Lame sexist Mackie advertisement

prolearts · Post by **prolearts** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 12:31 pm

Well, just when you think it's safe to assume that people in our industry realize that sexist advertisements are both offensive and bad for business, Mackie has to pile a new one on! Witness the ad for the VLZ3 little mixer thingy. I quote: "dust bunnies collected from the last time your girlfriend cleaned your desk. it's been a while." Hey little missy, welcome to the recording studio, the cleaning supplies are in the closet, get to work! Nice going Mackie, can you please fire the Rip Van Winkle who just woke up from 1952 and wrote that ad copy? It's the 21st century for crying out loud!

Sincerely,
Jason Ward
Chicago Mastering Service

P.S. Maybe the writer's idea of women making progress is that she hasn't cleaned his desk in "a while!" Not like the old day's when you'd get put in your place for leaving dust bunnies around!

Jay Reynolds · Post by **Jay Reynolds** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 12:58 pm

Is this ad less offensive if you drop the assumption that the imaginary engineer in question is male?

prolearts · Post by **prolearts** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 1:16 pm

Ha! Yeah, way to look on the bright side. However, I think the easiest thing might have been to imagine that the imaginary sloppy unisex engineer was responsible for cleaning their own little project studio desk. I mean, unless Mackie is rolling out a bold new gay-friendly ad campaign, I think a heterosexual slant is probably safe to assume. But, hey, prove me wrong Mackie!

hautacam · Post by **hautacam** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 1:29 pm

I didn't think the ad was very offensive. It was stupid but I don't think it was that offensive.

RefD · Post by **RefD** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:22 pm

nowhere near as bad as some of the Dean Markley ads from the 80s.

*cues up 20 year old image of a naked sweaty nymph, her legs covered in satin sheets and boobs partially obscured by shadow, awaiting the return of her favourite Dean Markley customer*

chris harris · Post by **chris harris** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:26 pm

the sexism is obvious... and, offensive.

but, as someone who cleans his own damn studio, I'm offended from that angle, too.

rwc · Post by **rwc** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:43 pm

I read it.

I got a laugh, but still found it to be a stupid ad. I never liked mackie ads.

But to actively hate it? How the fuck is this sexist to the point of being terrible? I imagine people who get offended by this get pissy when I say she, or he, instead of he/she in papers.

Do we really have to be careful about everything we say, in order to not offend any party?

I saw the ad as putting the guy in the chair, in the demographic of messy guy whose girlfriend may have once tried to tidy his space, who stopped trying when she noticed it was impossible. A girl once cleaned my tech desk workspace in the office here, of her own volition, without me asking, and never did so again when it was a clusterfuck of PCBs, wires, and solder the next day. If I mentioned this, should I expect people to throw fruit at me?

life is short. get offended when a client stiffs you, or when your mic collection gets robbed, or when a freelancer drops your u67... not when someone mentions a girlfriend in a mediocre audio gear ad.

Removing every preconception and stereotype that gets used in non-violent/meant to be offensive advertising takes the humanity out of society.

Can't we go back to hating on mackie for the crosstalk, or the shitty summing, or maintenance hostile innards of their products?

RefD · Post by **RefD** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:43 pm

subatomic pieces wrote:the sexism is obvious... and, offensive.

but, as someone who cleans his own damn studio, I'm offended from that angle, too.

strewth.

actually, i wish i had time to give mine a proper cleaning...best i can manage anymore is some paffs with compressed air, wiping down desktops and a quick run of the vacuum over carpeting.

and, apart from disaster management, that's twice yearly!

but the area between the walls and the racks looks like a dust bunny orgy!

*makes mental note to get a tank vac with corner attachments*

RefD · Post by **RefD** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:45 pm

*throws a grape at rwc*

Rodgre · Post by **Rodgre** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:50 pm

RefD wrote:nowhere near as bad as some of the Dean Markley ads from the 80s.

