I won’t buy a Buick—because of the offensive advertising
My husband brought me Barbara Lippert’s article on Buick’s new ads [April 25]—apparently he remembers how disgusted I get at half the ads on TV, including the Buick ones. So many of them just make me want to scream! Why must so many ad groups think they have to portray a woman like she’ll have a freaking orgasm if she will only use their product? If we really could, we’d all buy the stuff. The clothes aren’t what we wear—the woman in the red dress looks anorexic, as does the woman in gold. That one reminds me also of days gone by with kings and castles, where the women all just stood around and looked gorgeous, waiting for a signal from their master to take care of his needs. Yuck! The woman in the car under the waterfall has a huge bust that men can hardly ignore and ends up in the shower with a phallic-looking nozzle. Maybe they think men will buy a Buick so they’ll have a wife or significant other like that. I wouldn’t buy a Buick, because of the advertising, just like I won’t buy Herbal Essences shampoo. We women have a heck of a lot more going for us than perfect bodies or orgasmic qualities! I’m sick of seeing women exploited and inferior, so why don’t they knock it off? Maybe they need to ask more of us who are average, everyday, halfway-normal women!

Debbie Barnes

For the record: An article that appeared in the Nov. 1, 2004, issues of Adweek, Brandweek and their online counterparts titled “The Price of Admission” stated that Judy Brill, a former employee of Foote Cone & Belding in San Francisco, allowed a print-services vendor to pay for her “honeymoon,” and that later that print vendor won a contract worth $2 million to service the AT&T Wireless ad account, of which Judy Brill was the division head for that account. Judy Brill has categorically denied these allegations. Adweek, Brandweek and their online counterparts accept the fact that the AT&T Wireless account was awarded to Andresen, Inc. at the approval of AT&T’s own independent auditing firm and not by Judy Brill. Despite information from other sources, Adweek, Brandweek and their online counterparts also accept that Judy Brill paid for her own honeymoon, which she spent in Alberta, Canada, not New York and Mexico as previously stated. Adweek, Brandweek and their online counterparts have no information that would imply that Judy Brill left her position at Foote Cone & Belding for any other reason than to pursue further advancement of her career. We regret any harm that may have been caused to Ms. Brill by the article. … In the ranking of the Top 100 agencies [April 25], Cossette Post in New York should have been listed at No. 92 with 2004 revenue of $17.2 million and billings of $170 million. … Full Circle Entertainment is a unit of Omnicom Media Group, not OMD [Media Report Cards, May 2].