Adland_ Searching for the Meaning of Life on a Branded Planet - James P. Othmer [82]
The Johns Hopkins sociologist Andrew Cherlin recently wrote, “Marriage used to be the first step in adulthood; now it’s the last.” Which would seem to mean that at some point, that twenty-seven-year-old single dude whose life is the envy of married men and the bane of single women will declare himself self-actualized enough to tie the knot.
Then he can start making a whole new set of Hasselhoffian mistakes that an entirely new generation of children can blame him for.
As an intellectually curious person, I love this stuff. This type of information reveals yet another aspect of who we are and what we value and desire without passing judgment. But as an advertising veteran, I also realize that information such as the man study can be abused. Because, as Spider-Man’s uncle Ben said, “With great power comes great responsibility.”
Which makes one wonder where brain mapping might fit in. Or hypnosis.*3
In addition to leveraging its man study to make a big promotional splash in the ad world, Leo Burnett was making another, more important announcement: there was a shitload of money to be made off modern man based on the study’s findings. Indeed, with up to 80 percent of men surveyed around the world saying that the images they saw in contemporary advertising were out of touch with reality. Burnett saw a great opportunity to help brands get it right. One way was to better define and differentiate the typical male archetypes.
“In recent years,” Cameron said, “marketers were too preoccupied with metrosexuals [for example, the well-coifed soccer star David Beckham] and retrosexuals [the Vince Vaughn character in Old School, who refuses to adapt]. It’s been overhyped, and we found the distinctions to be far more complex.” Globally, the study found that 24 percent of men fall into the metrosexual category, with 16 percent clinging to retro ways. This information led to a more nuanced dissection of the male psyche, especially for the 60 percent of men who had previously defied categorization. This led to new, additional labels like patriarchs (good family men) and power seekers (greedy, egotistical bastards). The study goes to great lengths to chronicle the struggles of men trying to balance their desires to be both. Hence the previously mentioned McDonald’s “Dad’s Making Dinner” spot.
Bombs Versus Burgers
Since Rose and I had previously spoken at length about the man study, I settled for a brief update (the upshot of which is, three years later, we males are still confused, misunderstood, and complex beings). Over a late-afternoon beer in her office, Rose did a riff about the classic archetypes of businesses. I’d heard a lot of this before while working at Y&R. Kind of like Joseph Campbell meets Campbell’s soup, but Rose’s explanation of it was still interesting. McDonald’s, for instance, had been the dreamer. Now it is the innocent. She said its recent commercial with the young African American kid who brings his boom box to the family table and eats his Happy Meal to “Cha-Cha Slide” is a perfect example of the innocent archetype.
Finally, I asked Rose if she had ever considered the ethical implications of her job. If there were times when she felt that she was the proponent of an evil industry. Before she could answer, I told her about The Hidden Persuaders and my talk with Ben Kline and his tip about brain mapping and my father being a hardworking bricklayer who never had to think about things like this and the state of my tortured and conflicted soul.
Maybe I wasn’t trending feminine, but I was a million miles from being the Marlboro Man. “Are you done, Othmer?”
I nodded.
“I just got back from a trip to Washington,” Rose said, “where I was speaking on behalf of the pro bono group the Council for Opportunity in Education [coenet.us], which is all about helping