My partner for the final project is Heather Miltenberger, and together we have created a communications plan to raise Alzheimer’s awareness among 75-85 year old African American women living in Philadelphia. These women are living below the poverty line, and have never graduated high school.

Click on this link to view our Communications Plan Draft.

Click on this link to view our Final Presentation.

We hope you enjoy and welcome any comments or revisions you may suggest. Thanks for reading!

For this week’s blog, I tried to think about marketing campaigns that have turned into a major failure recently. The one that immediately popped up in my mind was the Bud Light campaign with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney. This article showcases a prime example of a campaign that failed to plan correctly for its target audience, and upon evaluation, found the results to be less than what they hoped for.

In this New York Times article, the headline talks about how Bud Light has dropped from being the nation’s number one seller of beer since the campaign started. Interestingly enough, the new number one selling beer is Modelo Especial. (This is a fun commentary on the state of the United States population, with so many more Hispanic/Latinx people contributing to our economy and our purchasing habits! But, I digress.) The article then goes on to talk about the ways that sales have dropped and how the company has been losing employees and executives due to the backlash/boycott.

This shows me that there was a significant oversight in the planning of this campaign. While Mulvaney was a great choice to be more inclusive and cater to the LGBTQ population, Bud Light failed to conduct any sort of research on what the consequences of this campaign might be. It all comes back to knowing your audience. If you know that your audience and a majority of your customers are on the conservative side of the scale, it might not be a good idea to place an entire ad campaign on someone in that community. At least, not make it their campaign’s entire identity.

Upon completion of the campaign planning, there should have been some focus groups or surveys that went out to members of the target audience, aka Bud Light consumers. In doing this, marketers could have gotten these knee-jerk reactions on a much smaller and less public scale. They could have avoided any kind of scandal or outrage that they are now facing. In addition, this article proofs a few statistics of how this campaign was evaluated, particularly dealing with beer sales. I find it interesting that this company did not have a better planning plan in place, and only evaluated the campaign based on the sales of beers and the attitudes of the customers. I think there needed to be some more methods of evaluation to truly gauge the community, particularly those customers who are LGBTQ and also drink Bud Light. I think the results might be vastly different.

Welcome back, everyone! Feel free to check out my target audience profile information here. This page has all the information you will need about my target audience!

Why is multiculturalism and multicultural marketing important? That seemed to be a question that we sought to answer in this week’s lesson. I started thinking about the different ways I could answer that question, and I wanted to find an article this week for this post that would be the perfect example of the answer, and I did! Simply put, multicultural groups need to be represented in the media, for a variety of reasons. I want to talk about a few of those reasons with my post this week. With that being said, the article I read this week was about the 2023 remake of The Little Mermaid, and how Disney recast Ariel as a black woman, hiring Halle Bailey to portray the princess.

The CNN article talks about how young black girls everywhere are inspired by this choice, and were so excited to see the movie. There were multiple quotes of young girls saying how important it was to them that they saw someone on the big screen that looked like them. It allowed them to believe that they too could accomplish their dreams and be whatever they wanted to be. The article also goes on to talk about the racist backlash this casting decision has faced. Critics saying it doesn’t make sense to cast a black woman to play someone who lives under the sea, or that Ariel was a Danish folktale so she should’ve remained white. All of this is strictly excuses because these people did not like the change. The article talks about how as a fairy tale, it shouldn’t matter what race Ariel is; all that matters is that her story is one that is universal regardless of race.

This inclusion of Bailey is so important and relevant to the idea of multicultural marketing. Representation matters. Just hearing the comments from young black girls is enough to convince me that there is a dire need for multicultural marketing and representation in more than just our pop culture. We tend to respond well to seeing people that look like us in the media when it comes to our actions and purchase choices. Seeing how influenced young black girls were by this one movie and its casting choice proves how powerful representation in the media is, especially for underrepresented populations. These groups need to be seen and heard, and we need to do a better job of incorporating that strategy into our mainstream marketing across the board.

I wanted to find an article this week that dealt with representation in the media and advertising of multicultural groups. One theme I noticed in our material this week is that it is important for companies to showcase these groups in their advertising, but it is important to get it right. That got me thinking: before I ask if these companies are getting it right, shouldn’t I first ask if they are even doing this at all? That leads me to an article I read this week from the Hollywood Reporter about this year’s Super Bowl, and the ads that played during the game. The main premise of the article is that this year’s Super Bowl was severely lacking when it came to LGBTQ representation in its advertisements.

