(See the ads here.)
…assuming the mark is to generate buzz and controversy. From the Wall Street Journal:
Next week, Burger King kicks off a major ad campaign that involves a unique twist on the tried-and-true marketing technique of taste testing. The campaign is already generating controversy.
See Burger King’s new ad campaign about “Whopper Virgins.” This ad features taste tests with farmers from Transylvania and pits the Whopper against McDonald’s Big Mac.
The No. 2 burger maker in the U.S. asked farmers in the Transylvania region of Romania, the Hmong tribe of Thailand, and other folks in far-flung places to sample its Whopper alongside McDonald’s Big Mac and declare the winner.
One ad, set to begin airing Monday, features images of villagers in traditional garb choosing the Whopper over the Big Mac. A Transylvanian woman, an Inuit tribesman from the Icelandic tundra and others point and, in their native tongues, declare their preference for Burger King’s flagship product.
I find the ads ignorant and mildly amusing. Those Hmong tribesmen from Chiang Mai have probably been exposed to millions of tourists. Giving them a fast-food hamburger–which Chiang Mai can offer plenty of anyway–isn’t exactly a huge leap. I’m not sure about how close the other “Whopper Virgins” naturally are to hamburgers, but I can’t imagine that they’re shocked at the prospect of trying one, nor by Americans asking them weird favors.
Some people are labeling the ads as colonial and exploitative:
The campaign has also stirred up a welter of online commentary. Brian Morrissey, writing on Adfreak.com, likens the campaign to colonialism and declares it “embarrassing and emblematic of how ignorant Americans still seem to the rest of the world.”
“It doesn’t get much more offensive than this,” noted The Inquisitor blog. “If visiting poor people in remote locations, some who would be at best surviving on below poverty levels and throwing a burger in their faces isn’t bad enough, it gets better, because they also ask the Whopper Virgins to compare the taste of the Whopper to a McDonalds Big Mac as well.
I think that this kind of controversy was exactly what ad agency Crispin Porter + Bugosky was going for. I don’t find the ads terribly offensive. Is filming a native eating a burger that much more exploitative than tourism, which fosters busloads of fascinated stares and cameras-in-face a week, often for nothing in return? Is it that much more ignorant or colonial?
Crispin Porter is using an old, existing colonialist fascination with natives (as evidenced through the likes of Survivor and Tarzan) to perpetuate a certain take among Americans, who are indeed largely ignorant of other people in the world. The bottom line is that these people are always exotified, whether they’re being interviewed for a documentary or given a burger. Media benefits by building separation between “us”–the wise consumers–and “them,” the funny-looking primitives.
It’s not the best image to perpetuate, but neither is feeling sorry for “them” and assuming guilt for the fact that a corporation is, once again, profiting off our ignorance of other cultures. That still puts us at a perceived advantage: We have the knowledge and riches to judge what is right or wrong for these tribespeople. Fact is that we don’t.
Only the tribespeople themselves can accurately decide what is good or bad for them. The real problem lies in the fact that corporations and host countries rarely weigh tribal input or give tribes adequate information about the issues facing them. Nor do they offer tribes many options on how to present themselves to the global eye. The systematic “evil,” as it were, is already in place. The company is using information gaps associated with preconceived notions to make money. It is not the source of the problem. Nor are the ads.
So we go on judging and groveling, bolstering the ad’s notoriety while taking on the equally obnoxious role of being de facto spokespeople for the natives.
I’d like to see a reporter go in and objectively ask the natives themselves what they thought of the commercial. I’d like to see the natives answer honestly, not in a way they feel they should answer. Then I’ll feel ready to say that the commercial is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Check out our selection of the best business credit cards.
how about a link to see the commercial, or a web site to visit.
just a thought
S h Blair
Good point–I added a link at the top. It’s also at http://www.whoppervirgins.com/
My parents are both from Transylvania, Romania and what they say is completely wrong. No tourists go to rural areas of foreign countries and my parents said they have never even heard what a burger was until they came to the US, which was a few years ago. They should not assume stuff that they don’t know!
“Is filming a native eating a burger that much more exploitative than tourism?”
Yes, it is. It’s bad enough our own food industry is trying to kill us, but shoving this excrement down the faces of people who - if the nonsense advertising hype is to be believed - have never had a “hamburger” before will make them physically sick. The filth and chemistry involved in making the “American sandwich” is bad for human organisms, plain and simple. Too bad the camera crews didn’t stick around for the sugar crash and rounds of diarrhea that ensued an hour or so after the poor people ate this slop.
