The phrase “politically correct” gets tossed around so often when it comes to online discourse nowadays, but what exactly does it mean? To be “politically correct” pertains to having an elevated level of maturity in dialogue and self-expression. In media, if there are Grammar Nazis, then I suppose you can also find there are also “Nazis” for political correctness, a heinously ironic appellation. Although the intention to correct is notable, however, oftentimes, it seems that these intentions also serve a different agenda, which is to manipulate.
We see the use of political correctness as a manipulative device in commercials, advertisements, and even political campaigns. For example, most recently, Pepsi’s 2017 controversial commercial centered on the culture of protest movements in America. The commercial begins with individuals taking to the streets their protest signs, ready to face the policemen barricading their path. Celebrity Kendall Jenner then, on a way to a photoshoot, suddenly leaves to join them. The commercial concluded with Jenner approaching the police officers, with a Pepsi on hand ready to be offered, which the officer in turns accepts. The crowds of protesters in the commercials then erupt in tumultuous applause and cheer, while everyone else becomes comfortable and peaceful with one another, despite the previous tension.
Viewers however, were not pleased. The Pepsi advertisement was received as horribly offensive to the public because it reduced the movements fought by protesters as something easily resolved by just a drink of Pepsi. Pepsi made the clarification that the advertisement was meant to invite unity among citizens in their respective causes. However, the commercial seemed to only achieve the antithesis of what they wanted to portray. Instead of showing support for the movements, it showed ridicule for the cause, discounting the gravity of the situations faced by protesters and citizens.
The commercial, among others, is one of the pieces of evidences used in Naomi Klein’s article titled “The patriarchy gets funky.” The premise of the article is rooted in the evolution of the image of movements and issues presented in advertisements. Klein contended that representation has become a vital key in pleasing audiences in the content of media inasmuch as just the presence of representation, already provides the illusion that the solution to the issue of which the sectors given representation is facing, is already achieved. However with the presence of sectoral representation coupled with product placement, one does wonder if the aim of these corporations is really to enlighten, or to disillusion the public to buy their product.
If anything, it’s phenomena like this that serves as a reminder that we must stop capitalizing on social issues. It is as if the plight of the people is malleable enough for drawing boards of “How are we going to insert our product here?” Relevance is attractive but it is not meant to be a profitable end to an exploitative means. Content such as the aforementioned commercial and campaign, that are displayed publicly, urges us to ruminate on our understanding of issues and awareness. We must know when we are being manipulated. We must know where true empathy lies, because with the growing age of media, everything can be masked as “for the cause”.
