Brands plough the gender track, chase relevance and an image makeover
Several new campaigns challenge the popular narrative around machismo. Is this real change or opportunism on the part of the brands, ask experts
Six packs don’t make a man, nor does playing with guns. But he who feels the pain of others and lets his tears flow is the real deal, says actor Ayushmann Khuranna, staring deep into the camera in a 3.51 minute video that zipped across the internet highways no sooner than The Man Company, a male grooming brand, released it. Iconic denim brand Levi’s, long seen as the symbol of the ultra-masculine, is walking away from the stereotype with a campaign that asks all, including men to be proud to be more. Gillette asks men to drop the stoic exterior and let their emotions show.
Men are at the frontlines of the gender battle, as brands look for a way into the conversation online and minds of the young communities they target. “Brands often use topical causes. The reasons may vary from a convenient attention to associative responsibility to resolving socio cultural conflicts as a cultural brand,” said Ashish Mishra, MD Interbrand. More likely, the spurt of ads asking men to change their attitudes towards themselves and not just women, is what Mishra terms ‘occasional opportunism’ or making the most of a moment.
The point Mishra and branding and gender studies professionals are keen to drive home is that brands must demonstrate greater commitment or else the glib narrative being employed may end up denting credibility. Advertisers have in the past reinforced the male behaviour that they are now seeking to dismantle and if they want to be taken seriously, they need to do more than dish out homilies. John Browne, former CEO of British Petroleum (1995 to 2007) writes in his latest book Make, Think, Imagine: Engineering the future of Civilisation, “At the start of the twentieth century, gasoline-fuelled automobiles became the popular choice because they conveyed a more masculine image than the electric-powered alternatives.” Now, as brands try to cater to a category classified as millennial, the narrative needs to change.
The gender narrative, Ambi M G Parameswaran, founder, BrandBuilding.com says, is how brands are trying to connect with the millennial consumer. “But not all brands can pull this off,” and such attempts end up like a ‘lipstick on a pig’ situation, he adds.
Forced messaging can damage the brand’s positioning and Ambi points out the new campaign by condom brand Manforce on cybercrime reporting as an example. “The Manforce message sounds a little forced since the same brand brazenly advertises in airports with messages that could be mistaken for an ice cream brand,” he says. According to him Levi’s and Fastrack (Titan) are more consistent with the messaging.
The need of the hour is to ensure that the ad is not a one-off effort or a shallow reading of a serious problem. Frivolity is the risk brands run when they insert themselves into topical issues without planning for a strategic intervention.
“Brands often use topical causes. The reasons may vary from a convenient attention to associative responsibility to resolving socio cultural conflicts as a cultural brand. Gender diversity and equality are clearly gaining importance and brands recognise that,’ said Mishra. But brands have to do much more than this if they want to bring about real change, in terms of identity and among the communities they serve.