“We’ve let our hair out, gone back to work and made our voices heard, so why are we still putting up with uncomfortable and painful sex?”
Now THAT, Durex, is a great question. One that we're SO glad advertisers are starting to ask, seeing as women make up the huge majority of consumers. It's hella dumb not to cater for our needs, if you ask us.
The renowned condom brand also have a range of lubricants, which they are marketing with a pretty great ad, if we do say so ourselves.
The ad uses examples of women fighting for our rights, using our voices to protest, to work, to rebel against societal norms, but yet many of us don't speak out against painful or uncomfortable sex.
Dryness down there is such a common aspect of our daily lives, and the ad points out that our body lubricates itself differently depending on our hormones and the time of the month.
It's perfectly normal that a lot of us would need a little help sometimes with the 'ol lube. Especially during sex, when most heterosexual men don't seem to realise that we need water for the slide to be fun, so to speak.
btw, using lube is great.
it is NOT TRUE that if you need lube you are not aroused enough, lazy, or dysfunctional (actual examples)
An advert which shows a protester, female body hair and a working mum is refreshing, so we're even more chuffed that they brought painful sex into the equation.
Millions of women face this issue in their lives, and it can be incredibly frustrating. We all deserve to enjoy sex and have as many (multiple) orgasms as physically possible, and lube is a tool in our armoury to help us achieve that.
If you've been on your social media accounts recently, you most likely can't avoid the new fad; the Ten Year Challenge.
Celebrities from Mariah Carey, Trevor Noah, Amy Schumer to Caitlyn Jenner participated in the glow up experiment, with most famous faces simply proving how freakishly ageless they are.
Some participants brought humour into the fray, paralleling their image with one of another look-alike celebrity, or in Jenner's case, changing gender over the last 10 years.
The concept of then-and-now images isn't exactly new, but it's gained massive traction over the last week. What harm could it be?
Kate O'Neill of Wired magazine introduced a new notion which essentially blew our minds, and even forced Facebook to deny her semi-sarcastic suggestion.
Her idea? That the 10 Year Challenge could be useful to any entity that’s looking to develop facial recognition algorithms about ageing.
Me 10 years ago: probably would have played along with the profile picture aging meme going around on Facebook and Instagram
Me now: ponders how all this data could be mined to train facial recognition algorithms on age progression and age recognition
O'Neill flipped a metaphorical table by suggesting the tech giant had initiated a trend solely to contract facial recognition data from the social network's users.
"I knew the facial recognition scenario was broadly plausible and indicative of a trend that people should be aware of. It’s worth considering the depth and breadth of the personal data we share without reservations."
Allegedly, the conspiracy translates to Facebook needing to experiment with data, and the meme proving the perfect way to achieve it.
Like most emerging technology, facial recognition's potential is mostly mundane: age recognition is probably most useful for targeted advertising. But also like most tech, there are chances of fraught consequences: it could someday factor into insurance assessment and healthcare.
"Imagine that you wanted to train a facial recognition algorithm on age-related characteristics and, more specifically, on age progression (e.g., how people are likely to look as they get older)," she added.
"Ideally, you'd want a broad and rigorous dataset with lots of people's pictures. It would help if you knew they were taken a fixed number of years apart—say, 10 years." WHAT.
O'Neill is saying that the powerful technology company could use the algorithm for advertising, insurance assessment, healthcare and finding missing children. Both positive but simultaneously dangerous consequences.
Of course, this is all total speculation, unsubstantiated evidence. Yet Facebook was forced to dispel the rumours:
The 10 year challenge is a user-generated meme that started on its own, without our involvement. It’s evidence of the fun people have on Facebook, and that’s it.
Do we place too much trust in sites like Facebook? Even if the challenge isn't a case of social engineering, the website has come under fire following numerous controversial claims against them.
Examples of social games designed to extract data aren't far from reality, let's cast our minds back to the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
The mass data extraction of over 70 million American Facebook users was performed, and rocked the country so much that Mark Zuckerberg himself had to turn up to Congress.
