Calvin Klein’s Controversial “Kiddie Porn” Ads, a Strategic Marketing Plan or Ethical Nightmare free essay sample

However that was just child’s play in comparison to an ad campaign that ran in 1995 that gained the title the â€Å"kiddie porn ad† (Associated Press, 1999), and even prompted an FBI investigation. The campaign sparked a number of ethical questions including where a line should be drawn between stimulating and fashionable art and raunchy and exploitative content in advertisements. The set up was just this; the ad took place in what looked like to be a dingy wood-paneled basement that could have either been a glorified closet or a the room you wouldn’t want to find yourself after a night a bad decisions (Barlow, 2008). Either way, the environment was definitely not â€Å"kid friendly† to say the least. A photographer stood out of frame and used his deep and hair-raising voice to ask the scantily clad models a series of uncomfortable questions ranging from asking one of the models if he thinks he could rip off his shirt, and then promptly gawks over his physique. In another, the voice tells one of the female models that she â€Å"looks like a movie star† where she promptly replies, â€Å"I am†, he then proceeds to ask her â€Å"have you even made love in a film? and when she confirms, the voices simply lets out a murmured chuckle to himself and then the clip ends and fades to the Calvin Klein brand logo. The 30-second spots conjured up harsh criticism that even gained the attention of the FBI, where they investigated the possibility of child pornography charges (Barlow, 2008). Nothing was ever charged because all models were of age. The 6 million dollar ad wash shot by famed photographer Stephan Meisal who was best known for his seductive shots including Madonna in her 1992 book Sex. (Lilley). Even through the harsh aftermath this advisement conjured up, Klein went on to sell more than 100 million dollars worth of pants (Lilley). Klein insisted in a New York Times article that placing the â€Å"kiddie porn† stigma in his brand was not his intention, he said that the ads intended message was to show â€Å"that young people of today, the most media savvy yet, have a real strength of character and independence. They have a strong defined line of what they will and will not do. † (Lilley). The ad was eventually withdrawn in August 1996. I will use the TARES test that was discussed in chapter 3 of our text Media Ethics issues amp; Cases to depict my ethical standpoint on this particular persuasive message. The first segment of this test is to depict the truthfulness of the persuasive message. At first glance there isn’t much that the actors in this advertisement could actually lie about. The ominous voice asks a series of uncomfortable questions to the models who then answer to the best of their ability, not much to lie about there. However, how these questions are used to sell denim is another story. Not one time is the denim mentioned throughout the ad until the voice comments on how well the denim looks on one of the female models. Nowhere in this ad does it mention anything about the quality, fit or anything for that matter that would go through someone’s mind when it comes to purchasing a new pair of jeans. So I would say that this ad is more or less truthful although the truthfulness of its content has nothing to do with what it is trying to persuade the viewer to buy. The second segment of this test is to depict the authenticity of the advertisement. To me the authenticity of the ad is lacking in the sense that the ad seems to not be doing the right thing with â€Å"the right attitude† (Pojman 1998, 158). The ad does not make me think that there is a sincere need for me as the viewer to purchase those jeans as opposed to other brands. It only makes me think that if I wanted to be questioned and gazed at in a dimly lit basement by a man whom I cant see, I would purchase those jeans. Like mentioned above, Klein intended the message of this ad is to show the independence, strong will and character of young people; however I saw just the opposite. Even the models in the ad seemed to be a bit uncomfortable in the situation they were in even though they were getting paid to be there, which made me as a viewer even more uncomfortable. After viewing the ad I felt more like I would buy Calvin Klein jeans to get those poor models out of that creepy basement type room. Until the very end of the commercial where the Calvin Klein logo flashed across the screen, did I know that the point of the message was to sell denim. The matter of respect is the third tear in describing the ethical standpoint of the persuasive message. This is where I found the advertisement to have lacked the most. â€Å"His ads were absolutely pornographic,† Clara Marks a mother said during an interview about the advertisement in 1995, â€Å" They’re exploiting children† (Newsweek, 1995). It was more than just the exploiting of young people, again the models were all of legal age, but this was one of the first times that males were the main subjects of the exploitation. It seems to be normal to see young beautiful woman being the subject of sexually charged advertisements, but in this Calvin Klein ad the males were the ones that looked to be the most uncomfortable. It was not only uncomfortable for me as a viewer to hear a mature male voice gawking at the young male models, but the male models seemed to share the same awkwardness. Maybe if the ad was in a more socially appealing location and if the content was conducted more like an actual interview rather than a questioning before an elicit video was to take place there after, it would be easier for viewers to accept it into their daily dose of advertisement viewing. On the contrary, maybe it is just the will of adults to be worried about what this ad could do to the innocence of their children. â€Å"Where are the parents who are allowing their child to do this? † said Marks, â€Å"I wouldn’t allow my daughter to dress like that, and she knows it. † However on the contrary Jennifer, Clara’s 15-year-old daughter at the time responded to the ad in a much different way. â€Å"All my friends wear pants down past their underwear,† said Jennifer, â€Å"She’s got the body to wear it. Why not? I can’t believe there is controversy over this† (Newsweek, 1995). Maybe this really is an act of young people exposing their vulnerability, and showing that it is acceptable to be vulnerable and anxious as long as you do what you want, which is what Klein wanted the ad to prove. However I still think that there could have been a more socially acceptable way to prove this that didn’t involve a creepy old man questioning young beautiful models about their physique and personal escapades. The next factor to consider is the amount of equity within this advertisement. Is the recipient of the message on the same playing field as the message’s creator? It is far from the truth to say that Calvin Klein is a brand that likes to keep a wholesome, and family friendly image. This brand has been using the â€Å"sex sells† motto for as long as I can remember, and have been reaping the benefits ever since. When the â€Å"Kiddie porn† ad came into play it may have come as a shock to some, but to others like Jessica, the campaign was just another sexually charged ad to add the to the list that Klein has built. I don’t think that this ad is promising anything that it can’t provide; in fact I don’t believe that it is really promising anything at all. If anything it shows the viewer the extent that young, ambitious and beautiful people will go to be seen on a national scale. However, if Calvin Klein wanted to be represented as a higher class designer brand, then why did they choose such a dismal location to shoot the commercial and what was the point of making his models uncomfortable to the point that it radiated onto the viewers? It made me question if this campaign was made to actually sell jeans or was it made as a publicity stunt. Is this advertisement socially responsible? This is the last question that needs to be asked in determining the ethical standpoint of a persuasive message. I say no. Nowhere in that ad campaign was there any glimmer to prove that purchasing Calvin Klein jeans will have a positive outcome on society. http://www. thedailybeast. com/newsweek/1995/09/10/calvin-s-world. html http://articles. latimes. com/1999/feb/18/business/fi-9098 http://www. minyanville. com/special-features/articles/strange-ads-calvin-klein-target-macys-6/11/2010/id/27861 http://www. bloggingstocks. com/2008/09/10/ads-gone-bad-calvin-kleins-amateur-porno-marketing/ http://highered. mcgraw-hill. com/sites/dl/free/007288259x/151122/calvinklein. pdf