According to GLAAD, there were only four advertisements in this year’s Super Bowl lineup that explicitly featured LGBTQ people. There was a fifth that featured Billie Jean King, but that was the NFL’s own halftime spot. GLAAD representatives commented in the article about how disappointed they were in the fact that companies were not using this mainstream platform to bring more representation to the fold during a time where gay rights are being questioned and put on the chopping block, so to speak. It then goes on to discuss previous years and other initiatives that the NFL partook in this year to help spread representation of LGBTQ issues.

It’s a sad statistic to hear that only four out of the numerous Super Bowl commercials had representation for LGBTQ characters. I am not saying that every ad needs to have it, but I think it is a shockingly low number for the year 2023. We are supposed to be living in a community/society that is much more tolerant than the past, and yet we still don’t see the progress we need. Communicators need to be able to reach all of their audiences, and there is a population here with the LGBTQ crowd that is vastly underserved. You could push back and say that not a large portion of that population are football fans, but that isn’t the point with representation. Getting them exposure to the mainstream audience will help make their experiences and their group “mainstream” themselves. Normalizing their existence in advertising without stereotyping them could go a long way. This year’s Super Bowl lineup dropped the ball big time in that matter (no pun intended!).

I decided to take a step way out of my comfort zone this week. I have spent a lot of time in my studies looking at what one might call the “popular” minority groups. I have studied African-American and Hispanic culture pretty frequently. I feel like I have learned a great deal about what makes those groups tick and have a general empathy for the experiences they go through. One minority group I have not explored, however, is one that I feel often gets forgotten: Asian Americans. Because of that, I wanted to use this week to get my bearings on the experiences this group goes through, so I spent this week watching the first three episodes of Fresh Off the Boat.

This comedy show is a series set in 1995, where the Wong Family moves from Chinatown in Washington, D.C. to Orlando, FL. Louis, the father, opened his own restaurant there so he moved his family for that dream. Jessica, the mother, struggles to fit in with the other women in her community. Eddie, Evan, and Emery are their sons, though the show focuses on Eddie (the oldest and the narrator of the show.) They also move with their grandmother, who doesn’t speak English, only Chinese.

I think the show in general can be viewed as a bit problematic, seeing as the Chinese characters tend to perpetuate some common stereotypes of the Asian population. However, I think the writers had more of a satire in mind when writing this. I think that this show makes fun of these stereotypes by heightening them a bit, making them so funny that the viewer sees it as ridiculous. You also do get a glimpse into the family’s values and the subtle discrimination they deal with on a daily basis, opening my eyes to a plight I never really see.

The pilot episode is all about the family moving to Orlando and settling into their new home. There are multiple instances in this episode where the family is seen as other or outcast. First, let’s start with the moment they arrive at their house. A group of white women in the neighborhood, riding around on roller blades, approach them and welcome them to the neighborhood. When they ask Jessica her name, they are surprised it isn’t something “more exotic.” Moving on, when Eddie arrives at school, he goes to sit with a group of white boys at lunch. When he pulls out his packed lunch of a noodle dish that his mother made for him, the boys make fun of him, telling him his food stinks and to get rid of it. Eddie then goes on to beg his mom for “white people food” (AKA Lunchables…ahhh the 90’s!) instead of her cooking. Finally, back in school, a black student calls Eddie a Chink, prompting Eddie to beat the student up. When in the principal’s office, his parents defend him and yell at the principal for not punishing the other boy who called him the derogatory name. These are all instances of everyday occurrences that I never experience. This group of people, typically referred to as a model minority, do not live a model life at all. They are still seen as foreign or other in the eyes of the white people in their community.

The second episode deals with Eddie’s performance in school, and his mother’s expectations of him. At the beginning of the episode, there is a school meeting going on where the principal talks to the parents about a drug dealer handing out drugs to students in the area, and he is at large. When asking if there are any questions, Jessica raises her hand and only asks when report cards are coming out. This perpetuates the stereotype that all Asian families care about academics above everything. Eddie then earns straight A’s, which is still not enough for his mother, who tells the principal the school is too easy. Again, it’s almost over the top absurd in her reaction, making you laugh at the thought of how strict she truly is. But it doesn’t have the feel of making fun of the family. It is more of a display of the complicated feelings Jessica goes through here, wanting her sons to be successful and not knowing how hard to push. For me, it was some insight into what motivates this group and what their values are.