Another aspect of the website which garners negative attention is their suspicious community guidelines which seem to apply more rigidly to certain types of people.
Let's face it, Facebook is already heavily involved in politics, such as the critical 2016 US Presidential election and Russian interference.
JUST IN: Facebook says it has removed 364 pages and accounts related to coordinated inauthentic behavior from Russia – blog $FBpic.twitter.com/cBvBnci9sG
According to Kate O'Neill, major tech corporations acquiring data could be used for population control and law-and-order;
"After Amazon introduced real-time facial recognition services in late 2016, they began selling those services to law enforcement and government agencies, such as the police departments in Orlando and Washington County, Oregon."
"But the technology raises major privacy concerns; the police could use the technology not only to track people who are suspected of having committed crimes, but also people who are not committing crimes, such as protesters and others whom the police deem a nuisance," she continued.
Facebook's implication in various privacy concerns has created a tumultuous relationship between the tech giant and its users.
O'Neill is definitely right about one thing- data is one of the most powerful currencies, so don't spend it dangerously.
“Regardless of the origin or intent behind this meme, we must all become savvier about the data we create and share, the access we grant to it, and the implications for its use."
Gillette has made more than a few mortal, and almost exclusively male, enemies today after it debuted its brand new advert about toxic masculinity.
The ad is currently trending on Twitter, having clocked up three million views already on YouTube as well as 282,000 dislikes.
The two-minute clip opens up by showing men of varying ages and ethnicities staring into the mirror, before the narrator asking the question: 'Is this the best a man can get?', turning its former brand mantra on its head.
As the ad rolls on, it shows both negative and positive sides of supposedly 'masculine' behaviour, from bullying and harassment, sexual misconduct, 'mansplaining' and violence, to men standing up for sexual violence victims and acting as excellent father figures.
The video faces the Me Too movement head on as a brand which has a predominantly male audience, and regularly aimed its former ad campaigns at gruff, typically 'masculine' men.
Many viewers felt that the advert accepted its vital responsibility in speaking to their target audience, considering men have been notoriously at the heart of sexual assault allegations.
One especially poignant part of the clip shows Terry Crews speaking out about sexual assault, crucially standing up for both male and female survivors and their Bill of Rights.
WATCH – @terrycrews full opening statement: "I am honored to use my platform and story to help create additional civil rights protections for survivors across the nation under the Sexual Assault #SurvivorsBillofRights."
On the one hand, Gillette's message slightly missed the mark by tarring an entire gender with mostly the same brush, though it did show varying 'types' of men. Some say the advert is capitalising on the #MeToo Movement, others say it's complete chastisement.
The reception has been extremely mixed, with some of the target audience (all men) wanting to go as far as boycotting the brand forever, and others praising it immensely.
One infamously vocal *cough* vile *cough* public figure to comment on it is, of course, Piers Morgan.
I've used @Gillette razors my entire adult life but this absurd virtue-signalling PC guff may drive me away to a company less eager to fuel the current pathetic global assault on masculinity.
Let boys be damn boys.
Let men be damn men. https://t.co/Hm66OD5lA4
The deplorable King of 'Boys will be boys' rhetoric himself has been arguing with members of the public ALL THE LIVELONG DAY on Twitter, claiming man-hating 'feminazis' are waging a war against men through advertising. As if advertising in essence isn't inherently waging a war against women. But whatever.
(Let it be clear: Anyone who equates feminism with man-hating has absolutely zero notion of what feminism means. Feminists hate the patriarchy, not men themselves. They are two different things. Thus ends the public announcement services for today)
Gillette: Men, could you please be the best versions of yourselves and care for yourself and others
Why has the advert received such an angry response?
Many viewers believe that Gillette's efforts have created a video full of preaching, which isn't totally untrue. The video may have missed the mark with it's tone, after all, women know all about what condescension feels like.
We experience patronising behaviour on a daily basis in the workplace, among other settings. It never teaches us the lesson it's attempting to, which for me is the main problem with the ad.
