"New Face of Ferrero" competition - only white children should apply?

[RedApple11]

Just bought a pack of Ferrero treats for my DD and was shocked at what looks like a blatantly discriminatory campaign. The new "Faces of Ferrero" (ie, the winning children whose images will be used to promote Ferrero products) are all white and fair featured. Five boys, one girls. Are only fair white children attractive enough to be the Face of Ferrero then?

I contacted Ferrero about this and was told:

"We would like to stress that the competition was judged purely on the basis of the children's responses to the question which was: "what they want to be when they grow up and why?".

So I investigated further and discovered that actually, what a crock that was. In fact, all entrants were required to upload their children's photos in order to have a valid entry and these images were then displayed in a gallery. See www.faceofkinder.com/terms.php and scroll down to section 9.3 which states:

"The photograph must have been taken within the last 6 months before it is sent as an entry in the competition. The child must be fully clothed. Whilst entrants may crop and enlarge photographs, they must not submit a photograph which has been substantially altered. By entering into the competition, the entrant agrees that the promoter can visit the child to check that the photograph is an accurate representation of him or her. No changes will be permitted to photographs accepted into the Gallery after the voting period opens on 30th May."

Anyway, the wonderfully white and photogenic winners can all be found here: www.faceofkinder.com/gallery.php

Don't get me wrong, these kids are all gorgeous and this isn't sour grapes - I had no idea about this competition and wouldn't have entered my DD into it anyway.

That said, I think it's outragous that in this day and age, a company like Ferrero can get away with promoting the idea that only fair white children are attractive enough to be the Face of Ferrero. This seems wrong on so many levels.

And you are condoning actively racist behaviour on the part of the company (choosing people based on skin colour) in order to appease people who might worry about racism.

Thats so contradictory I can't even believe someone thinks its a viable argument.

Also Freud I'm fairly sure as Ive said before that at least one of those children has a parent or grandparent with darker skin....perhaps that satisfies the 10% you are insisting upon no?

Freud, with the greatest of respect, what the actual gash are you on about? Companies should use all colours of the population in their ads to ensure that no-one feels left out?

Where does that end? Skincare adverts an hour long because they have to include every skin colour? Shampoo adverts having to include all types of hair?

Isnt the fact that they are using humans not enough? I think the shame here is that some people clearly do see people as skin colours, whereas I tend to just see a human being

10% could only be proportionately represented if there were at least 10 children.

10% of children in a sample of 6 children = 0 children (unless you want to count half a child... maybe just a couple limbs would do).

cheers thatisall .......

I have no doubt at all that in many respects racisim, both positive and negative, does exist in business/ entertainment / advertising ..... but imo "not proven" in this case

I would acyually be more inclined to suspect that conscious, deliberate racial selection had taken place, if every year, the winners were mostly white, with one, perhaps two, ethnic minority child(ren).

As it is, it looks like it may actually be like it said on the box. It's an internet popularity contest, followed by a Kinder panel selection.

Exactly TheBigJessie, a token non-white child being selected each time just for their skin colour... which is horribly offensive.

advertising on the whole is far more representative that it was a few years ago and that is a good thing progression is good

so are toys aimed at children and books again that is a good thing (not all the pink stuff but thaty is a different debate) i feel kinder slipped up a bit here it could have been better though out. if a black/asian/mixed race non white child were to say to me was i not able to enter this competition because i am white i would think that is a pretty bad thing

Its not a bad thing, it would be an honest mistake on the part of the child, and should be corrected by an honest explanation.

Not by condoning deliberate racial selection.

should have said not white ....

If one of the six winners were not picked because they are white it would be racist.

here here whiteshores positvie racial discrimination is insulting

I think they have chosen a good range of children, they are not all typical white british children. I don't see the problem?

Theres also no disabled children there and no one with a facial deformaty, they can't cover everything just to keep everyone happy. I'm sure it was done on a voting system (who ever got the most likes) so nothing to do with what they look like (more to do with how many family and friends they could get to vote for the child).

FreudianSlipper: how would you think the thing out better? People entered children. The public (I.e. Grandmas ) voted. The fifty highest voted children went through to the final. What would you do if you were in charge? Rig the preliminary vote? Not have the competition at all, and run down to a modelling agency with an order for "several children with obviously varied complexions"?

Surely this is a joke? There's so much to do today. It's beautiful out there.

i do not like these competitions i find them a little cringy

but maybe a bigger selection of children, that represented all children i think would be better, like i said one child or adult blah blah in previous post

society has changed and moved on advertising should reflect that

I thought society had moved on from condoning selection based on skin colour... but apparantly not.

Your recommendation that they should make their selections based on skin colour is the most offensive thing here.

really is that what i have said

Yes, you are saying at least one child should be of another colour, and that Ferrero should have deliberately made sure this happened.

i said i think a competition where you are picking a child to represent a company that is marketed to all children should represent our society (that is not 100% white)

i said i cannot see anything wrong with having one or two non white children (or more even) but it does seem odd to me that the choice is only white children

i cannot see why that would be positive discrimination but i can see why someone may feel discriminated against (and i hope no one is but i can not answer for how everyone may feel and if someone does feel like that that is pretty shit)

So you are advocating deliberately picking one or two children based on their skin colour to stick in there as a gesture.

Offensive, and discriminatory.

who said anything about a gesture

i said it is about representing our society, including us all not only one group

And selecting children based on skin colour to do so.

That is discrimination.