This past Tuesday, social media sites were flooded with criticisms over Gap’s newly released advertisement, involving four young, female members of a cirque company advocating for the wearing of their clothing, in tandem with a plug of female empowerment.
Yet, in identity empowerment this advertisement quickly fell short – with a singular young, black participant amongst three white performers, it appears that the former is no more than a prop and an effort to appear superficially racially sensitive. An effort that, as social media users have vehemently pointed out, ended up in an offensive position of disempowerment.
While each of the three white representatives of the company speak about their skill sets, what they love about their group, etc., the featured black member does nothing but sit passively and is not even asked a question by the commercial’s conductor, Ellen DeGeneres.
To the many articles that have reacted with pejorative remarks about the “over-sensitivity” of today’s media users, of “hashtag activism” and the principle that people being offended by this ad are just looking for something to be offended by, I pose this question: is presence the same thing as representation?
To that, I argue they can frequently not be the same. To make compromises and concessions as a marginalized group to appear in media should not require silence, passivity, or the neglect of persons of color just to be shown at all.
Just because you have a non-white participant in this commercial, Gap, does not make you progressive or an advocate for change. Rather, the silence and near ignoring of the singular non-white participant in this advertisement makes a persuasive stance to the contrary.
Photo source: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/nation-now/2016/04/06/gap-apologizes…