I mean, the clip showing a line of men, standing behind BBQs with smoke wafting up from their grills, reciting “boys will be boys will be boys will be boys"? It's a bit obvious.
That being said, the ad didn't even show the worst aspects of the patriarchy, the worst of the predators, the horrors many women face every single day. It didn't even go that far when we think about it from this perspective, but yet thousands are saying it went more than far enough.
However, the ruthlessly aggressive response by some users to the video clip, in one way, reiterates the point.
While I don't believe all men (or women) should be tarred with the same brush, I do believe that the defensive backlash shows the toxicity of the defensive feminist-fearing aggressive male dialogue.
Today, all the men in Britain who insist that everyone else is snowflakey, over-sensitive and thin-skinned will be crying about an advert that is not scheduled to appear on British TV. Just a heads up. #Gillette
Like many women and men have said, only those who have done something wrong should be afraid of the Me Too era.
By becoming an ally for sexual assault survivors, by proving you believe in equality, by acknowledging the pain which survivors of sexist behaviour and sexual violence have undergone, by lifting up women and minorities such as the LGBT+ and trans communities; only then will society believe that you aren't part of the problem.
It's time for a lot of men to stand up and prove themselves; just because you haven't done anything wrong in the past doesn't mean that you can't stand up for what's right when it matters. And in today's Me Too society, it really matters.
Seeing a massively popular brand attempt to start a conversation is encouraging for most of us, despite the fact that the ad was overdone and the tone was slightly missed.
The male demographic clearly felt attacked by the ad (um, hello, EVERY MEDIA ADVERT makes women feel like sh*t about ourselves so now you understand how it feels) despite the fact that it was arguably trying to encourage them to better themselves for their own benefit.
Let's not forget that toxic masculinity is harmful to men as well as women. While men are the perpetrators of 90% of violent crime in America, they are also 70% of the victims of violent crime. They are also four times more likely to commit suicide.
By facing the aggression and violence inherent in society, men find gain too, yet so many of them are too angered by the ad to see that it isn't trying to attack them personally.
Hate speech by Gillete. Manly Alpha males rule. Pansy betas are actually misandrists and thats who this ad is supporting. #BoycottGillette
President of Procter & Gamble, owners of Gillette, stated that;
"By holding each other accountable, eliminating excuses for bad behaviour, and supporting a new generation working towards their personal 'best,' we can help create positive change that will matter for years to come."
No doubt Gillette anticipated a backlash to the clip, but all publicity is good publicity as the saying goes.
Gillette better be careful or it’ll suffer the same financial fate Nike did when it made rightwingers mad. pic.twitter.com/8ELvdwVDgF
Gillette has collaborated with the Building A Better Man project, which aims to reduce violent behaviour in men, and The Boys and Girls Club of America, which helps young men develop better communication skills.
The company is also donating $1m a year to US charities who work to support men over the next three years.
It has to be said that their efforts deserve praise, since #MeToo began there has been a shocking amount of defensive commentary from groups of men as opposed to constructive conversations and support for women and minorities suffering at the hands of the patriarchy.
Gillette has rarely found itself in the midst of controversy, but today everyone is talking about them.
On November 29th, Deborah Ross of The Times wrote what can only be described as a SCATHING article about influencers which began like this;
"I have a dream. It is not a big dream. I am not Martin Luther King. I only do dreams on a small scale, so it is a small-scale dream and my small-scale dream is this: might there be any way we could do a find and replace on the word “influencer” so it is replaced by “detestable freeloader” wherever it appears? So we all know what, in fact, we are dealing with."
Yikes. To add to the drama-fest, YouTuber and Blogosphere's Influencer of the Year 2018 Melanie Murphy has responded.
We have to say, Murphy makes some noteworthy points;
Starting off her 13-minute YouTube video with a cool "Okay Deborah, calm down", she proceeds to explain the hypocrisy behind Ross' points with a level of clarity which is hard to deny.
