Advertising Diversity by Shalini Shankar

8/9/2019 Advertising Diversity by Shalini Shankar

1/49

ADVERTISINGDIVERSITY

Shalini Shankar

Ad Agencies and the Creation of

Asian American Consumers


2/49

ADVERTISING

DIVERSITY

Ad Agencies and the Creation of

Asian American Consumers

SHALINI SHANKAR

DUKE UNIVERSITY PRESS

Durham & London

2015


3/49

© 2015 Duke Universiy Press

All righs reserved

Prined in he Unied Saes of America on

acid-free paper ♾

ypese in Chaparral and Myriad by seng

Informaion Sysems, Inc.

Library of Congress Caaloging-in-Publicaion Daa

Shankar, Shalini, 1972–

Adverising diversiy : ad agencies and he creaion

of Asian American consumers / Shalini Shankar.

pages cm

Includes bibliographical references and index.

978-0-8223-5864-0 (hardcover : alk. paper)

978-0-8223-5877-0 (pbk. : alk. paper)

978-0-8223-7561-6 (e-book)

1. Adverising—Social aspecs—Unied Saes.

2. Asian American consumers—Unied Saes.

3. Asian Americans—Race ideniy—Unied

Saes. 4. Sereoypes (Social psychology) in

adverising—Unied Saes. 5. Adverising

agencies—Unied Saes. 6. Minoriies in

adverising—Unied Saes. . ile.

5813.653 2015

659.1′042—dc23 2014040371

Cover ar: Illusraion based on a phoo by

he auhor.


4/49

For Roshan and Anisha


5/49

CONTENTS

PREFACE ix

INTRODUCTION Te Pich, 1

CHAPTER Accoun Planning, 37

CHAPTER Creaive, 89

CHAPTER Accoun Services, 147

CHAPTER Producion and Media, 191

CONCLUSION Audience esing, 250

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 269

APPENDIX ranscripion Key, 271

APPENDIX Asian American Populaions

in he Unied Saes, 272

NOTES 275

GLOSSARY 287

REFERENCES 289

INDEX 307


6/49

PREFACE

Differen pahs led me o underake his research and wrie a book abou

adverising. I had wached many ads wih youh and heir families during

fieldwork for my book Desi Land in Silicon Valley, on saellie and cable

elevision channels and programming blocks ha were explicily madefor and aimed a Souh Asian American audiences. I wondered who made

hese ads, whom hey hough hey were reaching, and where his adver-

ising fi in he broader American commercial media landscape. As a long-

ime viewer of live elevised spors, I had also become atuned o how ads

had changed over years, especially he increased inclusion of minoriies in

ads ha previously feaured mosly, if no exclusively, whie alen. Te ap-

pearance and speech syles of some acors suggesed heir ehnic or racial

ideniy, while ohers seemed inenionally difficul o place; corporaionsseemed o deliberaely shif brand ideniy o foser a broader range of con-

sumer idenificaion.

I decided o pursue his projec abou adverising developmen and pro-

ducion because of my ineres in race and represenaion as well as media

and consumpion. Adverising brough hese concerns ogeher, and a

producion-based perspecive allowed me o consider he culural and

linguisic semioics of he process. I began fieldwork for his book in he

spring of 2008, when he effecs of he financial crash were becoming a new

economic and social realiy, when he Unied Saes was on he verge of

elecing is firs black presiden, and when smarphones and social media

claimed heir place as a household presence. My posiion as a universiy

professor made mos people I me favorably disposed o my research; i

evoked a level of respec ha I did no have o earn bu did have o main-

ain. I did his in large par by being as inconspicuous as possible and re-

specing whaever boundaries were drawn for me. Te limis of he daa I

was able o collec, as well as ha which I am able o discuss, are eviden

hroughou he book.Tis is a book abou he complex dynamics of imagining and repre-


7/49

x • PREFACE

sening diversiy in adverising developmen and producion. I focus on

Asian American adverising bu also consider general marke and oher

muliculural markes and explore connecions beween he social dy-

namics of agencies and he finished producs of adverisemens. Wriing

abou American adverising was unexpecedly challenging. As a linguis-

ic and culural anhropologis, I never fel compleely a ease in corpo-

rae America and found he baner of markeing and neworking evens

awkward, as I was no looking o ge ahead in he business world; I con-

inue o be criical of capialism and he social and economic inequaliies

ha i engenders and renews. Adverising is designed o be capialism’s

bigges cheerleader, creaing need and desire for goods and services. Ad-

verising execuives are archeypal middlemen, selling hemselves o cor-

poraions as much as hey sell producs and services o consumers. Bumiddlemen, as I learned, come in a wide range of poliical beliefs and sub-

jeciviies. I came o respec and appreciae heir effors, he long hours

hey worked, and he someimes harsh criicism hey endured when de-

fending heir creaive and producion work. Teir own social saus rarely

mirrored he idealized worlds of heir ads, and he marginalizaion some

conended wih owing o heir race, gender, immigraion saus, accens,

and limied social neworks was inense. So oo was he success hey en-

joyed when hey challenged whie hegemony wih heir counerimages of Asian Americans and heir ambivalence abou furhering paricular sereo-

ypes of hemselves or ohers.

Tis is no a book abou exposing adverising execuives as raciss or

illusraing ha all adverising is racis. Raher i is an analysis of he iner-

acion beween eniies such as he U.S. Census, adverising agencies, mar-

ke researchers, and he goods and services indusries, focusing on hose

individuals who offer producs and services for sale (cliens, adverisers,

markeers) and hose who creae messaging o promoe hem (adveris-

ing execuives). Teirs is he day-o-day work ha produces he some-

imes specacular, someimes offensive, bu ofen jus forgetable mass-

mediaed versions of an America in which race, ehniciy, gender, sexualiy,

class, naionaliy, and ciizenship are carefully rendered. Ta race and eh-

niciy coninue o mater in ads sands in direc opposiion o he claim

of conservaive media and corporae America ha we are in a “posracial”

era in which racism is no longer a social ill. In his world ehnic and racial

difference is called “diversiy”—a surprisingly cheerful erm because i

acknowledges difference bu none of he inequaliies ha can underpini. Ye racism persiss in corporae America as well as in America more


8/49

PREFACE • xi

broadly, from everyday remarks masquerading as humor o violen crimes

of hae and xenophobia. As I compleed his manuscrip, America made

sense of he “no guily” verdic in he rial of George Zimmerman, he

acquited killer of he black eenager rayvon Marin, and acknowledged

he one-year anniversary of he Oak Creek, Wisconsin, Gurdwara shooing.

Mos recenly, he evens in Ferguson, Missouri, provide gruesome new

evidence linking racism, police brualiy, and he inequiies of everyday life

for African Americans and oher racial minoriies. Tese and myriad oher

evens in which ehnic and racial difference as well as dynamics of privi-

lege and inclusion come o he fore confirm ha America is in fac no in a

posracial era, despie claims o he conrary.

Te coninued relevance of race and ehniciy, especially in ligh of

demographic predicions ha America will be a “majoriy minoriy” na-ion by 2042, is quie beneficial for adverising, because represening dif-

ference makes money. Te adverising indusry cares abou diversiy be-

cause i makes good business sense, and addressing diversiy is necessary

o remain relevan o cliens and complian wih regulaory agencies. Di-

versiy maters in everyday ineracions among ad execuives, in heir per-

sonnel decisions, and in heir creaive and producion work; i has come o

shape noions of wha ad execuives highligh as being “normal” abou he

Unied Saes. I focus my discussion on he developmen and producionof ads hemselves, bu I do so in ways ha do no simply criique he work

of adverising as conribuing o racialized capialism or by praising Asian

American adverising for producing ehnically and linguisically specific

ads ha disrup whie corporae hegemony. Raher I presen my version of

he world I observed, filled wih racism and inequaliy as well as atemps

o address hese issues in workplaces and in creaive work, and I consider

wha may be learned abou he formaion and reproducion of hese dy-

namics in corporae America.

Each chaper in Advertising Diversity begins wih a vignete conaining

a porion of an adverising accoun inended o highligh various pars of

he developmen and producion process. Te accoun unfolds from sar

o finish o offer glimpses ino he incepion, growh, veting, and making

of an adverisemen, as well as is plan for circulaion, wih names and

oher deails modified for confidenialiy purposes. Alhough developmen

and producion can unfold in a number of ways, aspecs of he process are

found in mos adverising and markeing aciviies. aken ogeher he

segmens illusrae he broader process of adverising piching, creaivedevelopmen, and producion and complemen he srucure of he book.


9/49

xii • PREFACE

If you can recall an ad ha you hough was really funny bu public ou-

cry deemed i racis, or have been old o lighen up when you hink an ad

is racis, or jus canno escape he ads you would raher ignore on live ele-

vision, framing he pages of your newspaper, in your glossy magazines, on

fla screens in axis, preceding your Youube video, waiing o gree you on

airplane ray ables, showing up on your Facebook newsfeed, or as hey re-

play in your mind when you would raher be hinking abou anyhing else,

hen read on o find ou how some of hem came o be.