In the third episode of the show, Louis and Jessica struggle to fit in at a block party in the neighborhood with the other people on the block, and Eddie is trying to fit in at school. Eddie isn’t wearing the same Jordans that all of the other students are wearing, so he decides to get a woman on his arm to show off to the other boys, making them forget about his lack of shoes. The same woman he has a crush on is the woman that Jessica becomes friends with. However, Louis convinces Jessica that all the other women in the neighborhood hate Honey (the friend) so she shouldn’t be friends with her. He fears it will cause their restaurant’s business to suffer. Jessica agrees, and at the party, she doesn’t treat Honey well. Honey’s feelings are hurt, and Jessica realizes the error of her ways. She apologizes, and in the process, gains more interest for the restaurant. By the end of the episode, they all retain their real identities and have a better sense of themselves.

Each one of these episodes touches on a specific type of struggle an Asian American family might go through in a predominantly white neighborhood. Like I mentioned before, they perpetuate stereotypes in the process, but more so in a satirical way that makes the viewer see how absurd they really are. All in all, I liked this show, because it gave me a glimpse into what life could be like for this population, something I never really had seen before. I think the show does a great job of mixing comedy with social commentary on their experience, teaching you something without you even knowing it.

I went into this week with the shadow of the impending Supreme Court rulings about affirmative action looming over me. When reading about the first four rules for multicultural marketing, I was definitely finding myself really relating to rule #2, Divide and Conquer. I think it is so important to celebrate the different personalities and cultures that make up our country’s society. In having these feelings, I find it sickening that the Supreme Court is trying to take away that unique sense of identity by ruling that college admissions can no longer be based on race.

I read an AP article this week that discusses the aftermath of the court’s decision and how it will now affect college admissions as a whole. The article talks about how this decision will almost surely diminish minority admission to a lot of colleges and universities. In the other states that have already banned affirmative action, there were dips and slides in enrollment almost immediately, and they are still in a decline, particularly among Blacks and Hispanics.

Now, I am aware that the court’s decision does not deny admissions offices from promoting diversity among its applicants, there is just an extra barrier for students of color to get into some of these schools. Having less resources and access to things that rich, white kids have access to puts them at a severe disadvantage when it comes to their accolades. There is the fear that this will most likely deter students from even attempting to apply, because either they know they don’t have a good chance to get in or they know that if they do get in, they will be in a vast minority on campus. They wouldn’t feel welcome or at home. This presents a barrier to the college admissions world in their quest to promote diversity.

Working in this field, I am highly impacted by the court’s ruling. Our department now has to come up with creative ways to promote diversity on our campus as well as for Penn State as a whole, which is tough to do seeing as Penn State’s track record with diversity is not the greatest. Promising diversity to students who know they are starting a few paces behind those with money and privilege is like trying to tie a shoe with one hand tied behind your back: almost impossible and incredibly frustrating. These students are smart, they know their situation. The court’s ruling will make us as marketers in the college admissions world have to fight tooth and nail to continue to divide and conquer when it comes to our messaging to these segmented populations.

This week’s discussion on how we market to the LGBTQ population got me thinking a lot about the recent scandal involving Bud Light. Back in March, Bud Light launched a campaign involving transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, and it included rainbow-colored cans of the beer. What followed was a load of backlash from anti-trans and LGBTQ populations. People started to boycott Bud Light, refusing to buy the beer. The article I read this week talks about the boycotts and the ways that corporate America has to navigate through this growing division amongst our population.

There are other companies the article mentions that have faced recent backlash for their pro-LGBTQ initiatives. Target employees were facing threats from customers who didn’t support their Pride Month merchandise, to the point where the company has decided to pull some of its merchandise. Starbucks locations can no longer decorate for Pride Month over fear that there will be retaliation of some sort. Even Disney World is having its fair share of clashes with Florida governor Ron DeSantis over his policies surrounding the LGBTQ population.