Ross essentially slated influencers in her article, describing them as 'detestable freeloaders', essentially people who deserve to be hated because they receive complimentary items and give nothing in return.
Murphy responds by issuing the point that the media in general is funded by advertising and marketing, for example, on the bottom of Ross' article had a sponsored post, without which the article possibly would never have been read.
Promotion and marketing absolutely surrounds us, from celebrities such as David Beckham for Adidas, Beyoncé for Pepsi, Justin Timberlake for McDonalds, Jessica Simpson for WeightWatchers, Brad Pitt for whatever cologne he's feeling that day, Julia Roberts for Lancôme, Hannah Witton for PlayStation, Holly Willoughby for Marks & Spencer etc etc.
It's inescapable. However, just because they receive free objects doesn't mean that they give nothing in return.
The issue which Murphy takes with Ross' article is the sheer hypocrisy as well as the generalisations which she makes. She places every influencer in the same category, when many of them promote noble causes such as LGBT+ charities and organisations, cruelty-free and paraben-free beauty products, health foods, nutrition, sexual health organisations, disability and accessibility rights, chronic pain activists, and more.
Jameela Jamil's i_Weigh movement has become hugely successful, and empowers people to weigh themselves on their overall worth as a person rather than their body mass index. Jamil suffered from an eating disorder for years, and now uses promotion and Instagram to create a unified group of people who value and respect themselves. She also is a major campaigner for banning airbrushing.
Melanie Murphy claims that every successful creative has the support of brands behind them, and receive freebies. Many of them self-fund their projects, and use the money for other causes, others simply give away any freebies which they receive.
Murphy also points out that just because they gain complimentary products does not mean that those people aren't extremely hardworking. Many influencers balance their life online with their family and a side-job.
"95% of what I show, what I wear, I pay for myself," she claims. Through advertising and word of mouth, companies can use influencers for their branding, but this doesn't undermine the level of thought which goes into choosing which brands to work with.
Murphy works with Always pads to talk openly about periods, Barclays, who sponsor Pride, a show which explores bisexuality, PicMonkey, Wella for hair dyes which work against allergies, Holland and Barrett for cruelty-free health and nutrition products.
Numerous influencers and their agents are hugely picky about who they work with, the brands must make sense for the influencers for them to collaborate with them.
"I'm always so bloody proud of my paid-for content, always. The money these brands pay me enables me to write a novel and work on more artsy things like short films which I invest in myself but don't get money back."
According to the Youtuber, the media wouldn't survive without branding and advertisements. From YouTubeads to websites, podcasts, radio, television, newspapers and magazines, advertising is saturated in our industry.
For Deborah Ross to call followers of influencers 'morons' is entirely unfair, from Melanie's point of view;
"Under-researched drivel such as this which contributes to the negative rhetoric that surrounds bloggers and influencers, thousands of hard-working people. Some of which juggle a family or another job."
Many believe for Ross to declare that influencers have done nothing to merit this lifestyle is flawed and reductive, Murphy herself demonstrates a great engagement because of how she chooses brands to work with;
"I never try sneak anything in, I'm never shady. I am lucky and I'm very grateful, I don't swan around."
Lastly, Murphy places emphasis on the fact that YouTubeis a community which supports one another, they collaborate and shout each other out and lift each other up. In the journalism industry, there is minimal collaboration and no support between competing publications;
"You sit and write and you get aid to do that, there was a time where people would scoff at your job and say that that's not a real job. We actually support each other. You're not going to see The Times supporting an article from another publication."
She describes the loneliness which perpetuates society, and how YouTube can be used as escapism, or for self-help, for comedy, entertainment, advice or even just to connect;
"A lot of people are lonely and it's a beautiful thing to be able to connect with people through words through a lens. Families are smaller, the Church has collapsed, community has gone to shit. I feel like through my monthly blogs I encourage people to connect with their real-life friends and family"
As Murphy points out, building a following of thousands or millions doesn't just happen for no reason.