10/49

INTRODUCTION

Te Pich

At : p.m. on a warm evening in May , ad ex-ecutives trickled into the agency’s large conference

room. Open windows let in the sounds of Manhat-

tan traffic along with a refreshing breeze. Projected on the

wall was the PowerPoint presentation the Asian Ads account

team had sent to the client for a new business pitch. They had

worked well with this client over the years by developing and

producing insurance and financial services ads for Chinese

American audiences. Today they were presenting their ideasfor a brand launch into markets designated as “Asian Indian”

and “Korean” by the U.S. Census. Ad executives who worked

on the pitch gathered around the speakerphone in the center

of the conference table, speculating about the location of the

client based on the unfamiliar area code the account execu-

tive was dialing. “Indiana! Wow. I didn’t expect that,” one cre-

ative exclaimed as she looked over the brand- awareness print

creative concept. An automated voice greeted them from the

pod in the center of the large conference table. “Please wait

for the moderator of your conference,” requested the pleasant

female voice as the account executive hit “mute” and the team

reviewed their plan for the presentation. The account execu-

tive began to quiet down her colleagues when the automated

voice finally announced, “Your moderator has arrived. Wel-

come to the Allied Country conferencing center. Please enter

your pin code followed by the pound key.” A larger than usual

group had assembled for this new business pitch, each ready

to contribute if needed. Sunil, an account executive who had


11/49

2 • I NTRO DU CTI O N

already worked with this client, remained reserved and de-

ferred to his colleague Kew to make the presentation. In past

accounts Sunil had begun presentations in a lighter tone with

more jovial openings, like “They are gonna sell their concept

to you today, if you will buy it!” Exposing the artifice of the

work being done, he delivered the line with just enough affect

to draw a chuckle from his clients, warming them up so that

his creatives’ work would be well received. Today, however,

he remained quiet, not wanting to jeopardize the possibility

of new business in a down economy. “I’m very excited about

this presentation,” creative director An Rong told his team as

they awaited connection to the conference call. He reminded

them, “This is the first phase: branding.” The client finally ar-rived in the virtual conferencing center: the vice president of

marketing, George, and his colleague Nadine. Turning on the

charm, account executive Kew warmly welcomed them and

began making small talk. Without the benefit of presenting

in person and entertaining the client, their performance via

speakerphone along with the visuals they had sent had to do

the work of “selling it in,” as some account executives called

it. Kew began, “We have two concepts for you, each that sellsyour brand, cultural insights, as well as incorporates your logo.

How are we selling all three in one package? Let me show you

with Concept One.”

Over he pas cenury or so, he American adverising indusry, like ad-

verising globally, has undergone dramaic shifs, rifs, conroversies, and

reconcepualizaions. I has creaed beloved jingles, produced deplorable

caricaures, and become absoluely inescapable. I has been houghfully

and sylishly explored hrough such dramaic renderings as ’s award-

winning drama Mad Men and served as a more casual backdrop for oher

ficionalized dramas and comedies. I has even survived he dreaded digi-

al video recorder ha allows elevision viewers o fas-forward hrough

commercial breaks. Indeed he cos per second for ads during he Super

Bowl has seadily risen, even afer he 2008 recession. And no mater how

charming Don Draper can be and how much Mad Men fans relish his cre-

aive presenaions, mos of us are sill annoyed a he commercial breaksduring his show abou adverising. Despie his, adverising is a seminal


12/49

THE P ITCH • 3

par of our shifing media landscape. Currenly, when elevision, radio,

social media, and he Inerne converge in ways ha make he boundaries

ha separae hem increasingly less imporan, he work of adverising is

far less sraighforward. Creaing brand ideniies, generaing aspiraional

imagery, and building a growing consumer base sill remain paramoun,

bu cachy creaive alone canno accomplish his. Muliple plaforms, re-

gional acical evens, and promoional ie-ins wih oher reail and media

oufis make adverising oday so much more han generaing and exe-

cuing a commissioned creaive vision. Brands are managed from above,

co-oped from below, and appropriaed in unforeseen ways. Adverising’s

role is o say ahead of consumers by creaing aspiraional imagery, while

i also srives o be sure audiences idenify wih he represenaions hey

circulae. Especially as he U.S. populaion changes in is ehnic and racialcomposiion and who couns as a coveed consumer, ways of saying cur-

ren and relevan are sies of ongoing cones and compeiion.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Advertising Diversity invesigaes processes of racial and ehnic represen-

aion in various segmens of he American adverising indusry. I look

a he day-o-day work of developmen and producion, he people doinghe work, he broader corporae consrains in which his work is based,

and how all of hese areas shape mass-mediaed commercial represena-

ion. I consider he role of his work in bringing abou paricular repre-

senaional shifs while someimes reproducing racism and he modaliies

hrough which i does so. If we pose he quesion “Why does race sill ma-

er so much?” wih regard o adverising, he reducive answer would be

“profi.” If adverising’s role is o creae aspiraional imagery and brand

idenificaion for consumers, hen people in ads should look somehing

like heir inended U.S. audience, in which one ou of hree people iden-

ify hemselves as African American, Hispanic, Asian, Naive American, or

some oher nonwhie minoriy. Adverising reflecs bu also creaes dif-

ference, and boh hese sraegies are inended o furher brand ideni-

ies and consumer idenificaion. Niche advertising does his in specialized

ways, by argeing subsecions of he populaion, creaing ads ha address

hem specifically, and placing hese in media ha is hough o appeal o

hem. Multicultural advertising is one ype of niche adverising; i arges

ehnic and racial minoriies hrough in-culture andin-language messaging.Beginning wih Jews and blacks in he 1960s—groups ha were some-


13/49


imes reached by deparmens wihin general marke agencies—and His-

panic and Asian consumers from he 1970s onward, muliculural agen-

cies atemped o reach audiences from hese groups hrough sraegies

ha differed from mainsream adverising. Ye large, mulinaional gen-

eral market agencies, as hey are called in indusry parlance, have also

sough o reconceive of he mainsream in ways ha more cenrally in-

clude minoriies.

Defining Normal

Consumers idenify wih brands on many differen levels, bu I argue ha

race and ehniciy remain cenral o consrucions of brand ideniy and

consumer idenificaion in he Unied Saes. As each U.S. Census pro-vides new daa abou minoriy populaions, markeing has followed sui

and atemped o reach hese consumers as direcly as possible. Since he

2010 Census especially, he inclusion of minoriies in general marke ad-

verisemens in ways ha are no disparaging or mocking has increased,

allowing general marke adverising execuives o display heir experise

in reaching African American, Hispanic, and Asian audiences. Using he

corporae-friendly erm diversity, hey represen wha markeers call he

“new normal” as marked by difference, conceived in inoffensive and some-imes ambiguous ways. Anoher reason why race sill maters so much can

be found in a consideraion of he people who make ads and how heir

own subjeciviy inersecs wih clien expecaions o shape his work. Te

New York Ciy Human Righs Commission and oher eniies have alleged

ha he American adverising indusry has made minimal progress in di-

versifying is ranks in he pas fory years. If his is he case, how does his

predicamen bear on creaive work in muliculural adverising aimed a

minoriies, ofen made by minoriies who are expeced o embody he dif-

ferences hey represen? How migh i play ou in general marke adveris-

ing, where a broader culure of whieness pervades agencies and creaive

renderings of wha is normal and aken as objecive fac?

Over he course of his book I will argue ha he American adverising

indusry, like much of corporae America, has been shaped by economic

and poliical shifs during he pas several decades. Tese shifs, marked by

he civil righs era, muliculuralism, and currenly he noion of a “pos-

racial” Unied Saes, have led o changes in discourse abou ehnic and

racial difference. Capialism and race have long been inerwined, and hecurren ieraion of his relaionship is eviden in corporae America’s ver-


14/49

THE P ITCH • 5

sion of diversiy, a formulaion ha recognizes ehnic and racial difference

as decoupled from inequaliy and prejudice. Diversiy, however, is anyhing

bu apoliical; i conains ensions ha arise from geopoliical concerns

of U.S. miliarized conflic, relies on biopoliical ways of racking migra-

ion and couning bodies and heir consumer rends hrough he U.S. Cen-

sus, and furhers capialis neworks ha link individuals and indusriesin differen locaions. Such a concepion of diversiy furhers he culure

of whieness ha pervades corporae America and shapes is noions of

normal while i also makes invisible he work ha normal does o obscure

racism, discriminaion, and prejudice.

Te highly subjecive concep of normal is differenly undersood by

hose who work in he corporae world of adverising and hose on he ou-

side looking in. One hing his book will show is how differen normal can

look depending on where one sands wihin corporae America, especially

when i comes o race, ehniciy, and language. Elizabeh Povinelli has pro-

vocaively suggesed ha “he ordinary” does no simply exis; raher i is

a projecion of numerous saisical ordinaries. In adverising he noion

of normal can be considered a collecion of aspirational norms—how diver-

siy looks in an ideal world and how ha world can be rendered wihou

looking like an adverisemen. One of he processes I invesigae is how

cerain values come o be considered normal and wha he consequences

are of having ha version prevail in commercial media. I remains o be

seen wheher muliculural agencies ha render ehniciy and languagein highly specific ways or general marke agencies ha have sough o in-

. Bes Buy Super Bowl spo sarring Amy Poehler and Jake Choi (2013).


