Big Bang's Theories on Race and Gender

I think that CBS’ The Big Bang Theory incorporates racial and gender stereotypes into its characters and comedy without including any severely racist or sexist themes. Still, while it may not be severe, it is definitely present. A lot of the comedy does center around racial and especially gender stereotypes, but honestly, what adult sitcom doesn’t? There is not a great deal of ethnic diversity on the show; there is only one non-white regular character, and minor characters are also almost exclusively caucasian. Gender diversity is also not particularly important on the show. It centers around a group of four white males, and the female characters are always introduced as girlfriends and often seen as sexual objects. On the whole, though, I think this show is not too bad of an offender. 

The character of Raj Koothrappali is the only non-white regular on the show. He lived in New Delhi for most of his life before moving to the United States. His Indian culture is present in the show; there are many references to his previous life in New Dehli, he has an Indian accent, and his parents often advocate that he marry an Indian girl in an arranged marriage. But the main elements of his character are not dependent on race. He has a social disorder in which he cannot speak to women, he is very socially awkward, and he is a “nerd.” Raj is known as the “token Indian” on the show, and his race is played upon often, but there is not an overwhelmingly racist undertone.

Penny, the main female character, is definitely sexually objectified on the show. It seems that every episode either implies or blatantly states that she is a “slut.” She is blonde and curvy, goes out with random men often, and is extremely stupid. In fact, the main comedic element of the show is the contrast between the four male geniuses and Penny, their dumb blonde neighbor. But the show also refers to her not-ladylike qualities often. This is another main element: Penny is tough, strong, and unafraid, while the four men are weak, wimpy, and terrified. When there is a spider in the boys’ apartment, Penny kills it. When there is a sports event on TV, Penny explains it. When a bully picks on the men, Penny beats him up. There is an interesting mix of the traditional stereotypes within Penny and the exact reversal of them between her and the four men. 

It’s very difficult to find a popular adult sitcom that does not include any racist or sexist jokes or characters. I think that says a lot about who we are as a culture, since most popular comedy is derogatory toward someone. It seems that diversity’s role in media is mainly to appeal to a wide audience, not to actually value and accept that wide audience. Does the fact that I watch this show and find it funny make me a sexist or a racist? I certainly hope not. But does it mean I am prolonging and encouraging the objectification of females and certain races? I certainly believe so.

...Oops.

-Saige

Race is Not Yet Won

No matter how hard we may try to end racism, I have a hard time believing that humans will ever live in a world free of racial discrimination. Of course, the extent of racist behaviors and ideas in the US has decreased dramatically even in the last fifty years, but it’s a big planet with a lot of people on it, and many of us across the globe are still treated differently because of the color of our skin. I myself have never and will never treat someone worse than another for this reason, but that does not mean that I am not conditioned by society to associate certain races with certain practices and characteristics. This is how I feel about modern advertising: no ad today will be so blatantly racist as it might have been fifty years ago, but many ads today participate in stereotyping because stereotypes are a major part of how people view each other, and thus how we view ads. 

Still, just because it happens doesn’t mean it’s right. I don’t believe any type of stereotyping is right, but I certainly won’t pretend I’m not guilty of stereotyping people. Advertisers must walk a thin line when considering stereotypes in their ads because the line between racist and stereotypical is so thin in itself. In many cases, a racial stereotype is something that a majority of people are aware of, and thus a recognizable image that will reach a wide audience. But is it acceptable to judge a certain race for the sake of sales? It shouldn’t be, but for some companies, brands, and advertisers, it is. Racism and stereotyping are still present in advertising, maybe not to the same degree as they have been in the past, but enough to cause concern.

This example of racism in current advertising is one that I came across a while ago. It really stuck with me because it would not necessarily be noticeable if you saw the L’Oreal ad on its own, since Beyonce’s face is recognizable. But when it’s placed next to an unedited photo of her, it becomes clear that her skin was lightened considerably, suggesting that L’Oreal thinks light skin and hair are more beautiful than dark. 

We read this ad in class, but it relates well to the modern Beyonce ad above. The idea that lighter skin is more desirable is present in this ad too, but here it is blatantly obvious. Unfortunately, this ad also suggests that dark skinned people are dirtier than light skinned people, illustrating the idea that racism, while subdued when compared to older ads, still exists in advertising today. 

I absolutely believe that advertisers have an ethical responsibility to refrain from stereotyping based on race. That being said, I believe everyone has this responsibility. Still, advertising has such an overwhelming presence in our day to day lives that eliminating stereotypes from ads would likely contribute to the end of racism. I can only hope that in my future I am able to create wildly successful ads without offending or insulting any human being based on race, gender, creed, or anything else. 

“Our true nationality is mankind."

