Let me start of by saying I love Dove. My skin tends to be sensitive and their basic soap (which isn’t really soap) called a “beauty bar” works very well with my skin.
Dove began to dominate the US market back in the 80s when a dermatologist showed how the soap irritated and dried the skin much less than other soaps. The company started a massive marketing campaign and today they’re one of the biggest brands in skin care.
A couple of years ago Dove started a marketing campaign designed to raise awareness about the problems with female image. Beauty products always paint the picture of the perfect woman, when we know that isn’t possible for most. Below are two examples of the campaign; I’m particularly fond of the second one.
Great messages right? Certainly. The campaign’s capstone was a website called Campaign For Real Beauty, an organization that promotes self esteem. Very noble stuff right?
This and this alone makes Dove a socially responsible brand. But there are a few problems. This falls into the realm of corporate responsibility. Dove is simply a brand, they aren’t their own company. Dove has a number of sister brands, hundreds actually. Below I’ll list just a few:
- Axe
- Ben & Jerry’s
- Country Crock
- Klondike
- Degree
- Suave
- Pond’s
- Q-Tips
- Slim-Fast
- Lipton
The company that owns all of these is Unilever, a Europe based conglomerate. Dove promotes naturally beauty, and says you should feel comfortable with who you are. They would never advertise something with a message that using their product would make you more beautiful. However, check out this commercial below:
Fair & Lovely is another Unilever brand. Here’s another ad, and another targeted at men and I would say these two are even worse.
Does that look like the same message Dove is sending? Certainly looks more like the opposite. Granted, Unilever was forced to pull some of these ads for being racially insensitive, but the brand still exists and the product still sells.
So does this undermine the whole Campaign For Real Beauty? It does and it doesn’t. For one thing, it’s shameful for Unilever to allow Dove to market this way but at the same time continue to market their other products in the way they do (ever seen an Axe ad?). But, Dove could be committed to this and be expending resources to convince their parent company to go all in with them. This would be a good thing for the company and corporate responsibility.
I think Dove should just get back to their roots, sell me some soap that doesn’t irritate the skin.
What do you think, do products like Axe and Fair & Lovely make the Dove campaign disingenuous?
 By The Weakonomist |
The Weakonomist is the founder of Weakonomics. Clicking the picture of the puppy will tell you more about him. If you like what you're reading consider subscribing to the blog, following him on Twitter, and checking out the related posts below. Please consider a donation if you really enjoy Weakonomics. Also keep in mind that nothing I say can be construed as financial advice. |
| Related Websites |
Said,
Said,
Maybe this can become a support group of guys who use Dove for sensitive skin. I’m also allergic to artificial smells, so Axe is my arch-nemesis.
My mouth literally dropped open when I saw that commercial. I had no idea. The blame is easy to place on Unilever instead of Dove. Marketers craft a message certain groups want to hear in a way they want to hear it and the product itself is part of that message. Unilever (along with Fair and Lovely) is the one who controls the Fair and Lovely message, not Dove.
Corporations usually keep the public perception of their brands separate to avoid conflicting messages. Usually it’s more subtle conflicts, like one drink that has a youth appeal and another that is sophisticated. But one product whose core message is you are beautiful as you are directly conflicts with a cream that relies on racism to sell.
Some markets – some messages – should just be avoided, even if there is a quantity demanded.