15/49


crease he overall inclusion of nonwhie acors in heir ads will win ou,

bu he compeiion cerainly seems o be on. Te sakes are clear: here

are over 100 million minoriies in he Unied Saes, and reaching hem

hrough adverising has become a op prioriy. By looking a everyday

ineracions among adverising execuives and beween hem and heir

cliens I consider how agencies full of smar, educaed people, many of

whom are minoriies or oherwise espouse liberal, progressive poliics, can

sill make ads ha are publicly called ou as racis.

A broader aim of his book is o see he poenial of adverising for

furhering a poliics of aniracism, even while he adverising indusry’s

goals are of course very differen. Millions of people labor for corporaions

worldwide, and academic criiques of hem fall wihin a double bind of

ehical complexiies when offering an accoun of he posiive and negaivework hey do. Unlike he invesmen bankers and hedge fund managers

who epiomize corporae America in ciies like New York, mos adveris-

ing execuives I me saw hemselves as working in a differen echelon of

corporae America, one premised on he unending social promise of doing

good creaive, of empowermen hrough consumpion, and of bringing

humor, originaliy, and small burss of fleeing pleasure. Alhough drawn

from a very differen conex and lieraure, James Ferguson’s “poliics of

he ‘ani-’” is useful here. Ferguson argues ha i is somewha predicablefor anhropologiss and he Lef o rail agains neoliberal forms of gover-

nance bu no sugges any viable alernaives. He urges anhropologiss o

hink creaively and imagine he possibiliies of recen ransformaions in

governmen and spaial organizaion, o find he conemporary possibili-

ies of wha we acually do wan o see.

When considering Ferguson’s challenge in his ligh, how can we hink

abou commercial media in ways ha do no immediaely condemn i

for is superficialiy, is reducive imagery, and is poenial o reproduce

sereoypes? If we could see i doing somehing differen, wha would ha

look like? I realize ha Ferguson’s discussion abou governmenaliy, aid

organizaions, and pro-poor acivism in Africa akes on issues of a differ-

en order and purpose, bu he quesions he raises can be adaped o he

subjec of adverising: Wha would we like o see adverising do, if wha

i is doing now is no o he liking of criical scholars and media-lierae

consumers alike? Barnor Hesse has writen, “I is no simply he posracial

horizon ha confounds he heoreical criique of racism, bu i is also he

concep of racism iself ha confounds he criique. Tis is now he vialphase of he so-called race quesion.” o apply his line of quesioning o


16/49

THE P ITCH • 7

he adverising indusry, I ask, Wha makes commercial communicaionracis? Is i exclusion based on cerain characerisics? Is i discrimina-

ion? Or is i he unequal reliance on cerain individuals for inellecual

and whie-collar labor ha ulimaely shapes social values a a socieal

level? Pu anoher way, if adverising execuives do no wan o be racis,

and he cliens who fund he adverising do no wan o be racis, and he

media oules do no wan o be racis, hen wha would need o happen

in corporae America o bring an aniracis agenda o he forefron of ad-

verising developmen and producion? My approach is o deconsruc he

idea of normal as an objecive social fac in adverising and consider how

nauralized versions of race and ehniciy, wha migh be called normal,

come o be. Normal is a erm I heard rouinely among ad execuives in ways

ha rendered subjecive noions of social life and difference as commonly

held beliefs shared by all. Troughou his book, and especially in he con-

clusion, I reurn o he poliics of he ani- o see wha can be learned from

analyzing he broader dynamics of capialism, race, and media ha gov-

ern he adverising indusry and how economic and poliical ideologies

ha come o bear on culural and linguisic choices ulimaely consiuediversiy.

. Nissan Chinese American spo feauring in-language voice-over and Chinese

American family (2013).


17/49


Categories and erms

By considering he adverisemen from an indusry perspecive—ha is,

a fifeen- or hiry-second film, soundscape, or work of ar ha srives o

ell a sory, be eneraining, and be auhenic—I consider wha culure and

language mean in he conex of adverising diversiy. I do so by focusing

on Asian American adverising as a par of broader processes of commer-

cial media producion, represenaional sraegies, and capialis agendas.

Asian American adverising is a produc of more han he adverising in-

dusry; i emerged from he “new immigraion” ha occurred afer 1965,

he poswar rise in consumer and youh culure, muliculural ideologies

ha celebrae heriage languages and culure, and a corporae world ha

welcomes racial minoriies who are willing o do culural and linguisicwork for hire. Ta Asian Americans—especially he five larges groups,

Chinese, Korean, Filipino, Asian Indian, Vienamese, and, on he Wes

Coas and Hawai‘i, Japanese and Pacific Islanders—consiue a viewing

public is a claim ha many general marke adverising agency execuives

find spurious. Numbering jus over 15 million (alone or in combinaion)

in he 2010 U.S. Census, hey consiue barely 5 percen of he oal U.S.

populaion. Unlike Lainos, who a 50 million consiue 17 percen of he

overall U.S. populaion and have a leas wo full-ime elevision channelsha feaure original conen, Asian Americans have a handful of saellie

elevision channels ha pull conen from Asia, weekly program blocks on

local access cable, and various prin media wih relaively small circula-

ions. So why boher o arge hem a all? If we are o believe he ad execu-

ives who pich heir services o poenial cliens, i is because his group

is believed o have he highes purchasing power and per capia income of

any group, including whies. Tese saisics have been qualified and even

conesed, as I discuss in chaper 1, bu remain valid and apparenly quie

influenial. Major challenges, however, oppose hese enicing saisics.

Wih several differen languages and orhographies, no o menion na-

ionaliies, religions, and colonial pass, he Laino adverising approach

of using one variey of Spanish and downplaying ehnonaional differ-

ences simply does no work for Asian American adverising. Raher, Asian

American adverising coninually grapples wih how o creae and produce

messaging aimed a specific Asian ehnic groups ha is broad enough o

index he caegory of Asian American.

Te ehnographic examples presened in his book are drawn from myfieldwork in adverising agencies. In mos cases, unless I am describing


18/49

T HE P I TC H • 9

he hisory of a specific agency (mosly in chaper 1), and in secions of

his inroducion, chaper 1, and he conclusion in which I discuss he

growh and developmen of markeing approaches o diverse audiences,

I have changed he names of people, agencies, and brands. Real namesgenerally include a surname as well as a ile, o differeniae hem from

pseudonyms. All of he excerps from meeings and creaive conversaions

are from one Asian American agency based in New York Ciy, and iner-

views and observaions are drawn from fieldwork in Asian American agen-

cies in New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, as well as general marke

agencies in New York. Mos of hese Asian American agencies are founded,

owned, or operaed by individuals of Asian descen; some are currenly

owned by a larger media conglomerae. Te individuals who develop and

produce hese ads are predominanly Asian American and perform his

caegory in a variey of ways for heir cliens, for heir colleagues in he

adverising indusry, and among hemselves. Teir performances of affec

and ideniy offer a glimpse ino he minue negoiaions of creaive con-

ceps, inricae choices abou language varieies and ranslaions, and finer

aspecs of casing individuals and direcing hem in prin, elevision, and

radio ads. aken ogeher, he corporae work of commercial media pro-

ducion and he represenaions hey yield provide a window ino inersec-

ions of race, capialism, and he producs of is labor in he weny-firs-cenury Unied Saes.

. Mercedes-Benz in-culure and in-language prin ad for Filipino American

consumers (2004).


19/49


Before I elaborae on he heoreical concerns of he book, I offer glosses

on some of my erminology. Ethnoracial orethnorace combines he erms

ethnicity—referring o differences of naionaliy, religion, language, and

culural heriage ha can be defined by insiuions such as he U.S. Cen-

sus and pu ino social pracice, or by communiies and socieies in ways

ha may or may no evenually ge recognized by more formal eniies—

and race, referring o U.S. Census caegories under which ehniciies are

grouped. Tese are no muually exclusive and someimes overlap; for ex-

ample, he caegory Hispanic can be classified as whie Hispanic or non-

whie Hispanic. Wih he Asian caegory, here is less ambiguiy abou race,

as Asian consiues a single racial caegory wih various ehniciies as well

as “Oher Asian” lised wihin i. Te erm ethnorace was no prevalen in

adverising agencies; hey preferred ethnicity, which hey used o refer ospecific groups, wheher racial (i.e., Asian or Asian American) or ehnic

(Chinese, Korean, ec.), or he erm diversity when referring o social dif-

ference in general. Usually diversity indexed differences associaed wih

race or ehniciy, bu i could also be used o refer o (lesbian, gay,

bisexual, or ransgender) issues, differenly abled individuals, and oher

underrepresened groups. In hose conexs where ehnoracial difference

was made explici—usually in muliculural adverising—adverising ex-

ecuives mos commonly used he erms African American or black forpopulaions living in he Unied Saes, African for recen immigrans from

Norh Africa, Hispanic for Laino or Chicano, and Asian for Asian American

(a erm hey also used o alk abou Asia he coninen).

