Audi drops not to subtle paedophile car advert!

Since when did little girls wear leopard skin patterns.

The Cadbury flake will always be remembered. The men on the board of Audi knew that. Why not use a car mad teenage boy?

If you're incapable of recognising the techniques used by the advertising industry and how/why they influence purchasing then that says more about you than about the people that can.

This. It says some very worrying things about people's media literacy, or lack thereof.

It is odd and yes it is a worry that this got clearance as an add for a sporty car. Maybe young women on the board do not link the imagery the same way as 40+ women do?

[quote OvaHere]I agree with the OP. There's dodgy subliminal messaging there. I'd be less suspicious if ad agencies didn't have a long history of this sort of stuff.

Check out this Baby Soft abomination from the 70s

So this is AT LEAST the third v bad/dodgy Audi ad: this one, the one of an attractive woman falling over (comparing her to cars that look good but are not good!!! can’t find that online anymore), and the one in China comparing a woman to a used car.

Appalling.

I can’t believe anyone can look at that advert and think sexual thoughts!

I don’t think sexual thoughts. But my parenting instinct does kick in and tell me to grab that little girl and protect her- she looks like she’s been “arranged” or styled to provoke...

If that was an adult or teen female draped on a red supercar wearing sunglasses, a short leopard print dress, eating a banana, it would definitely be sexual.

I guess what I’m saying is while I don’t see it as sexual, it looks like someone is trying to mimic sexuality with a very young child.

says more about those making the observations to me.

If you're incapable of recognising the techniques used by the advertising industry and how/why they influence purchasing then that says more about you than about the people that can.

Not a single aspect of that add was accidental. It was all chosen and designed for a purpose. That purpose wasn't 'I know, red car is red, child is cute, and banana is fruit - that'll sell a high power car'.

The decisions were made in the context of an industry where imagery has clear meaning and intent. As has been said, red car = power, banana = phallic symbol, female used to sell cars = sex. It's not exactly cryptic. So either, best case scenario, someone has chosen these images without thinking of any of those connotations, and then it has been through approvals wherein no one else considered them, in which case their marketing team need to go back to uni to learn the basics, or they have deliberately chosen images which, in the public psyche, relate to sex and power, and then applied them to a child. Which is vile.

It's an odd advert. None of it 'goes' together, it's like they did 3 different adverts and put them all together and none of them work.

My actual first thought when I saw it was 'that's not a safe place for a small child to stand'. When I heard the slogan it just puzzled me more.

Adverts are supposed to stick in your head and I guess this one did just not perhaps the way it was intended. As someone in the market for a family car, still not buying an Audi.

But it is not always the case

At no point have a said that its never the case

Its the ONLY bit i have a problem with

One assumes victims may Also read into things as well as people who work both with paedophiles and their victims

The ‘only paedophiles see paedophilia’ thing is tiresome

Its like ‘only racists see racism’

I understand what you’re saying. But it is not always the case. If you have ever read snippets of the diaries of peadophiles they will see an act like a child’s skirt rising or touching their leg as the child giving out a sexual message and ‘flirting’ with the man. Things that us normal people know are nothing sexual but a peado has a twisted mind.

And here’s another v sexist 2017 audi ad, in China
thediplomat.com/2017/07/audi-apologizes-for-ad-in-china-comparing-women-to-used-cars/

Boycotted audi (previously owned one) when changed cars, because of their awful woman falling over advert a few years ago.

I agree with the OP. There's dodgy subliminal messaging there. I'd be less suspicious if ad agencies didn't have a long history of this sort of stuff.

Check out this Baby Soft abomination from the 70s

If you do an advert that's so bizarre, then people are going to deconstruct it in an attempt to have it make sense. And this advert just can't take that - there's too much that flags up when you start examining the individual elements.

and

‘Let’s your heart beat faster - in every aspect‘

What does? The little girl? The banana? That she's standing in a dangerous place? The red car which is parked on a family driveway? Or are they saying the little girl's heart is beating faster? Doesn't look like she's excited to me. And in how many aspects can my heart beat faster?

It just doesn't make any sense at any level, and the individual elements are not just odd, but a tad dodgy.

Makes your heart beat faster? A female form has been used for decades to sell cars, usually scantily clad and leaning on the car, with or without a phallic symbol (banana, lollipop, dripping ice cream...) Somebody has made a tiny leap into a leopard-print clad young girl/child, plus phallic symbol, leaning on a car. And presumably it will make all the peado's hearts beat a lot faster.

The whole thing is repulsive. I'm amazed that some don't see it, and that is slightly worrying.

says more about those making the observations to me

What does it say

I didn't see anything wrong with the advert - small child looking cute eating a piece of fruit in front of a car. A red car is a car that is red, the banana is a piece of fruit, the car looks nice but doesn't look particularly sporty tbh, animal print is just a pattern on a skirt - says more about those making the observations to me.

The ‘only paedophiles see paedophilia’ thing is tiresome

Its like ‘only racists see racism’

She’s posing, wearing sunglasses, eating a banana. Little girl in front of big red adult car. It jars because she doesn’t belong there

If it was a boy? Could we see him more easily as the driver?

Some pointed out that the driver would not be able to see the child in that pose, leaning on the grille

I though the girl WAS the driver.

I'm not seeing it. Some people have overactive imaginations, imo.

Don't like a child in front of a car but that's all I see.