 Ads Among Millennials. Seminars examining Millennials were plentiful at Advertising Week. Why, everybody’s crazy about Millennials.

However, whenever anyone starts a conversation about Millennials as adpeople, things get ugly fast. Criticisms include, “…the problem is with Millennials entering this industry with their ‘It’s all about me’ egos.” Agency executives refuse to accommodate Millennials in any way, shape or form. The generational differences in advertising agencies are filled with resentments and negativity.

This is yet another reason why diversity will never happen in the advertising industry. In short, the Old White Guys in charge refuse to share with anyone outside of their exclusive realm—even their White spouses, mistresses and assorted Caucasian female peers get shafted.

Millennials actually represent a scarier threat than other minority groups. For starters, many of them are White—especially the ones who are granted access into the field—despite the fact that the group overall is the most diverse generation in history. Second, Millennials will work for lower wages than Old White Guys, while often producing equal or better results. Third, unlike Old White Guys, most Millennials are not digitally disabled. And the list goes on.

Our industry leaders are arguably seeking to prevent and restrict the younger generation’s ability to succeed. In adland, Millennials are the new minority.

11428: Preparing For Advertising Week.

Where Are All The Black People? has undergone a makeover, de-emphasizing the W in Where and altering the title to read: Here Are All The Black People. Ironically, all the Black people in advertising actually could be accommodated by a single New York City venue. The Advertising Week Official Guide features an ad where Black now covers Hispanic, Native American, Indian and Asian—but doesn’t include African American. At the website, the speakers for the September 23 event are TBD. And a quote from Jeff Goodby reads, “I loved this event. One of the most moving things I’ve done all year.” Not sure his words will hold up for 2013.

11332: Soaring With Hypocrisy.

This contrived campaign from Lowe Campbell Ewald says minority kids can soar. Unless they’ve set their sights on landing a job at agencies like Lowe Campbell Ewald.

From Ads of the World.

11266: The Heat Is On.

From The Los Angeles Times…

Minorities more likely to live in ‘urban heat islands,’ study finds

By Tony Barboza Los Angeles Times

Blacks, Asians and Latinos are more likely to live in “urban heat islands” that are most at risk during extreme heat waves that are expected to worsen due to climate change, according to a new study.

Researchers at UC Berkeley used satellite imagery to find neighborhoods in hundreds of U.S. cities where there are few shade trees and a lot of heat-absorbing, impervious surfaces like pavement, cement or roofing.

The authors paired that information with data from the 2000 Census to find that blacks were 52 percent more likely than whites to live in “urban heat islands” — microclimates that can get an extra 5 to 10 degrees warmer during heat waves — while Asians were 32 percent more likely and Latinos were 21 percent more likely.

The study, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, also found that people who live in more segregated cities, including whites, are more likely to live in heat-absorbing neighborhoods.

“Overall this pattern of racial segregation appears to increase everyone’s risk of living in a heat-prone environment,” study co-author Rachel Morello-Frosch, a professor of public health and environmental science at UC Berkeley, told the Los Angeles Times.

The research highlights one way in which minorities are likely to suffer disproportionately from the effects of climate change. Living in a concrete jungle could put blacks, Asians and Latinos at greater risk during heat waves, which are expected to become more intense, frequent and long-lasting as cities heat up.

Extreme heat waves are responsible for about one in five deaths from natural hazards in the United States, the study said.

To help reduce the risk, the study recommends that city planners plant more trees, paint highly reflective roofs, use pavement that absorbs less heat and consider racial and ethnic inequalities in decisions about adapting to a changing climate.

“Efforts to minimize heat risks in cities need to be more attuned to the racial disparities we see on a national scale,” Morello-Frosch said. “We need to make sure that any heat mitigation strategies really focus on the most vulnerable communities.”