Seeing all of these examples of the hate and division that still exists among us really gets me thinking a lot about how we should be marketing to this population. We’ve read this week that there are steps forward that are happening when it comes to inclusion and acceptance. In fact, the majority of consumers fall under the umbrella of being willing to embrace the LGBTQ population. However, this article and these boycotts prove that there is still a level of hate in the world that cannot go away. I think the biggest challenge for marketers in this situation is to figure out the best way to create your inclusive environment while still catering to your target audience.

Bud Light, for example, should know the demographic that it generally serves. It is just a fact that a lot of typically right-leaning people would be supporters of the brand. These people sometimes might not be accepting of the LGBTQ population and the inclusive marketing Bud Light was going for. It is an interesting added issue that marketers now have to face. Almost everything is politically charged in today’s society, with the social and political getting mixed together. Companies have to make decisions based on their values, but also the values of their customers in order to be successful. It is a balancing act I do not envy, and it will be fascinating to see how the future of marketing reacts to this polarized environment going forward.

I wanted to find an article this week that really spoke to the stereotypes that minority groups still face today. One group that has faced harsh and unfair stereotypes since 9/11 is the Muslim population in America. The belief that any and every Muslim you see is a terrorist is a fear that many people still have in our country, and it is one that has severely impacted the lives of many innocent Muslims.

The article I found this week was from the L.A. Times from April 10, 2023. It was about how police were searching for a man that vandalized a mosque in Koreatown. They said he defaced the mosque with anti-Muslim hate words. He was not in custody yet, but was wanted for felony vandalism.

The article goes on to discuss how hate crimes are such a prevalent problem in Los Angeles still, particularly among the Muslim population. It talks about how hate crimes in general have slightly decreased overall, but the Muslim population was one of the groups where they rose. They talked about how it was a hopeful statistic for some, but there is still plenty of work to be done.

This article relates back to this course because a population of people who don’t get the attention they deserve when it comes to social justice is the Muslim American population. We as communicators cannot forget this population. There are harmful stereotypes all over the media when it comes to the Muslim population. Every crime show has Muslim terrorists as the villains. The news portrays Muslims as dangerous in the media, constantly highlighting the groups like ISIS that are the outliers of the population. There are little to no television shows or movies that have a Muslim family or even a character as the main protagonist. Women in hijabs can never speak English and are typically very traditional. Not all of this is true in real life. We need to change that narrative, and normalize Muslim Americans in our media culture. This population still stands apart from feeling like they are part of America, mainly because most Americans still view them as foreign and other. Until we can change that narrative in the media, these real-world hate crimes will continue. It is an integral part of our job as communicators to bridge that gap and market to this population just as we do to other marginalized groups in America.

This week, I thought a lot about the systemic issues that still face our society today, and how the media/advertising world fits in. My mind immediately went to the rebranding that has happened over the past few years since the rise of the BLM movement. The first one that popped into my head was Aunt Jemima syrup and pancake mix.

This brand’s logo and name was used to market these products, and it pushed a stereotype that has persisted for generations. “Aunt Jemima” is a discriminatory and racist name that typically would refer to black women who were slaves. As America’s eyes were finally starting to become fixed on the sights of changing the world around us for the better, brands like this one took a hit.

I found a CNN article from the day after the brand officially changed its name to Pearl Milling Company. It basically talks about the reasoning for the switch and how they came to the decision on the name. It turns out, that was the original name of the company and it refers to where the products were originally created. Why the company ever called itself Aunt Jemima is beyond me.

The article goes on to talk about how PepsiCo did not know how the public would react to the change, seeing as they were completely renaming a popular brand. Looking back on it now, we know that there were mixed reactions. There were those who embraced the change, viewing it as the right thing to do, getting rid of the stereotypical and racist name and logo. There were others, however, who were outraged at the change, not understanding why people were so sensitive.

In my opinion, those people are not intentionally cruel or insensitive to the struggles that African Americans face everyday. I think that they are just ignorant to it all. They don’t understand how that logo could make people of color feel, because they simply cannot ever understand. That is why multicultural marketing is so important. Learning how different groups think and feel is important in knowing how to market a product to them. It is essential for us as marketers and communicators to understand (as best as we can) the feelings and struggles of different racial and ethnic groups, so that nothing like the Aunt Jemima situation happens in the future. It’s the only way to run a successful campaign in today’s ever-changing and diverse society.