Wihin he caegory of Asian, ad execuives generally dropped he

“American” and simply referred o groups as Chinese, Vienamese, and so

on. Tey also used he U.S. Census–derived erm Asian Indian for Indians

and did no include individuals from oher regions of he subconinen in

his designaion. I reain heir usage when quoing or paraphrasing bu

also use he more common academic erms in my analysis, such as Asian

American and South Asian American when addressing caegories broader

han jus Indians. erms such as corporate America and whiteness are de-

fined in conexs of use, and heir use is no negaive; raher hey are in-

ended o conjure a broader seting and collecion of pracices in which

adverising is developed and produced. Finally, I use he erm racialization

o consider how cerain social meanings become linked o paricular racial

caegories and how hese meanings are veted and someimes ransformed

in everyday encouners. I look a his process in aciviies such as creaivebrainsorms, in which ad execuives conjure paricular culural atribues


20/49

THE P I TCH • 11

of Asian Americans, as well as in ineracions beween ad execuives and

heir cliens in which hey embody and perform his caegory as a marker

of auheniciy and legiimacy for he work hey produce. Racializaion in

he adverising indusry, as in oher secors of corporae America, operaes

such ha individuals ac as diversiy expers based on heir ehnic and lin-

guisic heriage raher han formal skills or knowledge hey may have ac-

quired. Tis wide range of erms signals he separae bu overlapping agen-

das of adverising execuives and cliens, as well as my own as an academic,

of puting ino words he work of adverising.

THEORETICAL ORIENTATIONS

Several lieraures have influenced my culural and linguisic anhropo-logical concepion of hese ideas, including criical race heory, criical

ehnic sudies, Asian American sudies, and media sudies. One of he ap-

proaches I foreground in paricular is o bring criical ehnic sudies ino

conversaion wih linguisic anhropology. I am cerainly no he firs o

do his, as Jane Hill, Michael Silversein, Bonnie Urciuoli, and ohers have

alked abou language and racializaion in U.S. media. My goal is o use

hese lieraures o analyze he ehnographic examples ha follow. Tere

are admitedly some sumbling blocks o his approach; mos apparen aremehod and scale. Linguisic anhropology ends o focus on microlevel

ineracions, while criical ehnic sudies ends o apply broader heorei-

cal claims in he analysis of exs (lieraure, film, elevision, adverise-

mens, ec.). An ehnographically informed analysis of he developmen

and producion of ehnoracial represenaion is bound o be less nea and

orderly han analyzing compleed exs. Bridging scales of inquiry is an on-

going challenge, and he book accordingly oggles beween differen levels

of analysis.

Assemblages of Diversity

A cenral concep I employ o do his bridging is “he assemblage,” begin-

ning wih Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guatari’s inroducion of he concep

and he numerous ways i has been analyzed and applied in he years afer

is inroducion in he mid-1990s. Deleuze and Guatari describe he as-

semblage as a “field of muliple maneuvers,” as emporally achieved and

open o ransformaion as i endures and circulaes. Tey emphasize he“expressive poenial” of he assemblage in ways ha can accommodae


21/49


change wihou srucuralis causaliy. Assemblage is a useful analyic o

undersand adverising developmen and producion as spaially and em-

porally delimied evens. Te concep allows me o illusrae he inersec-

ion of compeing ineress and vanage poins a a paricular momen in

American hisory, global capialism, and communicaion. Ben Anderson

explains ha assemblages are “provisional uniies ha may hemselves

have ‘emergen’ or ‘complex’ causaliy ha is irreducible o heir compo-

nen pars,” while Jasbir Puar develops he Deleuzian noion of an even

as “an assemblage of spaial and emporal inensiies, coming ogeher,

dispersing, reconverging.”

Te assemblage has been producively used in a number of disciplines;

for anhropology, George Marcus and Erkan Saka sugges ha i holds

grea poenial as well as challenges for ehnography precisely because iallows for he discussion of social formaions ha do no endure across

ime and space. Such an applicaion is ricky for ehnography because how

assemblages come ino being and how hey are perceived can be somewha

open-ended. Marcus and Saka wrie, “Assemblages are hus finie, bu hey

have no specific or disincive life-span; hey do no have a specific em-

poraliy. Furhermore, assemblages have no essence. . . . Te assemblage

is producive of difference (non-repeiion). I is he ground and primary

expression of all qualiaive difference.” Exending his concepion of as-semblage, which seems quie immaerial, I am ineresed in he maeri-

aliy of assemblages and heir consrucion. I use he concep o consider

how emporally and spaially circumscribed meanings of race and ehniciy

inersec wih semioics of language use and visual culure, and he ways

hese are veted beween eniies and produced and circulaed hrough

media. I use he concep o focus on he acual assembling ha happens

in he adverising process, beginning wih how cerain ypes of poliically

informed demographic daa colleced by he U.S. Census are used o jusify

he creaion of cerain ypes of markeing effors, like muliculural mar-

keing; how hese inform planning and sraegy of an ad campaign; and he

way a paricular ad looks, sounds, and feels.

While mos formulaions of assemblage do no atend explicily o lan-

guage, a leas no beyond referenial meanings, I would like o exend as-

semblage o bring ogeher differen levels of significaion. Assemblages

also allow me o examine finer aspecs of adverising messages vis- à-vis

bodies, sound, and affec ha are all carefully seleced, veted, and final-

ized and how ehnoracial difference is managed in media conexs owardhe end of profiabiliy. My approach is semioic, giving atenion o boh


22/49

THE P ITCH • 13

he linguisic and he maerial dimensions of he adverising process. Jil-

lian Cavanaugh and I have ermed his emergen field language materiality

o draw atenion o he maerial in linguisic significaion, a dimension

ha had been somewha overlooked in discussions of language and con-

ex, poliical economy, and language ideology. Elsewhere I have looked a

he power of commodiies as hey inerac wih narraive and heir shif-

ing social meanings as hey circulae, as well as a broader inersecions

beween language and maerialiy, wih special atenion o auheniciy

and value. By materiality I mean he properies of ads beyond language or

he commodiies hey may feaure. I am ineresed in sound and subsrae,

in hinking how elemens inerac as qualiies and properies o assemble

ino somehing social ha would index diversiy. In oher words, I do no

wan o reduce my concern wih maerialiy o a reificaion of ourselves as“subjec, social relaions, or sociey,” as Daniel Miller has cauioned. Tis

will be carried ou in a number of ways, including exploraions of linguis-

ic maerialiy, or considering language in he same frame as he maerial

dimensions of adverising, such as how language and culure are objeci-

fied, how language akes on maerial qualiies in adverisemens, and he

ways mealevel creaive and producion aciviies enable paricular ypes

of semioic work. Tese conceps allow me o bring o life his maerial and

discursive world and enable me o more fully illusrae coness of exper-ise, auheniciy, and ehnoracial assemblages.

Tus my agenda for using he concep of assemblage is hreefold: firs,

o demonsrae spaial, emporal, and semioic coningency in ways ha

hisoricize and make poliically relevan he culural and linguisic ideolo-

gies ha underpin adverising developmen and producion; second, o

invesigae modes of producion and quesions of circulaion, including

he poliics of creaive conceps, rademark, ownership, and reinscripion;

hird, because recepion is no limied o any one semioic plane, o con-

sider he linguisic, visual, maerial, affecive, and sensorial dimensions

of developing and producing an adverisemen in ways ha can accom-

modae all hese modaliies. Considering diversiy in adverisemens as

ehnoracial assemblages offers insigh ino why ads look and sound he

way hey do, how hey circulae, and he inended and unexpeced ways

hey are consumed. Te creaion of assemblages can be seen in he every-

day work of adverising developmen and producion, as well as in nego-

iaions and coness abou represenaion. Tese can ake he form of

broader culural conceps and ideological asserions abou paricularehnoracial groups, such as ha Chinese Americans value kinship or ha


23/49

. MassMuual Asian Indian American in-culure prin ad

feauring a Diwali rangoli (colored powder) design (2011).


24/49

THE P I TC H • 15

Souh Asian Americans end o rely on he recommendaions of heir so-

cial neworks for cerain goods and services. Tey can also be found in he

minuiae of semioic deails, such as he wording of he ad, he accen in

a voice-over, and he precise look of he visuals. How assemblages are in-

erpreed emporally and spaially by differen paries underscores heir

coningen naure and he work hey do o furher paricular noions of

racializaion, aniracism, acivism, and social ransformaion.

Diversity and Capitalism

“Diversiy is no o be good, diversiy is no o be fair, diversiy is no o be

liked by differen people. Diversiy is business. And if you wan o conduc

business wih people, you can’ ignore hem. You can’ insul hem. Youcan’ alk down o hem. You’ve go o alk to hem,” Douglass Alligood,

one of he firs African American men o work in general marke adveris-

ing, said o me. As Mr. Alligood’s decades of experience have shown him,

he imporance of diversiy has seadily increased since he 1960s, and he

climae of corporae America has shifed o accommodae diversiy in ligh

of economic and poliical shifs. Neoliberal ideologies of capialism shape

how differences of ehniciy, race, gender, and sexualiy are given marke

values and have become he basis of profi-making and mass-mediaedrepresenaion in he new economy. Te heoris Michel Callon, wih

ohers, has remarked ha “value” is no merely an economic fac bu is also

a social achievemen, coningen on culural as well as maerial processes.