This campaign is in incredibly bad taste. It’s exploitative, crude and condescending. Whoever is responsible for making this social disease deserves to be shamed eternally for foisting their smug, dopey little piece of garbage on the world. The jackass holding up the handmade coat in the video saying, “this took like a month to make and, like, he just gave it to me…” says it all. You’re a jackass, Sparky. The crew’s barely concealed disgust for the crap they are peddling oozes from under their shiny new fleeces. I can just hear them back at their local Starbucks, sipping their free trade double-latte mochacino, going on about how “I don’t like the stuff, but it was so cooool to be among those cool, like… free people.”
If I saw this gang of idiots in some off-the-road, out of the way place peddling their exploitative garbage I’d need a real good reason not to physically hurt them.
Chiang Mai is not a village, as the commercial states. It is the second largest city in Thailand. They have a Burger King there.
What’s with all the faux PC commotion?
Yes, we Americans tend to be an ignorant lot when it comes to knowing about peoples from around the world. Our school kids couldn’t find Transylvania nor Tanzania on a world map.
But come on, it’s just a dumb, silly, commercial meant to be humorous. Apparently, it misses the mark (like much of corporate America’s advertising these days).It’s not meant to be a Film Festival documentary on the plight of indigenous, native peoples.
You guys, especially Mr. Morrisey of adfreak.com, really need to mellow out and see this commercial for what it really is: a clumsy attempt at humor by some big, giant corporation that has missed it’s mark.
I find you address the obvious issues of this campaign, but you are neglecting the fact that you are not one of the used. Yet being on the side that WOULD think its just some business, get the convenience of saying that its okay.
Typical western thinking. We got all the business, and we say “it’s just business…”
Fact is, your justification saying “its just as exploitative as tourism, so it shouldn’t be an issue”, is faulty. That itself is the reason it SHOULD raise issue. It is not tourism itself that exploits, so much as the intrusive nature of self proclaimed “post-industrial” nations and their nature of attitude on the “other”.
Your very use of “tribesmen” and “tribe” lends a helpful hand to understanding your attitude on the issue at hand, “tribe” is a colonial term. These things are always to be overlooked as “well it’s just a _____”. But collectively it reflects a revolting image of the way a lot of us think, and subject others to cruelty, then make excuses.
When it does come down to it, these ideas exist on larger scales than this commercial. But we need to be compelled when we see how it trickles down the cracks and legitimizes greater scale treatment of “other” in the same context.
QUOTE: “It’s not the best image to perpetuate, but neither is feeling sorry for “them” and assuming guilt”…..See, you think you are objecting the solution. But “feeling sorry” for “them” and “assuming guilt” is not the answer we are giving for stopping this behavior. If you FEEL that guilt yourself, you may not want to acknowledge. But regardless, what should be DONE is different than your proposed solution. What should be DONE is beginning to acknowledge that “a little humor” or “just business” isn’t always the best reason to exploit. The point of making these things known is not to “make you feel bad” you aren’t 12 anymore. It’s to drive change of mind. To learn to notice these things then, QUIT DOING THEM…Google: Xenophobia, Mercantilism, Nationalism, Colonialism, Westernized mind, dismissive behavior, psychology of previous investment……These are all terms we should be made aware of in common knowledge.
@ Micah: Imagine you work for Crispin Porter. You get this assignment. There’s something at stake, like your job, or your bonus, your prestige, your second home, etc. It doesn’t feel right, but NOT doing it makes you really scared. So you do it. Does that make you an evil schmuck worthy of being clubbed down on the side of the road? In adver-land, these people did a really good job, even if it meant giving a local the runs for money…
@ DoctorRin: You bring up good points. My questions:
“It is not tourism itself that exploits, so much as the intrusive nature of self proclaimed “post-industrial” nations and their nature of attitude on the “other”.” –right. So how do we change that? What, specifically, needs to happen?
“Tribes” — I agree, it is a term that denotes separation. So is natives. So is clanspeople, primitives, etc. What’s the *correct* term?
Your last point: I have trouble seeing a capitalist society without any exploitation. I have trouble seeing *any* society without exploitation, come to think of it, if you define the term broadly enough. You’re pushing the dialectic in a more equinamous direction, which I find admirable, but what could possibly motivate people to a) get a real grasp of the harm in said exploitation is, b) stop doing something that makes them money or gets them attention/accolades, or c) come up with alternatives that they see as just as lucrative in terms of the currencies mentioned in b)?
“But come on, it’s just a dumb, silly, commercial meant to be humorous.”
That’s the problem. Commercials aren’t primarily meant to be humorous. Their function is to sell products - humor is a co-opted tactic or a pleasant by-product. American culture consists primarily of consuming products and producing the advertising that makes Americans continue to think they need them. Co-opting other cultures (especially in such a condescending, dishonest and dilettantish way) to serve those ends is abusive and dumb. The precious dorks at whatever advertising agency produced this crap need to be said “no” to for once in their pampered lives.
