We need the diversity within the diversity
I’m not bored of the diversity debate. I find it endlessly fascinating, like an Agatha Christie mystery, where more insight happens with greater exploration and thought. And, like one of those mysteries, you can often find something out that occurs as revelatory to you, only to discover that everyone else knew it all along and they now think you’re a bit thick…
Anyway, at the risk of holding up a giant sign pointing to that thickness, I want to discuss a new level of the mystery that I discovered for myself when I interviewed Jo Arscott.
The employment of an ethnically diverse workforce doesn’t necessarily mean the employment of an ethnically diverse workforce.
There’s a point in Jo’s interview where she (a girl of colour who grew up with a white family) mentions being somewhat surprised to discover that she’s not white. I then got the strong sense that Jo has spent large chunks of her life with that perspective: ie, that she didn’t define herself by the colour of her skin. She didn’t grow up in Hackney or Brixton, deeply immersed in the culture of the afro-Caribbean wave of post-war immigration; she grew up on a smallholding in genteel Gloucestershire, and that’s as white as it gets.
So what part of her would bring ethnic diversity to an ad agency? Yes, her experience as a woman of colour, but beyond that, the cultural elements of an urban background are missing. Would a white person from Haringey be more fully immersed in clichéd West Indian culture? Possibly. So what do we mean by multicultural diversity? Skin colour? Culture? Daily perspective? Upbringing? All of the above?
The question came up again when a friend here in LA asked for my help finding strategic talent to launch his afrocentric product in the UK. I soon discovered that there are very few planners of colour in London, and that there are even fewer with the kind of Afro-Caribbean background my friend was looking for (by the way, if you know anyone who fits that bill, please drop me an email: bwmkay@gmail.com).
UK advertising is a middle-class industry filled with middle-class people, and one could argue that it’s that homogeneity that’s stifling the diversity more significantly than a failure to include a certain number of people with a certain skin colour. And it’s only going to get worse: if you want to be able to survive in a big city on placement or intern wages, you’re going to need another source of income, and that excludes a lot of people.
So if it wants to be culturally relevant to the entire country, advertising needs ethnic diversity in all its forms. But it also needs socioeconomic diversity, because that’s what will bring the diversity within the diversity, if you see what I mean.
White, middle-class men and women can go a long way, but it’s like we’re writing music with half the notes. Find ways to being more voices into the choir and it’s only going to sound more interesting. And I get the ‘meritocracy’ argument, but the problem with that is that you can only judge the merits of the people you see. If there are whole chunks of the population that aren’t even stopping by, you don’t so much have a meritocracy as a ‘who’s the best middle-class white person’ contest.
I bet ten grand there’s a kid of colour out there without much cash, who’s thinking of a million ways to bring something incredibly creative to the world.
Unfortunately, advertising is not currently one of those ways, and until the industry changes things to make sure it is, it’s going to stagnate, atrophy and signal its death with a long and underwhelming fart.
Are you doing anything to stop that fart?
A bit of diversity of political opinion wouldn’t go amiss either.
Yes and no. The idea that greater diversity enables advertisers to reach ‘other’ people plays to prejudice. If an afro-carribean creative is better able to create advertising for the afro-carribean market then it follows that an afro-carribean creative is less able to sell to white people which I do not believe for one second. If you’re a good creative you can adapt and learn and apply what you learn to what you create. It shouldn’t be that difficult if you have any talent or empathy. Likewise, women who say women are better able to create adverts for female-orientated products are building a rod for their own backs because they can’t very well complain about the fact that they never get to do any of the funny beer ads if they pursue that line of argument.
There’s a moral case for more diversity – equal opportunities – which I thoroughly agree with but that’s about it. The good news is that’s all you need!
Equally, the idea people from ‘more interesting backgrounds’ or ‘beautiful weirdos’ are going to make better work is misconceived simply because it’s still looking at the surface and replacing one set of prejudices with another. This chimes with what you’re saying, I think. Diversity is not something you can see! You only need to look at how Pepsi’s diverse marketing department brought the world the incredibly inappropriate (and completely shit) Kendall Jenner ad to see where such a superficial approach can get you!
Couple of things:
Being better at something doesn’t necessarily make you worse at something else. I think plenty of white people could sell well to the Afro-Caribbean market. But as a collective group, would they be better? Possibly not.
Also, it’s an undeniable truth that a wide group of diverse influences will spark greater and more original creativity. Imagine if you had never visited an art gallery or opened a book. You could still be good, but that quality would run out pretty quickly.
And everyone, even great people of any race, are capable of shite.
But thanks for your generally interesting comment.
Dude…
I really want to speak to you.
drop me a line: bwmkay@gmail.com