*cues up 20 year old image of a naked sweaty nymph, her legs covered in satin sheets and boobs partially obscured by shadow, awaiting the return of her favourite Dean Markley customer*

I think that was Dean guitars... not Dean Markley.

See, I saw the ad and didn't get the "your girlfriend's job is to clean your desk" vibe from that comment. I totally got the "you are a slob and you didn't clean your desk, ever!" vibe. In that case, the offense is directed to me as an engineer, and not my girlfriend, as a girl. In that light, it didn't offend me at all. I'm more offended by ads that assume I'm stupid or gullable, not so much a slob.

Roger

Jay Reynolds · Post by **Jay Reynolds** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:57 pm

prolearts wrote:Ha! Yeah, way to look on the bright side. However, I think the easiest thing might have been to imagine that the imaginary sloppy unisex engineer was responsible for cleaning their own little project studio desk. I mean, unless Mackie is rolling out a bold new gay-friendly ad campaign, I think a heterosexual slant is probably safe to assume. But, hey, prove me wrong Mackie!

What bright side? Are you asserting that its not OK for Mackie to make this imaginary "girlfriend" subservient, but it is OK for us to objectify two women who are in a relationship with each other?
I really wasn't joking with my question. How would you classify your own assumption that the engineer in the ad is male?

prolearts · Post by **prolearts** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:49 pm

superaction80 wrote: What bright side? Are you asserting that its not OK for Mackie to make this imaginary "girlfriend" subservient, but it is OK for us to objectify two women who are in a relationship with each other?
I really wasn't joking with my question. How would you classify your own assumption that the engineer in the ad is male?

Geez, I don't even know any more?! How would I classify my assumption?? As the most likely intent of the writer, I guess. If assuming that it would have been a more positive thing to imagine that Mackie was into some sort of alternative lifestyle promotion is ALSO some bad thing objectifying someone, then I am just confused into oblivion. I don't know if you noticed the part where I also said that the easiest (read: only completely non-sexist) way to have framed it would be that perhaps people clean their own studios, but this is all getting a little too post-modern for me to continue pondering. Seeing as I'm a guy who is married to a female musician who does recording on her own, thank you very much, I found the ad a bit lame (and you can notice I chose "lame" rather than offensive to the it-didn't-offend-me posters), and not really something I would have written into an ad for a product I'd image Mackie would love women to purchase as well. I'll now back slowly out of the thread and leave it to any women who care to comment further as perhaps the more qualified parties to do so.

Enjoy!

lancebug · Post by **lancebug** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:56 pm

That Mackie ad really shocked me when I read it. I don't see how that could not be glaringly offensive to their advertising department.

Wait.. did I say Mackie?

chris harris · Post by **chris harris** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:32 pm

????? wrote:Do we really have to be careful about everything we say, in order to not offend any party?

I think that we should be conscious of what we say and the effect that words can have. I think that we should consciously try to NOT BE intentionally offensive to anyone. I think that it's especially insulting when people are intentionally offensive to large groups of people based on stereotypes. You hear this kind of sexist bullshit in the audio world all the time. To me, there's hardly a more sure sign of someone who's proud of their ignorance than a person who would try to fit in or gain acceptance from a group of people at the expense of the feelings of a minority.

The anti-PC backlash is very rarely ever present in minorities. People who have had hurtful things said to them or about them don't often consider it too much to ask for people to actually use their brain before they open their mouth to speak.

johnny7 · Post by **johnny7** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 6:06 pm

superaction80 wrote: What bright side? Are you asserting that its not OK for Mackie to make this imaginary "girlfriend" subservient, but it is OK for us to objectify two women who are in a relationship with each other?

He was simply saying that if it was a couple o' lesbians (one messy and one tidy), that this could be considered a "bright side". There was no mention of seeing them naked together. So leaping to "objectifying two women" seems forced.
Or are you trying to out-PC the original poster?
Johnny
btw I have not seen said ad...

Message Board

Lame sexist Mackie advertisement

Lame sexist Mackie advertisement

Who is online