'Detestable freeloaders' aren't just empty vessels of advertisers; they're entertainers, they're singers, actors, writers, comedians, models, creatives, editors, lighting experts, agents and so much more.
Rather than respectfully leaving the individual alone, the YouTuber, who has over 15 million followers, filmed the body and made a vlog out of the experience.
The video faced huge backlash, but was featured on YouTubes trending page for a number of hours.
The video was eventually removed, but many other YouTubers felt that there was a double standard for Paul's videos versus theirs because oif his massive following.
YouTube recently tightened their rules surrounding advertiser friendly content on the video hosting site, leading to a large number of alternative channels being de monetised completely .
'How many chances does Logan Paul get?' reads a PETA statement.
'PETA finds it repulsive that this “internet personality” with millions of impressionable young followers has not learned the lesson that there is sadness, not humour, in the death of others.'
'This sort of content has no place on YouTube or anywhere else, as it could desensitize young people to cruelty to animals, so PETA is calling on the platform to remove it.'
In response to Logan Paul’s recent pattern of behavior, we’ve temporarily suspended ads on his channels.
IKEA's latest advert might just be its most creative, albeit completely bonkers, marketing strategy to date.
In a bizarre yet oddly clever attempt to promote the sale of baby cribs, the Swedish furniture retailer is asking its female customers to pee on its latest print ad.
Sounds pretty disgusting, we know – but hear us out.
The flyer, designed by advertising agency Åkestam Holst, actually contains chemicals similar to those found in home pregnancy tests.
The idea is that when a pregnant women urinates on the ad, the positive result will reveal a discount code for the advertised crib.
The unique ad was published in the latest edition of Amelia – one of Sweden's most influential female-focused magazines.
Speaking to AdWeek, the agency behind the campaign said: “In order to make the interactive functions of this ad work in reality, we had to make several technical advancements.”
“The pregnancy test strip was used as a starting point… Careful selection of materials, together with a controlled capillary flow have been crucial for the success of this project. Technical advancements made during the work with this campaign have the potential to improve medical diagnostics.”
So, what do you reckon? Absolutely gross or utterly genius?
It’s been four years since messaging app Snapchat entered – and in many cases took over – our lives and it seems that’s time enough for the app’s owners to cash in on their success.
According to The Verge, one big change is coming to the app over the next few weeks and we’re not sure it’s one people will be overly pleased with.
Advertisements – which will have sound, be full screen and allow the companies who own them to redirect users towards their sites – will soon begin to play between friends’ stories on the app.
Because the ads will not be made by Snapchat themselves – as any ads which have previously appeared on the app have been – they are expected to look different to what's been seen up to now.
Thankfully the ads will be skippable and are expected to only feature occasionally between stories – rather than annoyingly break up any individual stories you may be watching.
The news comes just a week after the hugely successful app changed the layout of its Discover page.
Since users already watch 8 billion videos per day on the app, we hope the new ads are short – otherwise we’ll never get anything done.
The new Mayor of London Sadiq Khan is set to ban ads from London's public transport networks which could promote body shaming.
According to Business Insider UK, the Mayor – who was elected in May – has announced that from next month no advertisements which are "likely to cause pressure to conform to an unrealistic or unhealthy body shape" will appear on the city's buses or tubes.
During his election campaign last year, Khan promised to remove such images from London's public transport lines after more than 70,000 people signed a petition against a Protein World ad which asked: "Are you beach body ready?"
Apparently, like herpes, Protein World is back. Don't have time or energy this year, but in loving memory: pic.twitter.com/4kYexuqsB9
— Rhiannon L Cosslett (@rhiannonlucyc) May 26, 2016
In a press release which was posted to the mayor's website yesterday Khan said: “As the father of two teenage girls, I am extremely concerned about this kind of advertising which can demean people, particularly women, and make them ashamed of their bodies. It is high time it came to an end."
“Nobody should feel pressurised, while they travel on the Tube or bus, into unrealistic expectations surrounding their bodies and I want to send a clear message to the advertising industry about this.”