I exend his inquiry o look a wha ypes of economic as well as social

values are accomplished hrough culural, maerial, and language- based

processes, atending especially o he social and linguisic ineracions and

acors ha underpin hem. I build from Kris Olds and Nigel Trif, who

have idenified “culural circuis of capial” as “able o produce consan

discursive-cum-pracical change, wih considerable power o mold he con-

en of people’s work lives as well as produce more general culural models”

ha affec sociey on a broader level. In his book I look a how culural

circuis of capialism—as eviden in cerain profi-generaing enerprises

such as adverising and markeing—are involved in he producion and

circulaion of racial and ehnic formaions. In my firs book, Desi Land , I

sared o look a how broader movemens of capial and echnology shape

everyday lives, and I have since urned my atenion o adverising as a

differen se of culural and linguisic formaions ha have also emergedfrom new configuraions of capial.


25/49


Focusing on he work of capialis businesses raher han he move-

men of capial iself allows me o analyze he producion of racial and

ehnic meanings in a variey of commercial media projecs and how hey

affec he lives of individuals involved in heir making. Capialism has re-

lied on changing desires and needs as much as echnology, and here we

see boh a work. Wha is useful abou anhropological approaches o he

new economy is ha hey offer counerpoins o economic analyses ha

nauralize he forces of he marke and insead invesigae he social and

culural relaionships ha underpin hem. As par of her ehnographic

sudy of capialism, Karen Ho focused on how he experiences of inves-

men bankers are “horoughly informed by culural values and he social

relaions of race, gender, and class.” Her agenda was o “porray a Wall

Sree sho hrough wih embodimen, color, and pariculariy.” LikewiseI aim o capure how noions of diversiy are gauged hrough a capialis

lens and how social meanings abou ehniciy and race emerge from capi-

alism as well.

Te ideology of neoliberalism has been shown o bring abou numer-

ous changes in how we assess value, accomplishmen, produciviy, and

social meanings in corporae conexs. Neoliberalism is an economic

model in which markes deermine value wih minimal sae inervenion.

David Harvey has raced linkages beween deregulaion and loan-makingpracices o accoun for he rise of he marke as a force of social power

and how marke forces can deermine he value of individuals and heir

work. Wihin his realm, I am mos concerned wih a dynamic ha Po-

vinelli has idenified as follows: “Neoliberalism works by colonizing he

field of value—reducing all social values o one marke value—exhausing

alernaive social projecs by denying hem susenance.” If diversiy has

a marke value, as Mr. Alligood and numerous ohers in adverising sug-

gesed, hen represening i becomes a compeiive arena. Te noion ha

he “bes” approaches will be rewarded by marke forces underscores ha

“neoliberalism is no a hing bu a pragmaic concep—a ool—in a field of

muliple maneuvers among hose who suppor and benefi from i, hose

who suppor and suffer from i, and hose who oppose i and benefi from

i neverheless.”

Race is insrumenal o capialism, as Manning Marable and ohers

have argued, such ha “racialized capialism” draws atenion o he spe-

cific ways ha labor is parsed according o racial difference. Neoliberalism

and racialized capialism shape no only financial decisions bu also howpeople alk abou and represen race. Neoliberal ideologies are eviden in


26/49

THE P ITCH • 17

how diversiy is conceived and operaionalized in corporae work environ-

mens and in creaive work abou ehnoracial difference. Here assemblage

illusraes how diversiy is creaed, circulaed, and reformulaed for com-

mercial purposes, bu i alone does no ell he sory. Affec is very impor-

an as well, and he affecive labor of alk and embodimen are inegral o

how cerain agendas ge accomplished while ohers are no as easily exe-

cued. Bonnie McElhinny elaboraes on “he new regimes of self associaed

wih neoliberalism,” including aduls being responsible, auonomous, self-

sufficien, and enrepreneurial. Such processes are “mulimodal” and

span differen domains of ineracion; hey affec how people are ex-

peced o communicae, he sances hey ake, and how hey challenge or

accommodae one anoher communicaively. I am ineresed in he “sof”

or “people” skills ha are conveyed hrough affecive performance andparicipaion in shared modaliies of ineracion.

Diversity as Qualisign

Ehnoracial assemblages and performances of affec shape diversiy in cor-

porae America, bu diversiy remains elusive as a concep. Sara Ahmed has

writen ha diversiy is difficul o pin down because i has no clear refer-

en; i does no poin us o “a shared objec ha exiss ouside of speechor even necessarily creae somehing ha can be shared.” Urciuoli righly

observes ha people mean differen hings when hey use he erms di-

versity andculture and ha he same words have been recruied ino dif-

feren regisers ha each glosses differenly. Her poin is ha hey may

seem inerchangeable bu acually can index differen meanings and his-

ories. Given his elusiveness, I find qualisigns helpful in undersanding

how referens are defined and meanings are generaed in ways ha ake

on normaive values. In her widely cied work on he Gawa sociey, Nancy

Munn conceives of value making in erms of qualisigns of value. Building

on he semioic approach of he American philosopher Charles Sanders

Peirce, Munn idenifies qualisigns as useful because “hey exhibi some-

hing oher han hemselves in hemselves.” Qualisigns are iconic signs,

in ha hey bear a resemblance o ha which hey represen, ye hey only

signify when “bundled” wih maerial forms o convey socially relevan

meanings. Munn maserfully illusraes how he Gawa communiy “cre-

aes iself as he agent of its own value creation.” Her analysis relies on boh

maerial and linguisic elemens o illusrae qualisigns, and in his bookI consider how diversiy can ac as a qualisign of linguisic maerialiy. Di-


27/49


28/49

THE P ITCH • 19

focus groups or asked o commen ouside of heir areas of raining and

experise, solely on he grounds of heir race and ehniciy.

Tese oken few nowihsanding, whieness hrives in American ad-

verising in large par because i is embedded in he noion of a “color-

blind” or “posracial” America. Evelyn Alsulany noes ha he posrace

idea began afer he Civil War, as a way of marking progress since he imes

of slavery. Some mark he elecion of Barack Obama as America’s firs black

presiden as he ascension of posrace, bu arguably muliculuralism did

some of his work as well, as Jodi Melamed has oulined in her concep of

“neoliberal muliculuralism.” Tese are admitedly differen erms, bu

hey seem o accomplish similar ends. In sudying he producion and cir-

culaion of markeable images of Lainos, Arlene Davila idenifies he im-

porance of color blindness o he rise of neoliberalism and is role in con-sricing dialogues abou inequaliy. Insead here is a greaer emphasis

on markeabiliy and which aspecs of diversiy may prove o be profiable.

Indeed, as Davila argues, “he use of sympaheic represenaions o creae

he illusion of a posracial era is how racism operaes now, hrough a de-

nial of iself.” Whie characers remain a he “cener of consciousness,”

and minoriies are respecfully included in ways ha do no hreaen U.S.

excepionalism.

In his sense corporae America has long been coded as a whie place,one ha does cerain work in openly addressing racism while perpeua-

ing i in new packaging. Similar o Daniel Hosang’s argumen ha whie-

ness says dominan in sae poliics because whie poliicians don’ speak

“as whies” bu presen hemselves as racially unmarked, so oo is whie-

ness in American adverising racially unmarked. Criical race heoriss

have noed he cenraliy of blackness and black bodies o his ascension

of whieness as he mark of moderniy. Suar Hall has cauioned agains

such essenializing, as i “nauralizes and dehisoricizes difference, mis-

aking wha is hisorical and culural for wha is naural, biological, and ge-

neic.” Ye his approach acually works bes in adverising because ad ex-

ecuives wan o represen difference wih as litle conroversy as possible.

Te concep of diversiy here leads o a deparure from more criical erms

by acing as shorhand for inclusion, and confronaions abou racism are

avoided a all coss. Tis approach is in line wih wha he linguisic an-

hropologis Jane Hill has so defly illusraed in Te Everyday Language of

White Racism and he sociologis Edward Bonilla-Silva has conended in

Racism without Racists. Racis ideologies and discourse are couched in he


29/49


language of joking, humor, or simply business, and because no one inends

o be racis, hey are absolved of any offense hey may inadverenly creae.

