Originally Posted by Master Zik
If you don't watch tv then your share of advertisements is significantly smaller than the average tv viewer unless you watch a marathon of tv ads online.
That's all I'm saying.
Well then if my analysis is wrong, then post some examples of ads where other races (especially non-Black ones, which are typically even more underrepresented) are the main stars of the show. If my sample size is really misrepresentative of reality, then share with me things that prove me wrong.
So the LBGT community is an even smaller minority. Am I getting this right?
Again you're assuming they aren't and that based off your limited exposure to tv ads.
If it's coming down strictly to money then it's about which group is unified the most, boycotts the most when discriminated against and offended and who can really put a dent in the pockets of who are making the ads.
I honestly don't get this need to pit the LBGT community against the black community about who gets the most attention from media. It's like a lot of black posters on NT just want something else to be insecure about.
It's so strange cuz I've seen a rash of this in the past few weeks by black posters (I assume) when not long ago I was telling other dudes to stop comparing the struggle of black ppl to the struggle of the LBGT community in their arguments. Now dudes are playing this pity party about losing out to gay ppl and the agenda that's taken over media
Yall ****** can't get right.
Are you really going to tell me the LGBT community has more buying power than all of the other racial minorities? Asians have the highest median income in America. Indians are right there with them. Luxury brands flock to Asian communities to open up shop. Even if you want to bring Black people into this argument, the number of them makes even their lower median income way more collectively powerful than the LGBT community's.
The fact of the matter is, there are other discriminated groups in America with way more purchasing power and size than the LGBT community. This is not to say their issues are unimportant. But the primary role of an advertisement is to either 1) drive revenues, or 2) deliver a message. Clearly they were not going with 1) here.
Again, I'm just making an observation that this particular company finds it more important to support X instead of Y. You can read into that how you want. Just don't try and justify things that are blatantly wrong - such as the LGBT community having more economic sway than any of the racial minorities (especially the ones from Asia/Middle East/Indian subcontinent).
The message is crystal clear: the makers of this advertisement/those who approved it decided it was better to portray a normal family as same-sex of the majority race than as a racial minority. Neither one of the two is bad in any way. But it is not ambiguous at all as to where their priorities stand in regards to race vs. sexual orientation.