When Oreos Started Talking

[Jayd]

Am I the only one who doesn't buy the fact that Oreos really give a fuck about gay marriage? There's been a dozen corporations who have jumped on this corporate bandwagon for gay marriage, but, they largely support the Republican party when it comes down to campaign financing. I don't care how many pictures or Advertisements they make, it doesn't help to turn around and then support anti-gay candidates. Or just any right wing candidate who is only concerned with corporate rights and not the rights of others.

Anyhow, I wrote an article on the topic. It has some pretty good research as to why these cookie and jcpenney images are all a fricken hoax and more of a way to gain profit on a politically marginalized group being us queers.

http://goodasgay.blogspot.com/2012/06/wh...lking.html

Thoughts? Do the images still push people to think nonetheless, does it still have an effect on public opinion regardless of campaign financing?

[pellaz]

the images still push people to think nonetheless, does it still have an effect on public opinion

5+ years ago there was no gay adjenda and our little social experiment could come to a quick end either way with no gain.

N Americal is not well educated and not well informed. The main source of information for most citizens is the pictures on the cereal box or box of cookies.

[Bowyn Aerrow]

N Americal is not well educated and not well informed. The main source of information for most citizens is the pictures on the cereal box or box of cookies.

This sums it up nicely. Politics on the back of food packaging= Average American.

[Pix]

Actually, big biz throws money and basically owns both parties, Democrat as well as Republican. Of course each side likes to claim that's only true of the other but every nonpartisan group that looked into found them both rolling in corporate dollars, and often by the same donors (I even heard from someone who said PBS did an expose on that and claiming "there's only the Green/Money Party" and were suddenly harassed by the IRS until they shut up about it). The last report I saw showed both Obama's and Romney's sponsors and the differences were more subtle than substantial. There's a reason why the US is said to have "the best democracy money can buy."

[Genersis]

This sums it up nicely. Politics on the back of food packaging= Average American.

Things aren't much better here.

For my family at least, any news that's political is filtered out by their rich-politician-hate-o-filter. Though i think that's partly due to my family's working class background.

[ESLteacher]

I want my magical Oreos to start talking!?

[princealbertofb]

Am I the only one who doesn't buy the fact that Oreos really give a fuck about gay marriage? There's been a dozen corporations who have jumped on this corporate bandwagon for gay marriage, but, they largely support the Republican party when it comes down to campaign financing. I don't care how many pictures or Advertisements they make, it doesn't help to turn around and then support anti-gay candidates. Or just any right wing candidate who is only concerned with corporate rights and not the rights of others.

Anyhow, I wrote an article on the topic. It has some pretty good research as to why these cookie and jcpenney images are all a fricken hoax and more of a way to gain profit on a politically marginalized group being us queers.

http://goodasgay.blogspot.com/2012/06/wh...lking.html

Thoughts? Do the images still push people to think nonetheless, does it still have an effect on public opinion regardless of campaign financing?

It seems to me that you protest too much. Of course it's an economic and marketing ploy, and nobody can believe that it's not, but hadn't you rather have a brand that is gay affirming to a brand that pretends you don't exist, or worse, that denigrates you as a citizen?

I think this rainbow colouring of the oreo cookie, like any rainbow colouring is more profiled by the events that happen around the year, so it's more opportunistic, just like green, red and gold seem to symbolise Christmas, etc, they are just playing with the events that take place all through the year. They'd have Hallowe'en cookies for Hallowe'en and Easter cookies for Easter etc... It's merchandising in its most usual form. I'm not sure that Oreo were trying to make a political statement so much as they were trying to be inclusive at a time when some brands seem to be discriminating.

[spencer]

I'm very understanding of businesses wanting to support candidates that will help their business, and often times this means supporting anti-gay candidates but that doesn't mean their anti-gay, it means they have a business to run and they're going to support candidates that will help them, I don't have a problem with that and find it totally reasonable.

Also, when businesses are playing off as gay-frienndly just to make profits even if they really don't care I don't have an issue with that either. I'd rather them use fake-caring to make profits than using hate. I wouldd much rather see Oreos or Target or whatever pretending to give a crap about equal rights just to make some money than a company telling me they're donating money to support anti-gay laws. If a business is promoting equality even if it's just so they can increase profits it's STILL getting the message of being accepting out there and that's the important thing to me.

[Rainbowmum]

Gee I hope all politicians start running their campaigns through talking food.
They would save a fortune.

Seriously , that's just nasty.