Allegaions of racism are downplayed as misundersandings abou good-

naured fun or are counerbalanced wih evidence of nonracis work and

collegialiy wih minoriy coworkers. Especially because racism in ads, as

well as in he adverising indusry, incurs negaive publiciy, cliens work

hard o seer clear of anyhing ha would cross he line from being “edgy”

o being “conroversial,” as ad execuives explained i. I presen evidence

of hese dynamics in he developmen and producion of he creaive work

of ads and in ineracions beween Asian American ad execuives and heir

corporae cliens o illusrae how racializaion happens and how norms of

whieness are mainained, despie good inenions o respec ehnoracial

difference and minoriy individuals.Te reducion of racism o he figure of he racis allows srucural and

insiuional forms o become obscured. Having me over wo hundred

indusry professionals during he course of his projec, I did no find a

single one who performed he role of racis openly. I did, however, find

environmens pervaded by whieness and he use of he erm diversity o

emphasize anyhing ouside of i. Te ype of poliical correcness ha

emerged alongside muliculural agendas was quickly defined as oppres-

sive and even absurd, and color blindness was an ideology ha ad execu-ives in general marke agencies seemed o embrace. In my view inerro-

gaing whieness as economic and social advanage is quie differen from

condemning whie people. As long as racialized spaces are mainained—in

his case, diversiy being reaed as a special ineres—single acors do no

need o decide o discriminae in order for racism o persis or, as Lipsiz

pus i, for “space o be racialized and race o be spaialized.” In such

spaces, as Hall and ohers poin ou, liberal-minded individuals may “in-

adverenly paricipae” in reproducing racism. Muliculural adverising

execuives paricipaed in his cheerful concepion of diversiy bu were

no always able o avoid racis unpleasanness. In chapers 1 and 3 I con-

sider how adverising execuives manage heir affec o preserve he pleas-

an one of diversiy, regardless of racial or ehnic ension. Performing

alacriy in he face of racis jokes, reframing a clien’s culural ignorance as

an educaional momen, and embodying he difference hey are asked o

produce in heir ads are jus a few of he affecive sraegies I will discuss.


30/49

THE P ITCH • 21

Biopolitics and Racial Naturalization

Dimensions of he ehnoracial assemblage ha I am especially atuned

o are he geopoliics of how Asia and, by exension, Asian America has

shifed and coninues o change according o U.S. global policy and mili-

arized conflics and he biopoliics of how he U.S. populaion is divided

and couned by a Census Bureau ha redefines caegories of race and eh-

niciy as i sees fi. Te ways hese processes are influenced by adverising

and markeing, and he reciprocal effec he later may have on he former,

are boh relevan o making sense of ehnoracial assemblages. Biopoliics,

in bare erms, refers o inersecions of human life and poliics. Foucaul’s

wriings abou biopoliics and biopower have been insrumenal o under-

sanding governance, knowledge producion, new echnologies, geneics,and oher areas ha “illuminae he relaions beween life and poliics.”

Census Bureau caegories are deeply influenced by social and poliical for-

maions, as evidenced by he fac ha immigrans from Asia had lived in

America for over a cenury before he erm Asian American came ino par-

lance. Biopoliics eviden in he couning and caegorizing of he U.S. popu-

laion is he foundaion for muliculural adverising, and Asian American

ad execuives poin o census figures such as income and populaion con-

cenraions o furher heir own work. wo loosely conneced quesions ofbiopoliics emerge from hese dynamics and are considered in various por-

ions of he book: How migh he ways adverising execuives conceive of

groups and populaions shape hese caegories on upcoming U.S. Census

couns? How do forms of digial surveillance, enabled by smarphones and

oher echnologies, rack he physical bodies of Asian American con-

sumers as hey move hrough space and in paricular places?

Much has been writen since Henri Lefebvre heorized ha individuals

manipulae and inerac wih space, represen i, and code cerain spaces

wih socially consruced meanings. Neil Smih and Seha Low discuss

he resrucuring of public space in he weny-firs cenury; arguing ha

public space has been reprioriized, hey build on Lefebvre and invesi-

gae wha is currenly encompassed in wha he ermed he “producion

of space” o consider how people experience spaces. In a differen vein,

Sharon Zukin has discussed he social spaces of shopping and how con-

sumpion opporuniies ransformed public space. Developing srae-

gies based on how hey imagine consumers will inerac wih signs, digial

promoions, and experienial, place- based markeing, adverising agen-cies sand o furher ransform places as well as he acual spaces hrough


31/49


which branded messaging can circulae. Spaial concerns of managing

echnologies of power and producion are also imporan, in ha hey cre-

ae new ways of linking space wih consumpion pracices, ways ha uli-

maely aid in more effecive markeing sraegies in areas densely popu-

laed by Asian Americans.

Coness of who is bes able o represen America’s diversiy are evi-

den hroughou he book, especially in he ineracions Asian American

adverising execuives have wih heir cliens and how hey defend heir

work in an indusry ha does no uniformly see he value in heir argeed

approach. Like Mr. Alligood, numerous ad execuives were quie blun

abou diversiy being abou money and ha displaying diversiy in adver-

isemens and wihin agencies was abou generaing an awareness ha is

called for in he conemporary Unied Saes. Displaying experise aboudiversiy has accordingly become a sie of inense compeiion. Muli-

culural adverising, consising of agencies caering o Asian Americans,

African Americans, and Lainos, compees for cliens wih general marke

adverising. Especially since he 2010 Census, hese large agencies have

become far more explici abou heir abiliy o offer cliens “cross-culural”

and “oal marke” sraegies ha address diversiy; I discuss heir specific

approaches furher in chaper 4 and he conclusion.

How individuals are couned, grouped, and characerized as consumerswih paricular educaion and income levels, as well as heir “purchasing

power,” suggess how biopoliics works in adverising and how i shapes

racial and ehnic assemblages. Here my goal is consisen wih he argu-

men of Inderpal Grewal, who connecs biopoliics, or ways of classifying

and organizing bodies, wih he geopoliics of how naional boundaries are

drawn. She and ohers conend ha American sae imperialism has been

replaced by globally decenralized sources of power and ha America has

used inernaional and domesic pracices of excepionalism as a way o

circumven he policies o which i holds ohers accounable while i con-

inues o wield is influence hrough regimes and echnologies. I am iner-

esed in how American adverising concepualizes life in he Unied Saes,

how ha concepualizaion is accouned for and allied in he census, and

how hese are pu ogeher for capialis producion and consumpion.

Grewal shows ha hese configuraions have a major effec on diaspo-

ras and consumer culure, and his book similarly offers analyic lenses

hrough which o undersand how ad execuives invoke Asia, how Asians

in America are grouped and enumeraed in he census, and how hese con-ribue o knowledge producion abou difference in agencies and in ad-


32/49

THE P I TC H • 23

verisemens. While mos campaigns arge a single Asian ehnic group

a a ime, also significan are he ways individual execuions are groupedogeher by agencies o consiue he broader caegory of Asian American.

I view aspecs of Asian American creaive work as well as professional

ineracions hrough he framework of racial nauralizaion. As I have

explained elsewhere, racial nauralizaion refers o he work adverising

does o ransform Asian Americans from “model minoriies” o “model

consumers” and he use of consumerism o make claims of legiimacy and

naional belonging. Once exising ouside he bounds of he naion-sae,

as Claire Jean Kim illusraes, Asian Americans are slowly and selecively

being brough ino he fold of U.S. ciizenry as model consumers who are no

longer “forever foreigners,” o use Mia uan’s erm. Racial nauralizaion

involves he conversion of social and culural capial ino economic forms,

a process Pnina Werbner has illusraed wih Asians in he Unied King-

dom and Junaid Rana wih Asians in he Unied Saes. Devon Carbado

has used he erm racial naturalization in a legal conex o idenify which

pahs o ciizenship provide he greaes chances a legal nauralizaion. In

his exposiion of his concep, he grapples wih “why we migh concepual-

ize racism as a nauralizaion process” and how racism is a “echnology ofracializaion; indeed i is precisely hrough racism ha our American racial

. “SF Hep B Free,” a public healh campaign aimed a Asian Americans for

prevenaive hepaiis B screening (2010).


33/49


ideniies come ino being . . . socially siuaing and defining us as Ameri-

cans.” Carbado’s concepion, ha we are no “overdeermined by racism”

bu ha “racism is already a par of America’s social scrip, a scrip wihin

which here are specific racial roles or ideniies for all of us,” is helpful o

keep in mind inasmuch as corporae America is seeped in his ideology,

especially in erms of who is an exper abou diversiy. In Asian American

adverising his is largely accomplished hrough he work ha ad execu-

ives do as hey ransform Census Bureau caegories ino socially meaning-

ful represenaions. Signifying Asian American, a caegory encompassing

over a dozen naions whose unifying language is English, is an exercise in

biopoliical and spaial labor ha realizes Asian Americans as consumers

wih a presence in geographically precise “designaed marke areas.”

Sill hese specific racial roles or ideniies are open o remaking, andhis sor of refashioning is precisely wha adverising aims o underake in

is creaive work and, o some exen, in agencies. Evidence of his cones-

aion and shif can be found in he daa I discuss ha illusrae differences

among ad agencies and beween hem and cliens in ineracional syles,

noions of experise, and he labor ha produces capial via assemblages of

ehnoracial diversiy. Such condiions make he poliics of he ani-, espe-

cially aniracism, so much harder o sruggle agains—a poin ha Barnor

Hesse, David Goldberg, and ohers have noed abou capial’s abiliy o ob-scure racism and in some ways subsume i. Troughou he book I poin

ou how assemblages work o illusrae boh racis and aniracis posiions

in his sruggle and leave open possibiliies for change. I presen numerous

ehnographically illusraed discussions abou how corporae America pri-

oriizes, conceives of, and expends capial o atemp o shape assemblages

of ehnoracial diversiy. Te work ha producion does in making cerain

imagery seem normal and naural, how absrac conceps like he pos-

racial are rendered in adverising, and how immigrans wih paricular so-

cial and culural capial find heir way ino he upper echelons of corporae

America connec he makers of ads wih he represenaional work hey do.

