The recent controversy surrounding an advertising campaign for Sanex shower gel has culminated in the ban of the ad, drawing significant attention to issues of racial representation and sensitivity in marketing. The advertisement depicted black skin as cracked and dry, while presenting white skin as smooth and without blemish. This stark contrast raised alarm among viewers and led to complaints that it reinforced damaging racial stereotypes.
The advertisement in question featured two male models with dark skin, one shown experiencing itching and the other with visibly dry skin. In striking contrast, a white female model showcased her skin as clear and without issues. The depiction was criticized by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), which upheld complaints that the ad could imply a superiority of white skin over black skin. Such a portrayal not only perpetuates negative stereotypes but also risks alienating a large segment of the consumer base that expects more equitable representation in advertising.
The parent company of Sanex, Colgate-Palmolive, responded to the backlash by asserting that the use of different skin colors among the models was intended to showcase the diversity and inclusivity of their product line, rather than making a comparison based on skin tone or ethnicity. Additionally, they claimed the advertisement was designed to illustrate a “before and after” scenario relative to skin care, emphasizing their commitment to catering to all skin types. Despite these claims, viewers expressed their discontent, highlighting that the message conveyed through the visuals could easily be misconstrued as majoritarian discrimination in skin attribute portrayal.
Initially aired in June, the ad featured overdramatic graphics including a model with dark skin who scratched his body, leading to orange streaks resembling paint marks. A voiceover articulated a narrative addressing individuals who struggle with persistent itchiness and dryness of the skin, emphasizing the efficacy of Sanex’s product. The final scenes transitioned to a white model in a shower, where she appeared refreshed and without any blemishes, an image that contrasted sharply with the previous depictions of black models.
The ASA concluded that the ad contravened its broadcast code, particularly in its implications that the product was more beneficial to lighter skin as opposed to darker skin. Consequently, the ad was banned from future broadcasts unless it undergoes significant amendments to its content. The ASA noted that this ad unintentionally conveyed a message that could easily be interpreted as suggesting the superiority of white skin over that of other ethnicities. They urged Colgate-Palmolive to exercise caution in future advertising initiatives to avoid causing potential offense related to race.
In contrast, Clearcast, the advertisement approval agency, argued that the advertisement did not propagate negative stereotypes. They stated that one model was represented in a “stylised and unrealistic” manner to signify dryness, suggesting that skin color was not the focal point, while the sensitive portrayal of the second model was focused on inducing a sensory response to itchiness rather than emphasizing any visible condition.
Sanex acknowledged the ruling by the ASA and reaffirmed their commitment to promoting skin health across all demographics. The company articulated that their aim was to highlight how the diverse offerings within their Skin Therapy range could support various skin types. They embraced a mission to advocate for skin health inclusively, emphasizing their dedication to diversity within their brand communications.
This incident emphasizes the critical need for careful consideration of racial dynamics in advertising, illustrating how brands must navigate potential pitfalls when attempting to represent diverse populations. As society becomes increasingly aware and vigilant against issues of representation, brands like Sanex are tasked with ensuring their marketing strategies reflect these values without falling prey to stereotypes that could be harmful or discriminatory.
