One day while flipping through the Net I happened upon this most distressing news story:
Garnier, Adecco Fined for Rascism
The French cosmetics company, Garnier, and Swiss employment agency Adecco have been found guilty of carrying out a racist recruitment campaign in 2000.
A French appeals court overturned an earlier acquittal and ruled both companies had colluded to find only white women to sell make-up in Paris.
They were fined 30,000 euros ($40,865) and a former Adecco employee was given a three-month suspended jail sentence.
Garnier‘s parent company, L’Oreal, said it was not racist and would appeal.
Adecco, the world’s biggest employment agency, said it was astonished by the ruling and was considering an appeal.
‘Coded instructions’
The Paris Appeal Court found that Adecco had complied with what prosecutors said were coded instructions from Garnier to find only young, white women for its counters in the capital.
The court was shown a Garnier memo requesting “BBR” women – an acronym for “bleu-blanc-rouge” or “blue-white-red”, the colours of the French flag in French.
Prosecutors said the term was a racist code for excluding black, Arab or Asian women.
The term is also used in the literature of the far-right National Front party in France.
After finding them guilty, the court fined Garnier, Adecco and one its subsidiary’s, Ajilon, 30,000 euros, as well as 10,000 euros ($13,600) of legal costs, to the pressure group SOS Racisme.
Therese Coulange, a former Adecco employee, was given a three-month suspended prison sentence.
However, the former Garnier director, Laurent Dubois, and another Adecco employee were acquitted.
The ruling was the first time in France that blue-chip companies have been convicted of racial discrimination in hiring.
The charges had originally been dismissed by a civil court in June 2006 on the grounds that there was sufficient doubt about their guilt.
source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6279418.stm
Now you know I just about had a heart attack when I saw this — not that racial discrimination wasn’t uber evident from watching their commercials already– because you all know how much I love the Fructis line (presently I possess two of their shampoos, two of their conditioners and a bottle of their anti-humidifying milk) because of how well it works for my hair. Even though this atrocity happened only in Paris, and more than likely won’t cause me to stop using their products (they don’t have to like my ethnicity in order for me to like how their shampoos and conditioners work on my hair), the mindset of the advertising French is so bass ackward. And to think they thought they’d get away with it! This is 2009, right?
A couple of days later I notice a barrage of Blog posts concerning the “bad hair day” commercials, in which Gariner shows a Caucasian woman sporting an Afro-esque do prior to using the products to make her hair sleek and straight (I haven’t personally seen it and can’t find it anywhere on the Net, but I did see this one which I found offensive), along with the Fructis Flow spot featuring Memphis Bleek and an R&B type song but no women of colour in the singing line up (there was at least one in the commercial… I saw her… she was in the club with a natural style). Needless to say, the sisters are not amused, and I can’t say I blame them one bit. Considering I am a loyal consumer of the the Fructis line of products, it would be nice to see advertising that represents us women of colour who probably make up a larger portion of L’Oreal‘s revenue base, as well as does not liken our unique and beautiful texture to dogs or use it as examples to reinforce stereotypes of what “bad hair” looks like.
So how do we make that happen ladies?
Well Karen over at the Naturally Beautiful Blog spoke her peace directly to the company and receive a quick, albeit terse, response from their Consumer Affairs Department. Writing Addict over at On The Road to Queendom did the same, and I say so should we, because we need to have a say in how our hair is depicted in marketing campaigns!
Here’s my letter:
I have been a been a loyal buyer of your Fructis brand for many year and rave about how well they work with my hair type, but as an African-American woman I find your recent ad campaign for your Sleek and Shine line, depicting “bad hair” as the type that closely resembles mine and others of African descent — frizzy, course, kinky and coily. In your most recent commercial, a Caucasian model’s straight hair transforming into an Afro after a drop of water falls onto it. The model then screams in horror and is rushed to by a man with hedge clippers. The verbal message of the commercial is a claim that your product will “fix” the model (consumer, by proxy) hair so that it returns to it’s former glory instead of remaining a frizzy mess. In another of your commercials, aired outside of the United States, a pair of Caucasian models are shown walking dogs past the camera; one walks what appears to be a Poodle with matted fur and the model seen wearing what appears to be brown Dreadlocks, and the other walks what appears to be a Chow and wears a poofy Afro-like style. With the bad hair and the dogs the models walk off camera, then return walking in the opposite direction totally transformed into blondes with long, flowing straight hair. Because the language of the commerical is not one I’m fluent in I am not sure what was said, but despite that the offensive message came across clear.
Now while the objective of both campaigns is evident, the messages communicated by the visual are quite culturally offensive and done in very poor taste. By terming Caucasian hair that looks like African-American when it is in its natural state as “bad” in your advertising, you alienate your African-American customers and bolster the negative stereotype that hair like ours is undesirable. As a woman of colour who uses your product on her chemically unaltered (course, kinky and coiled) hair, I feel that your commercials are misrepresenting just how beautiful all hair is, not just that of the glorified straight, sleek and Caucasian variety, and sending the message that ethnic hair is not considered part of Garnier‘s demographic. And many of women like me agree.
In the future, I hope your company takes into consideration that women of all hair types use your products and are subject to your advertising messages, and will work harder to produce commercials that appeal to all of your consumers without being offensive to other ethnic groups.
And I kindly dropped it HERE. Quite possibly, if we get enough people on board and make a big enough fuss, Garnier will change its advertising stripes at home and abroad.
Update
Having sent out my correspondence on Saturday, I was surprised to find this response from them in my Email today:
From: Garnier <garnier@us.loreal.com>
July 20, 2009
Thank you for letting us know how you feel about the commercial for our company.
The opinions of our consumers are important to us when making decisions about our products, services and advertising. We value you as a customer and will forward your comments to the appropriate individual in our company.
Sincerely,
Cesarina
Consumer Affairs Advisor
Ref # 5174282
Now while I appreciate the promptness of the reply, the terseness of it, the fact that it is not addressed to me personally, and none of my searches brought up a “Cesarina” connected with Garnier or L’Oreal under the title of “Consumer Affairs Advisor” (notice there is no last name attached) makes me quite dissatisfied with the response at present. Provided my comments really are being forwarded to the proper individual, as relayed in this communiqué, I will wait about a week or so before following up. Now while I was not prepared to stop using the Fructis line based on the initial practices because as I’ve said, a company does not have to like me in order for me to like their products (when it comes to corporations, it’s never “personal”, and I understand that), but depending on how they choose to handle this situation, I just might reconsider my stance.
I will keep you all updated.
Healthy Hair Wishes,
mmichelle | 
08 15th, 2010| 
