Critical Analysis - Pnina Grossman

Pnina Grossman

Professor Nayanda Moore

English Composition

4/20/15

Pads of Power

            Always is a brand owned by consumer goods giant Procter & Gamble that sells pads, pantyliners and other feminine hygiene products. However, this a fact that would not be easily discernable from their recent #LikeAGirl ad campaign. The original video in this campaign featured different men and women, all of whom were asked to perform an action “like a girl.” The older women and all men and boys consistently made a show of being weak while running, throwing a ball and fighting. Young girls were then asked to perform the same actions “like a girl,” and all consistently performed these actions with a show of effort and passion. When asked “what does it mean to you when I say ‘run like a girl’?” one girl responded “it means ‘run fast as you can’”. Always then asks the audience “When did doing something ‘like a girl’ become and insult?” (Always #LikeAGirl). Following this, the director of the commercial those who acted weak in response to this phrase realize that there is no reason for it to have that connotation. As the music swells, words come up on the screen saying “let’s make #likeagirl mean amazing things” followed by “join us to champion girls’ confidence at always.com” (Always #LikeAGirl). An analysis of the rhetorical devices used in this advertisement campaign can be used to determine the intentions of the company and whether this ad campaign is a positive development or a negative one.

It seems surprising that a company selling feminine hygiene products would make a commercial for those products without saying the words “period” or “menstruation” even once. However, as an article on the a Social Media Data Analytics company, Crimson Hexagon, points out “[i]nstead of persuasive demonstrations of why their product is a good purchase, more and more companies have started campaigns that spotlight social issues, gaining brand recognition through rapid-fire shares on Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms” (Crimson Hexagon Editorial Team). The #LikeAGirl campaign brilliantly ties together these two aspects. In an outright appeal to ethos, this ad campaign shines a spotlight on how the phrase “like a girl” has been co-opted to refer to doing something in a weak way and how this effects the confidence of girls and women. The campaign also invites women and girls to share their own experiences and strengths on social media with the “likeagirl” hashtag, essentially getting them to do their marketing for the campaign on their behalf. In this model of using social activism to create brand awareness, the issue of girls’ confidence dropping around the age of puberty is fairly connected to the product that Always is selling.

Of course this campaign is not without its detractors. Emily Shire, a writer for The Daily Beast, points out that while the message of reclaiming female power and self-confidence are, indeed, important messages to be spread, one must question the sincerity of Always’ campaign. After all, Always is a seller of female hygiene products, but fails to even mention these products in their video. In this way, Always sustains the taboo around women’s menstruation, instead of breaking it, unlike other recent commercials selling the same products. According to Shire, “[t]he feminine product industry has helped create that shame surrounding menstruation, but it is also in the best position to destroy it. However, that’s not by claiming a specific type of tampon helps build self-confidence” (Shire).  Always, claims Shire, is mainly appealing to pathos instead of ethos, subtly claiming that buying their product will somehow foster self-confidence, and therefore this commercial ends up being emotionally exploitative, rather than being empowering, as it claims to be.

The other objection against the ad campaign is that Always is not reflecting a sincere belief of their company, just using others’ beliefs to sell their product. Andi Zeisler, cofounder and editorial director of Bitch Media, explores the historical exploitation of feminist beliefs in an article she wrote for Salon. This is no new phenomenon, Zeisler claims, but what is new is selling the idea of feminism, rather than just incorporating it into the sales pitch for a product. Either way, Zeisler says the usage is suspicious, and “[f]urthermore, the images and messages don’t go beyond the safe, upwardly-mobile striving of mainstream feminism” (Zeisler). Author Ann Friedman goes even further, saying that these empowerment ads “feed[] our collective hunger for big cultural shifts, while simultaneously allowing corporations an easy way out of helping to make those shifts a reality” (Friedman).

While these claims are generally valid, it is important to take into account this is not a case of a company preaching one message while practicing another. Always’ parent company, Procter & Gamble, actually does care about empowering women, something which is reflected in the make-up of their board. As Senior Editor at Large of Fortune magazine has pointed out, five out of Procter & Gamble’s eleven directors are female, furthermore, there is “[n]o tokenism in this mighty lineup. Every one of these directors has been on Fortune‘s annual Most Powerful Women list” (Sellers).

While some supporters point out Procter & Gamble’s diversity to show their company actually believes in the message of female empowerment that it is touting, others show that the tenuous connection between periods and self-confidence does not invalidate this ad. They point out that ad campaigns focused on positive messages rather than negative ones are actually just as effective. After all, “you don't need to make people feel bad about themselves to make them buy menstrual pads. Whether they have high or low self-esteem, they're still going to menstruate” (Diep). The focus is then on creating positive feelings towards the company so that people decide to buy their product, a strategy that seems to be working, as Nike, Dove and Getty Images all saw increases in revenue when they started positively advertising to women (Ciambriello).  Essentially, supporters suggest, these positive ads are doing jobs, which means that companies are using them for their own gain, but they are choosing to do so through positive means, and this is not necessarily manipulation.

Delving further into this argument, supporters will point out that the ads themselves are a powerful force for change in the realm of female body-image and self-perception. As it currently stands, 33% of young women are dissatisfied with their looks, up from 26% just two years earlier (Ciambriello). This number is very likely due to the increasing perverseness of social media and advertising in our world, as studies show that 60 seconds of exposure to underweight models in a commercial an actually change women’s perspective of their own beauty for the worse (Ciambriello). Essentially, the effects of this ad campaign might still be overwhelmingly positive even if the intentions behind making it were self-serving, at the best.

Since advertising is done to promote products, it is indeed difficult to believe that Always decided to start their #LikeAGirl campaign simply out of the goodness of their heart. More likely, they decided to start this campaign so that they would be associated with positive emotions, an people would choose their products over other products. However, credit must be given to Always that they chose to advertise in this way. Especially when it comes to periods, it is just as easy, if not easier, to play off the associated insecurities that women, and especially young girls, could have. Always chose to focus on the positive, and no matter their intentions, this positive message will likely have a positive effect on those who listen.  

Works Cited:

1.      Ciambriello, Roo. "How Ads That Empower Women Are Boosting Sales and Bettering the Industry." AdWeek. AdWeek, 3 Oct. 2014. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.

2.      Crimson Hexagon Editorial Team. "Examining Why Social Cause Campaigns Work." Crimson Hexagon. Crimson Hexagon, 24 July 2014. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.

3.      Diep, Francie. "The Psychology Behind The "Like A Girl" And Nationwide Super Bowl Ads." Popular Science. Bonnier Corporation, 4 Feb. 2015. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.

4.      Friedman, Ann. "The Problem With Those 'Feminist' Super Bowl Ads." The Cut. New York Media, LLC, 02 Feb. 2015. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.

5.      Always #LikeAGirl. Dir. Laura Greenfield. Prod. Always. Always #LikeAGirl. YouTube, 26 June 2014. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.

6.      Shire, Emily. "Yes, Always’s ‘Like a Girl’ Campaign Is Great—but It’s Also Deceptive." The Daily Beast. Newsweek/Daily Beast, 30 June 2014. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.

7.      Sellers, Patricia. "P&G Rates an “A” for Board diversity." Fortune. Time, Inc., 05 May 2011. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.

8.      Zeisler, Andi. "Worst Sales Pitch Ever: The Ad Industry’s Shameless History of Using Feminism to Sell Products." Salon. Salon Media Group, Inc., 21 July 2014. Web. 19 Apr. 2015.