Advertising, Media, and Race

Anhropological approaches o media producion and consumpion have

creaed a rich field of heoreical conceps and ehnographic pariculariies

ha dialecically link ideologies and acions of producers and he viewing

pracices of audiences. “Media worlds,” as Faye Ginsburg, Lila Abu-Lughod,


34/49

THE P ITCH • 25

and Brian Larkin have concepualized, underscore he dynamic possibili-

ies of media producion, among oher hings, in a variey of indusries

and locales. Media worlds consis of conexs of consumpion, in which

audiences engage wih various media in ways ha affec heir pracices

of ideniy making, communiy, and social affiliaions. Language ideolo-

gies, varieies, and uses, which I discuss furher in chaper 2, are also cen-

ral o media consumpion, and may be reshaped in urn as cerain me-

diaed language circulaes. Sudies of media consumpion are cerainly

relevan o consideraions of how audiences are imagined and how conen

is developed for hem. Ehnographies of media producion, such as Barry

Dornfeld’s sudy of public elevision producion in he Unied Saes, Jeff

Himpele’s work on Bolivian elevision producion, and ejaswini Gani’s

ehnography of he Bollywood film indusry, chronicle how audiences areimagined in he quoidian riuals and pracices of direcors, acors, agens,

and disribuors. Tese and oher works underscore ha ehnographi-

cally examining media producion is an excellen complemen o media

consumpion sudies because i brings o ligh processes of developmen

and conesaion ha are usually obscured in he final produc.

A rich body of ehnographic sudies of adverising has illusraed con-

ess beween agencies, cliens, and consumers. Cenered on quesions of

globalizaion in China, Japan, India, and Sri Lanka, hese sudies provideillusraive and varied evidence of how ad execuives imagine audiences in

hese naions, and I draw on hem hroughou he book. In he Wesern

Hemisphere, Daniel Miller’s analysis of adverising and globalizaion in

rinidad and Arlene Davila’s work wih Lainos in he Unied Saes and

ransnaionally across he Americas provide he mos relevan benchmarks

for my sudy. Idenifying and invesigaing he emergence and growh of

Lainos in adverising, also called Hispanic adverising, Davila oulines he

cornersones of muliculural adverising. Her firs sudy of adverising,

Latinos Inc., capured imporan dynamics of race and capialism ha I

build on and exend. As hese works illusrae, he adverising indusry has

a long hisory of creaing problems ha can be fixed only wih a paricular

produc or service. And like oher media, adverisemens acquire a life of

heir own once creaed and pu ino circulaion, especially when hey are

available for muliple viewings, commens, and discussions on Youube

and oher Inerne-based plaforms. Anhropological approaches o com-

modiies and consumpion are also par of his broader discussion, as hey

are inimaely linked o he developmen and producion of brand iden-


35/49


iy ha I focus on in his book. Tis generaive feedback loop includes

he ineracions of cliens wih he execuives hey commission o develop

ideniies for heir brands hrough ads, placemen in media (usually a com-

binaion of broadcas, digial, and oher plaforms), and responses from

consumers.

In an era when media has long been mobile, considering is impac in

diasporas creaes addiional possibiliies and opporuniies for circula-

ion and consumpion. Diasporic media consumpion, a opic I have ex-

plored in deph in anoher research conex, is cerainly imporan here.

Hamid Naficy’s pahbreaking work on Iranians in Los Angeles, Louisa

Schein’s work among Hmong in Minneapolis, and my earlier work wih

Souh Asian American eenagers in Silicon Valley and New York Ciy all

show he generaive possibiliies for ideniy and communiy-makingpracices. In discussing he imaginaive poenial of media in Asian dias-

poras, Purnima Mankekar and Louisa Schein draw atenion o how media

creaes cerain ypes of mobiliy. Mankekar asks how, even when people

are no mobile hemselves, media migh be ransporive and connecive

and engender opions beyond he conex of consumpion. Tis is a rope

ha Asian American adverising execuives have employed in a number of

ways by indexing homelands, suggesing possibiliies of lives lived else-

where, and using he affecive force of longing for homeland and belong-ing. A he same ime hese ad execuives also consider he simulaneiy

of media as a sie of mobiliy and he experienial poenial of goods and

services o bring people ogeher hrough shared media and communica-

ive plaforms. Tese ways of imagining Asian American consumers offer a

response o Mankekar and Schein’s quesion, quie relevan here, “How do

hese disconinuous hisories inflec culural producions by Asians hem-

selves?” As I discuss in chaper 1, money ransfer companies, insurance,

auomobiles, and oher producs offer agenive possibiliies for Asians in

he Unied Saes o bring abou change in Asia. Tey do so despie he

wide-ranging naional, ehnic, and linguisic heriages of heir imagined

audiences, by argeing ehnic groups eiher individually or as a collecive,

based on daa and knowledge abou economic and social rends.

In his sense, a poin of exploraion in his book is he way he migra-

ion experience is recas in erms of markeabiliy and how Asian Ameri-

cans’ nosalgia and senimen abou he naions hey have lef are refleced

in heir lifesyle, success, and accomplishmen as consumers. Mankekar

and Schein complicae represenaions of Asian men and women in a widerange of American and ransnaional conexs. Teir disincly American


36/49

THE P I TC H • 27

focus, like mine, brings o he fore cenral quesions of wha makes some-

hing “Asian” in America. Is i he rendering of Asian ideniies and sub-

jeciviies, consumpion of culure, use of language, or somehing else?

Adverising is explicily creaed wih inended audiences in mind, and

adverising’s main purpose is o convey messages o consumers in ways

ha creae idenificaion wih brands. Rober Sam and Ella Shoha re-

mind us ha media making is a social and inellecual projec, bu always

open-ended and suscepible o alernaive readings. Adverisemens, like

documens, acquire a life of heir own once creaed and pu ino circula-

ion. Asian American adverising capializes on hese imaginings and con-

cepualizes diaspora and naion, as well as he promise of movemen and

mobiliy, in is creaive conceps, arwork, and adverising copy. I exam-

ine his dynamic keeping in mind Fred Myers’s approach, which draws a-enion o he maerialiy of subjecs and objecs “in siuaions in which

human beings atemp o secure or sabilize—or limi—he flow of culure,

o urn culure ino propery form.” Myers describes Aboriginal paining

as a maerial and social pracice, and, wih very differen objecives, I con-

sider adverising as a maerial, linguisic, and capialis process wih social

impac and implicaions.

My ehnographic approach o adverising developmen and producion

allows me o examine no only represenaions such as adverisemens bualso linkages beween hese and he ideniies of he adverising execu-

ives involved in heir creaion. Deborah Poole idenified how anhropolo-

giss’ engagemens wih visual echnologies were largely in “he affecive

regiser of suspicion,” especially wih regard o race. Remarking largely on

early visual anhropological work and is atenion o he indigenous sub-

jec, Poole’s poin noneheless resonaes wih my projec of inerrogaing

commercial media for reproducing cerain ypes of racism hrough repre-

senaional and discursive sraegies. Such a criique is well esablished

wih regard o Asian Americans in a variey of media, including Holly-

wood, elevision, and adverising. For insance, regarding Asian Americans

in he media, Ken Ono and Vincen Pham ask, “Why do we sill see racis

media in a pos-race sociey?” Tey draw atenion o he ways hisori-

cal represenaions have “residual effecs” sill in play, a conenion ha

ohers who have looked a correlaions beween immigraion policy and

public represenaions have also made. In a relaed media conex, Rana

has noed ha he work of racializing Islam largely occurs hrough social

idenificaions—bodily compormen, dress, gender, and sexualiy—andha hese are depiced in media.


