He seems talented and has humour but he's way too lefty and 'progressive' for me.....He's entertaining but it was an effort to watch it to the end....but you are a genuine and honest poster so I did.

What I'd say in response is that the motivations of corporations is neither here nor there. Why should you or I care whether they believe or don't believe in any particular message they put out? Capitalism is the profit motive, it's exists to motivate the supplying of need.

You see a message from an advertiser, you like it or dislike it....you buy the product or you don't. If they gained your attention that's the point...as long as they stay within the law.

I would certainly agree with certain criticisms of corporations....for example, he makes valid criticisms of corporations (not the pink tax though) like child labour and anti unionist practices, tax practices and so on... So I'm interested in ideas where they could be better motivated.....however, mucking around with capitalism is something that has to be extremely carefully considered.....as history attests.

As for Gillette, their parent company, which is significantly larger is otherwise doing well, took an 8 billion write down the other month which was attributed to this campaign and hence the swap in direction. Still not buying them though until they issue an apology.

He seemed to make the contention that Nike's use of 'Colin Kaepernick' had no significant losses for them....continually chanting 'six billion dollars'. Well....that's not accurate and there is more to that story.

At the time of the adverts Nike were at 131.57 billion capital worth. Within days of the advert airing that worth had slid down to 123 billion. However if you look at the chart the general trend in Nike's worth has been significantly up since 2012 and I suspect has much to do with China and new markets (who aren't going to care about anti US themes) and the value soon recovered.....However, it's current value is now below it's pre advert high.....though I suspect this is to do with the trade war.

Essentially Nike are a global brand and corporation and it's hard to really see how a bad reaction in one country is going to affect them that much....it's probably reduced them a little from where they would be....but nothing major.

[Link]

Edited by Stirlingsays (24 Aug 2019 1.16pm)

Yep, he is very progressive but the overall message is still universal and told very well. The overall narrative is that companies make this stuff so people talk about the brand. If you are talking about the brand positively or negatively, you have become the advert for the company.
I noticed a whole bunch of people (Largely right-leaning)cheering on Gillette for dropping the ad and doing an "Ultra-manly-man" advert. Ask yourself, would anyone on the right even had noticed the ad existing if it wasn't for the last one? If it wasn't for people reacting to them, I would never had known that Gillette had made any campaign. That is the power of this kind of advertising.
The video you watched shouldn't suddenly convert someone to the left or suddenly change their politics, but it does serve as good warning for the future when every company starts these "Viral marketing campaigns" if you are pissed about it and rant on Twitter or a forum page, you are playing strait into their hands...
Fair play for watching to the end by the way, I know from experience how frustrating it can be to watch someone with opposing ideologies, sadly in 2019, a lot less people are prepared to do that...