There’s nothing PC about calling the past 50 years of your “culture” an unmitigated catastrophe and a gang of limp-wristed “creatives” idiots. Go ahead, have your “fun”, eat your burgers and die from your diseases, but do it in your own ample playpen.
Back @ you Drea: Here’s why it does. Burger King doesn’t come to the agency and say, “Hey, we have this stupid idea and we want you to do it…” The agency goes to Burger King and says, “We’ve got 3 different ways to achieve your marketing strategy this quarter/month/week/whatever.” It was their dumb idea. It was a weak, manipulative, dishonest idea. Had it been executed with an inkling of self-awareness or humor it might have been palatable, but it wasn’t. It wasn’t even interesting to watch. It had the air of a 17 year old girl’s pontifications on world peace, but without the ostensible benefit of being well-meaning. Like I said, keep it in your own ample playpen and I don’t have a problem with it.
@ Drea: As far as being intrusive, we need to stop justifying what we do with what we want. We wanna travel to Thailand, but don’t wanna eat what they eat, or live the means they people there live. We want some Western life every where we go, no matter what country. We wanna sell burgers, so its okay to just yank folks from these countries that might not know our full intention and get them to eat our shit. It begins with trying to see the world in someone elses eyes. But to do that, you have to get to know what they are about. The problem is, most Americans don’t know shit about any other countries except America. So we hold an American standard wherever we go. This is typical of alot of countries of westernized thought. But america is the pinnacle of this ignorance. I mean, it’s easy to say “tribespeople” to people who seem “poor and other”. But if you saw a french town, we wouldn’t refer to those people as a “tribe”. This is the same level of ignorance shown in this particular article. These people have had civility for plenty of time, but we still place them with a suboordinate description cause they don’t have stupid ass sky scrapers. I tend to think people who haven’t engaged in western ideals are “smarter” than most westerners. We always strive for a “simpler life” but we use complex technology to achieve it. Ha fools we are. Finally…Yes, exploitation is apparent in many situations. I am not an anti-capitalist, nor an anti-socialist. i say any economy that is to work depends on the mindset of the people. Now as far as America, getting cheap labor to make big money has been a fundamental problem for all of it’s history. PEOPLE WILL HATE YOU FOR IT!!! Yet here we are, getting cheap actors for a big commercial campaign. the same shit new age. “It’s just business” they say. Liars.
WOW. First of all, im sure these ppl choose to be rural, and second they didnt force them to eat the fucking whoppers. I hate people that always think america is out to get everyone. We have a bad past yes, but these people have plentiful food. If they wanted to exploit people, they would have gone to africa. And u people who complain about how kids are starving, i dont think you would donate 4,000 dollars either. This Burger King commercial is nothing more than advertising, and the people on tape were payed in their nation’s currency. And DoctorRin, you can shut up now, with your we strive for western civilization rant. Um and yea, in Thailand, i dont wanna eat a worm on a freakin stick. I would get sick. The world isnt falling apart becuase of america. The world falls apart becuase of whatever civilization is the strongest. First it was the egyptians, then the Romans, then the British, and now us. ITS NOT THAT WE ARE AMERICAN THAT COUNTRIES HATE US. its becuase we are the most advanced. WHO FUCKING KNOWS, freaking KENYA could be the next great world power, and when thay try to KENYANIZE everything, everyones gonna hate them. as for BURGER KING, do what u want with your ad money, but this ” controversy” is nothing more then a TREE HUGGER attempt to bring down ” THE MAN”.
@Quincy:…..You have no idea what you are talking about. Nobody has mentioned about starvation once. It’s funny you started off w/ an argument nobody even mentioned. Just shows you are arguing off the fact people are rejecting the ad, versus reading whats actually being SAID. And to quote you, “If they wanted to exploit people, they would have gone to africa.”….Hahahaha….You are hilarious, plenty countries in Africa aren’t what you see on NatnlGeo. Despise, you think every exploitative effort must be made in Africa??!!!? Hahahaaaaa….Leave the words to the rest of us. Thanks for playing tho.
Quincy, the straw men are really sore after the lady-fisting you gave them! Don’t hurt ‘em, Hammer!
The thing is, if you’d never had a Whopper or Big Mac in your life and then ate one of each in succession, you would get sick. You would experience a severe sugar crash followed by nausea and potentially vomiting and diarrhea due to this and the immensity of the caloric intake as compared to your native foods.I’m no doctor - actually, I work in a sort of advertising too - but this stuff is common knowledge… Or maybe you all really are that ignorant? You tell me.