A spokesperson for Transport for London – the group who will enforce the move – recognised the importance of the ban by acknowledging that commuters cannot avoid the advertising which appears on public transport.
Pleased to announce @TfL will no longer run ads on tubes, trains & buses which could cause body confidence issues. https://t.co/9Jm0pKrbUF
They said: “Advertising on our network is unlike TV, online and print media. Our customers cannot simply switch off or turn a page if an advertisement offends or upsets them."
With so many people being affected by body shaming, we think it's great that the issue is being tackled in such a public way.
We are no stranger to Paddy Power and their fearless advertising campaigns that are known to poke fun at various individuals and groups in Ireland.
And now it seems that all the ministers in Dáil Éireann are the butt of the joke in their latest ad that has been seen around Merrion Square and Kildare street today and yesterday.
As the election date is finally announced today, the message emblazoned on a large mobile truck for ministers is: "TD's, don't forget to settle up your bar tabs."
The cheeky line references a rather large bill that has been raked up by TD's in the Dáil bar as of November 2015.
According to the Sunday World, the ministers owe a total of €28,642 to the official government watering hole (and that was before all the inevitable Christmas parties).
And seeing as the current government has officially dissolved, it seems that Paddy Power wants to give a friendly reminder to ministers.
"You’d think that any member of the 31st Dáil would understand a thing or two about servicing a debt, but unfortunately a few of them have been skimping on their tabs," said a spokesperson for the betting company.
"We’re only too happy to give them a timely reminder before they hit the campaign trail."
Over the last few days the folks at TG4 managed to stir up some controversy when they tweeted an interesting ad for ladies football.
The image is one of a female GAA player holding a football to her body that makes it appear that she is pregnant.
In the two days since it was first posted by the TG4 account there has been a massive response on Twitter and divided opinion on the endorsement of the upcoming game.
The text accompanying the image reads: “The most important nine months of a woman’s life.”
The ad has made its way in front of the public and has not been removed from the account despite the controversy surrounding it.
Many people online are unimpressed with how the ad represents the sport. Some are calling it “disgraceful” while others are not happy with women being reduced to “baby making machines”.
@thecailinrua@SportTG4 any connection with women's football & pregnancy is just bizarre. Not even clever referencing just dumbing down
Speaking to TodayFM spokesperson for the Ladies Gaelic Football Association Derek Kinnevey said that the ad was never supposed to be released as it had been rejected in 2009. However they are looking at the publicity it has generated in a positive light. The hope is that the ad will “translate into focus on the field”.
According to Derek, the poster was "never meant to be seen by the public," though he added that "there’s no point in hiding from it now. It has generated a huge amount of discussion around ladies’ football and womens’ sports.”
The DailyEdge.ie reports that “this particular image was one of the ones that didn’t make the cut,” while the Ladies Gaelic Football Association also added they have a good relationship with TG4.
Many online commentators have noted how the ad has certainly generated conversation surrounding women’s sports but by drawing attention to motherhood they are reinforcing gender stereotypes.
@mary_white33@LadiesFootball disgraceful & inappropriate are the words that come to mind.Really don't know what they were thinking.
Three Ireland has come under serious fire today after one of its billboards has been widely criticised.
The billboard reads, “Sorry Vodafone customers It turned out he was a she after you’d used all your data.”
Three Ireland have since apologised for the billboard, stating that they never meant to cause offence. The network explained that the ad is "part of a wider campaign that gives examples of when you can often miss the best bits of TV/films when you're streaming because you've used all your data."
Three highlighted other examples in of their campaign, such as "Sorry Vodafone customers, Ireland scored the winning try after you'd used all your data."
Twitter has exploded in response with many people viewing the slogan as offensive and insensitive while other people have defended it saying that it is simply implying that by using all your data can miss the crucial ending of movies.
The controversy comes the same day that the Gender Recognition Bill passed through the Oireachtas. Ireland is now the fourth country in the world to specifically introduce legislation allowing trans people to legally change their gender.