         - H. G. Wells

-Saige

Sights, Sounds and Semiotics

The basic point of advertising is to convince consumers to buy one product over its competitors. And since we internalize such a small percentage of the thousands of ads we see each day, the way in which we see and understand the meaning behind a message is essential to the success of an ad. This concept is called semiotics. It can be applied to any ad, but the ads that stand out are the ones that center around a clear sign to which a majority of viewers can relate. The sign itself does not necessarily need to directly represent the product in question, nor does it need take a specific material form, but it must relate to a familiar social or cultural convention in order to convey meaning to the widest audience possible. 

This is a French ad for Hot Pringles. The denotation, or what is directly and literally present in the ad, includes a man, a hot air balloon, fire, and a cityscape. The connotation, or socio-cultural and personal association, is that this man is attached to the hot air balloon, keeping it afloat over the city with his fire breath. But what illustrates the sign in this ad is the myth, or ideology associated with the image: the chips are so hot that when this man ate them, he started to breathe fire. This is obviously not a real side effect of eating Hot Pringles, but since the majority of people know what the word “hot” means and how a hot air balloon works, it is clear that the ad is trying to convey the heat of the chips using these familiar and humorous signs. 

This commercial for Volkswagen is a bit harder to interpret. The denotation is simply an array of people smiling and laughing. The connotation for this ad requires a bit of thought, though. The people are pictured by increasing age, and the text at the end, “It’s not the miles, it’s how you live them,” connotes the idea that laughing is timeless and that age does not determine happiness. The myth here is largely open for viewer interpretation: it could mean that Volkswagen is a classic car that has been with us through the years and kept us smiling throughout; that Volkswagen appeals to any age group and will promote happiness to anyone; that a Volkswagen will last from your birth to your death and keep you happy throughout; or anything else viewers’ cultural and personal experiences can create within them. I think that this interpretable approach to advertising can either be very successful or very confusing. But in this ad, Volkswagen did a great job of conveying meaning, since it’s hard to find any negatives in images of people of all ages and races laughing, while still allowing the viewer to have control over the deeper connotations.

This billboard for McDonald’s has a clear meaning that is easily interpreted in the few seconds a driver has to look it over. The denotation is a potato, french fries, and an empty french fry container. The connotation is that McDonald’s french fries are made directly from potatoes. And the myth, of course, is that McDonald’s french fries are so fresh and so pure and so delicious that you will eat ‘em all up without a moment’s hesitation. This ad is successful not only because it’s made for one of the world’s most recognizable brands, but also because it takes one of the viewer’s most recognizable foods and makes it desirable by conveying the simplicity, both of the imagery and the french fries, and the taste as a result of that sign. 

Not every ad needs to be a glaringly obvious reference to the product to be successful. In fact, I believe that the most memorable ads are the ones that make the viewer think just enough about why the image has anything to do with the process. That is what a sign is meant to do, and when it’s done right, that is semiotics.

-Saige

Branding: The Hipster Cycle

At the surface, a brand is a name: a collection of letters that holds a certain meaning and is recognized for a specific reason. But beneath the surface, that name stands for more than just a product; it represents a lifestyle, a way of thinking, an image, a belief, a personality, a culture. These representations affect us constantly in our everyday lives, whether we realize it or not, because the recognizability and connotations of the brands we associate ourselves with in turn represent who we are as unique individuals. 

Our generation has always been and will always be driven by the human urge to be accepted in society, and it is my firm belief that that urge has become so influential in our lives due to the rapid proliferation of branding in the last century. Even if a person claims to take no part in what he might call the "mainstream bottomless pit" that is branding, it still affects that person because he is constantly being judged by society for his choices. In fact, the choice to avoid mainstream culture has itself become a culture, and one that has created and fed a huge number of "hipster" brands. 

The hipster movement is a perfect example of relevancy in branding. As it has become more and more apparent to consumers through constant exposure to media and advertising that our lives are being controlled by brands, it has become more and more appealing to dismiss what the media has decided is trendy and instead choose the offbeat and unexpected route in order to distinguish yourself from the crowd. But since this is precisely the point of branding, to make something stand out from the rest, it has quickly become mainstream to avoid the mainstream. Thus begins the never-ending cycle of relevance: that which has been distinguished slowly becomes indistinguishable until something new gains popularity. Because of this cycle, brands must work harder than ever to keep up with the continuous fluctuation of "cool" in society. 

But I think the really successful brands, the ones that become the faces of new distinguished Things, are the ones that decide for themselves what that next Thing is going to be. I truly believe that it is impossible to completely escape the influence of branding, and the brands that find something that makes escape seem possible are the ones that soon become the most relevant, and the absolute dictators of their own situations, and ultimately of their own cultures. Dietmar Dahmen taught us that asking "Why?" detriments a company, and asking "Why not?" skyrockets a company to the top. The same concept applies to brands. It is The Hipster Cycle, and it's still spinning. And as far as I can tell from my four whole class periods of education on the subject, it does not intend on slowing down.

-Saige