37/49


An imporan body of criical work analyzing exual represenaions of

race, as well as Asian Americans in media, underpins my observaions and

analyses. I have found helpful criical culural sudies and criical ehnic

sudies approaches, as suggesed by Sam and Shoha and execued by Al-

sulany and ohers, who have argued ha wheher images are “good” or

“bad” maters less han he ideological work hey do. For insance, Alsul-

any illusraes how elevision dramas play an imporan role in posrace

racism by including images ha could be consrued as good or bad. Show-

ing a Muslim as “good,” for insance, does no signal he end of discrimi-

naion agains American Muslims. Raher, good or bad image analysis can

slip ino moralism and draw atenion away from he complexiies of he

ideological work a paricular represenaion may do. In a differen media

conex, Judih Farquhar noes how aware media consumers are abouhe reducionism of images, and ad execuives credi heir audiences wih

similarly discerning abiliies. Tey hink long and hard abou which kind

of represenaion and message will accomplish heir desired ends and how

o make Asian Americans model consumers for cerain brands. Moreover

heir claims are carefully calibraed o mach wha hey believe will reso-

nae bes wih heir consumers.

exual analyses of adverising ha consider racial represenaion,

especially he prevalence of he model minoriy sereoype, have shownha his image coninues o be relevan in American adverising in ways

ha can furher he problemaic dynamic esablished beween Asian

Americans and oher minoriy groups in he original formulaions of his

sereoype. Wha is inriguing abou his curren urn of racial repre-

senaion is ha i makes far more sense economically o depic upwardly

mobile Asian Americans alongside, raher han in opposiion o, Lai-

nos and African Americans. Muliculural adverising relies on all hree

of hese groups coexising happily in consumer culure, and purchasing

power rumps race as a measure of differeniaion. In oher words, good

minoriies are good consumers. In fac wealhy consumers of all races are

valued. As I noed earlier, undersanding media producion is illusraive

in is own righ, and here is grea value in undersanding he process of

producing somehing ha ulimaely sirs conroversy, as he backsory

may no be as sraighforward as he end produc would sugges. Fore-

grounding hese emergen hemes, Advertising Diversity offers a look a

wha commercial media producion can ell us abou he perpeuaion of

racism, he ways new immigrans creae and negoiae race and ehniciy


38/49

T HE P I TC H • 29

in corporae America, and he discursive and maerial ways hese hings

are accomplished.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND ETHNOGRAPHIC FIELDWORK

In wha is perhaps only parially a ongue-in-cheek branding saemen,

Ulf Hannerz has suggesed ha anhropology’s agline should be “Diver-

siy Is Our Business” and ha “a sudy of diversiy remains he bes ani-

doe o unhinking ehnocenrism.” Ye diversiy seems o be everyone’s

business hese days. Te March 2013 issue of he Atlantic magazine fea-

ured a cover sory ha garnered much buzz among anhropologiss of ad-

verising, boh inside he academy and in he indusry. I feaured Red, one

of several prominen firms ha underake ehnographic research for hire.Te aricle, as well as oher recen accouns, suggess ha i is a good ime

o be an anhropologis in adverising. Anhropology is having a momen

in he ad indusry, especially he use of ehnography as a mehod o col-

lec marke research daa. Melissa Fisher and Greg Downey argue ha “he

corporae enchanmen wih culural anhropology’s wo iconic symbols—

culure and ehnography—mus be undersood wihin more widespread

developmens in he New Economy,” including business ehnography, and

an “inensified ineres in branding.” Anhropologiss are rouinely hiredfor accoun planning, branding, marke research, and audience esing. Re-

cen books exploring how anhropologiss engage in consumer research

and wha anhropology can offer adverising have atemped o bridge he

wo fields. Generally writen for corporae cliens, adverising indusry

execuives, and markeing sudens, hese works illusrae he impac ha

anhropologiss have had on adverising, especially in showing he value

of ehnographic research and how anhropological insighs on culure and

language can be effecively used o creae need and aspiraion.

As an anhropologis, I was cerainly a known eniy when I approached

agencies, bu doing academic ehnographic research did no earn me he

same welcome and saus as hose who worked in agencies. Douglas Holmes

and George Marcus offer he concep of “para-ehnography” as boh a de-

scripor and a mehodology for fieldwork encouners such as mine. Para-

ehnography refers o overlap in ineress and concerns beween anhro-

pologiss and heir subjecs. If anhropologiss and adverising execuives

are boh invesed in formaions of culure, language, visual represena-

ion, media producion, and audience recepion, how do heir objecives


39/49


and agendas differ from each oher? Marcus has writen abou he compli-

caed naure of such fieldwork; even when he ehnographic search for he

“naive poin of view” is welcome. He suggess ha “counerpars” raher

han “ohers” end o “share broadly he same world of represenaion wih

us,” and ha similariies beween anhropologiss and “managers of capi-

alism” may be greaer han wha we once hough. In such setings “anec-

doal daa” hold greaer value in illusraing he inerworkings of “cul-

ures of experise.” For Holmes and Marcus such daa signal “breaches

in echnocraic knowledge” and offer ways of “realigning he relaionship

beween ehnography and poliical economy.” Such an approach is help-

ful in hinking abou adverising developmen and producion as some-

hing oher han compleely negaive and oalizing, as earlier accouns

suggesed. Indeed my ime in corporae America was full of sories, de-scripions, recollecions, and cerainly anecdoes ha could be inerpreed

as parables, cauionary ales, sraegic plans, or simply lunchime baner.

Tere was much o be drawn from hese “hin” momens ha a he ime

seemed unconneced or unimporan, bu hey evenually allowed me o

ell a “hicker” version of an overall process, o echo Holmes and Marcus’s

use of he anhropologis Clifford Geerz’s erms.

Using ehnographic observaions, recorded conversaions, and iner-

views I conduced, as well as analyses of oher adverising and media rep-resenaions, I presen an inside look a he agendas and prioriies of he

corporae cliens who commission his work, he ad execuives who under-

ake i, he casing direcors who find he bodies o populae he ads, and

audience feedback abou ads, in ways ha updae and raise new quesions

abou he adverising process. Overall i was quie challenging o gain ac-

cess o he American adverising indusry, hough being an anhropology

professor probably helped. General markeing agencies were very hesian

o allow me o observe on an ongoing basis, bu hey did allow me o con-

duc inerviews, observe on a limied basis, and atend indusry evens. I

was permited o shadow ad execuives for a few days, inerview people in

various posiions, and hear heir houghs on diversiy, eiher when asked

or as voluneered, a he New York offices of hree large, mulinaional

agencies: , Ogilvy, and Young and Rubicam. I was able o visi wo

of hese agencies in 2008 and again in 2011. Addiionally, hrough an Ad-

verising Educaion Foundaion Visiing Professor Program Fellowship, I

spen wo weeks a Euro in Chicago in July 2010. o locae Asian

American agencies, I used he Asian American Adverising Federaion’s(3) websie o arrange visis o eigh agencies beween 2008 and 2012:


40/49

THE P I TCH • 31

in New York, Ad Asia, A Parnership, Admerasia, Communicaions,

and Kang & Lee; in Los Angeles, Inerrend and Group; and in San

Francisco, Dae Adverising. In New York I also visied he umbrella organi-

zaion Muliculural Markeing Resources, which creaes a sourcebook for

cliens wishing o reach muliculural markes, as well as he Adverising

Educaion Foundaion and he Associaion of American Adverising Agen-

cies. I addiionally atended numerous indusry evens ha hese eniies

held during Ad Week and a oher imes of he year.

I conduced, audio-recorded, and selecively ranscribed inerviews

wih adverising execuives a boh general marke and Asian American

adverising agencies. Te inerview forma was open-ended bu ailored

o he person’s ile and posiion in he agency. In general marke agencies

I asked ad execuives o describe heir work, recall deails of accouns hawen well and hose ha garnered conroversy, and relae heir houghs

on diversiy in heir work and in heir agency. In wo of hese agencies

I spen several days observing meeings and clien calls. In some Asian

American agencies I was graned greaer access. Te independenly owned

and operaed agencies were, by and large, more responsive and open o

speaking o me han hose held by larger media conglomeraes. In one,

which I call Asian Ads, I spen several monhs, four of hem coninuous,

observing he day-o-day aciviies of ad execuives and following severalaccouns. I was presen bu silen for hese recordings, and all names of

adverising execuives, cliens, and brands have been changed. All record-

ings have been selecively ranscribed, and numerous excerps, along wih

conexual informaion I observed in siu or a a differen poin in ime,

have been included in his ehnography. I presen ranscrips using a sim-

plified forma, feauring line numbers in he lef margin o call ou specific

uterances for analysis and limied noaions (including hose for overlap,

pauses, quoed speech, and emphasis) ha can be found in a ranscripion

key in appendix 1.

Focusing primarily on my ehnographic research, I limi my exual

analysis o ads whose producion I did no observe bu ha execuives dis-

cussed wih me, as when an accoun execuive or creaive showed me his or

her pas work and impared oherwise invisible deails abou he concep-

ion, copywriing, casing, shooing, and posproducion of he ad. Here

I employ wha Mankekar and Schein call “ehnoexual” analysis o offer

hisorically coningen and conexually driven readings of hese ads. My

ongoing ehnographic involvemen in hese agencies conribues o myexual readings of hese ads as a way o more fully undersand hem. Un-


41/49


able o collec acual audience feedback, I relied on wha ad execuives old

me abou how cerain ads esed wih focus groups, he broader public re-

sponse o a campaign, noable commens posed on Youube for cerain

ads, and how heir clien regarded he work.

I have aken several seps o comply wih he sipulaions of my In-

siuional Review Board agreemen as well as he nondisclosure agree-

mens (s) I signed in agencies, o proec individuals who were candid

abou heir opinions, and o avoid exposing sensiive informaion abou

cliens ha could indemnify agency execuives. In chaper 1 I selecively

use he real names of agencies and some individuals o race he emer-

gence of his indusry, bu I use pseudonyms for agencies and individuals

hroughou he remainder of he book. For hose accouns ha I observed

in pich, developmen, producion, or posproducion sages, I have cre-

Advertising Diversity by Shalini Shankar

Documents

Transcript of Advertising Diversity by Shalini Shankar