“i dont wanna eat a worm on a freakin stick. I would get sick.” Having had the dubious pleasure in China, (in Thailand, they prefer beetles to grubs) I can tell you first hand that you will NOT get sick from worm on a stick. You might be REPULSED by it, but this is a typical reaction. You suffer from the American disease of confusing what you want with what you need. Having been to other places the intrepid crew visited in their video, I can also tell you that those people are not starving. I live a 6 hour drive from Transylvania and I have a PlayStation 3, free health care and 20 Mbps downstream… (in that order
More interesting is how Crispin Porter could have gotten this right. “Creating a controversy” is not something a client like Burger King does without having substantial positive results on the back end. If there is any controversy, it is unintended and is just being spun as a victory. It’s not, and I hope someone gets fired over this. Anyway, how hard would it have been to compare the nutritional value of what the “natives” usually eat with the whopper? Couldn’t that have been done in a funny way? How about bringing a typical American Joe Whopper Eater and having him try to perform the daily tasks of the “natives” on his Whopper diet? That’d be funny too. Seriously, the commercial was an offensive, dumb idea badly executed. Thanks for hosting the discussion though!
I’m wondering why they couldn’t put similar burgers up against each other. No one who knows anything thinks a whopper is the competitor to the big mac… They are like apples and oranges.. they aren’t even trying to be the same thing… Why not put a stripped down Burgerking burger against the same product from McDonlads.. This proves nothing.
I bet these people would prefer a Wendy’s burger anyway… There is a reason they didn’t put the whopper up against a double bacon cheeseburger… It would get destroyed… Most people buy double QP’s with cheese from McDonalds anyway… not big Macs… if you want a Big Mac… a Whopper is not an alternative… they taste completely different and are made with completely different ingredients. What an incredibly stupid add campaign. Then again, it is Burger King, so what do you expect.
I wanna see the same thing down with their french fries.. Burger King ‘fries’ taste like salted cardboard.
Alright! I think Andrew had the only straight-up and intelligent comment on the board!
As for Rin–he claims to think “people who haven’t engaged in western ideals are “smarter” than most westerners.” You would not guess this from reading what he has to say. It seems to me he has an extremely condescending attitude towards them–he believes they are obviously too ignorant to see the “truth” of the situation–it must be up to us to decide whether the poor natives are being exploited. I accept them as they are–the ones that choose to appear in the commercial are just like their American counterparts who would joyously appear in a commercial–and that is NOT a compliment. I am sure some of them told Burger King to get stuffed, just as some Americans would. As for the folks going on about the so-called food, I hate to burst their bubble, but even the “simplest” villagers I have met knew that eating something strange and foreign would possibly make them sick. I have been faced with the choice many times in my travels, and have at times eaten native food that gave me a hard time. Again, I am nauseated at the idea that these folks were too stupid to make up their own mind about whether to eat some crap a guy with a camera offered them. If they actually WERE completely ignorant of the dangers of foreign food, then I would say Burger King did them a favor–now they know not to eat BK burgers. It is a lesson many of us have had to learn:)
This is plain “BS”. Romania might not best country in the world, and it might have been pretty bad during the communist time, but it is way different now. I do not know if they have to ask for certain rights for mentioning the country’s name, but these ads are just wrong. I am sure there is a fat/rich guy drinking beer in the Bahamas from the money he made from letting them project this image of Romania. Even though many people are offended by it, no does something about it; what can we do? I think this should be a matter of bigger importance to a national level, and not just an internet debate. We vote for a government to represent us and this is what we get. There are so many people that have business connected to tourism; all the international affairs are affected by this, made not too much, but it got to be a habit. First the Borat Movie, then Folger, now Burger King. What comes next? Romanians are spread all over the world, but pride can their be in telling people where you are from, when they see poverty and lack of knowledge in these ads. The problem is not in shooting ads in Romania, or have showing the conditions of the places there, it is more of projecting the right idea. They can make whatever they want to with the ad, they could have made it look good and everyone would have been happy, but now they risk having a lot of criticism. Maybe it does not affect the people Romanian people that do not travel outside the country, but it sure has an impact on the people that live outside. I, myself, live in the US, and I had people come up to me and ask me what the country is like. All they know about it is the poverty, and that we have many orphans. As the Orphan’s Agencies do a good job finding international support, they enhance the bad image of Romania. I am not saying that they should stop doing that or that it is wrong, my point is that we need other agencies in any domain to enhance the good things in Romania. That way there would be a balance.
Whopper Virgins Remixed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDLFN3nK7Go