Sony's Black vs White: Blackout

Some would argue that Sony is merely personifying the racial tension that really exists - albeit vastly ignored - in the greater culture of the major nations; regardless of how tasteless it may or may not be. Simply put, they've commericialized wounds that many claim aren't there, and that others deal with on a daily basis, which is the reason it bothers many of us so.

The ad implies "dominance", "preference", and "better"; which could quite possibly could be the case with their new (white) PSP. All company's claim that their latest product is better and preferred over the former. It's called "marketing". Nothing new there. Seems pretty innocent - right?

However, it seems that Sony chose to use a social ill that many believe to be true - that white believes itself to be "better", "preferred", and "dominant" over black - to personify it's product. Subliminal advertisements of these sorts are intended to convey a subjective message/response other than what's objectively implied. In this case, the dominance of black over white is explicitly implicit (i.e. clothing, skin, lighting, black knot around the neck, etc.); which will probably result in Sony using "artistic integrity" as its scapegoat.

The question is, should we be mad at Sony, or should we be mad at someone else (like ourselves) because these conditions exist in the first place for Sony to exploit? It seems that there is enough blame - and thus "responsibility" - to go around for all.

Because it's an advert, it comes off as if Sony is promoting this mindset (white racial dominance) more so than it's PSP product. Conversely, this ad commercializes racial dominance; virtually minimizing the importance of racial unity, and justifying the bigotry of...well....bigots! It comes off as if to say that racial unity is so insignificant, that they can sell a product by showing a lack thereof.

Obviously, Sony's intent is merely to get their name on the tip of everyone's tongue; with little regard of how inflammatory and/or racially insensitve their methods may be. "Shock value" has proven profitable in many situations; which could easily explain Sony's bold, seemingly unconscionable, effort. Even in Hollywood, there is a saying that states, "There is no such thing as bad publicity." But Sony could have quite possible shattered that adage.

As more and more major corporations take steps in embracing diversity - whether the intent is genuine or not - you would think that a company as large as Sony would have thought twice before releasing an ad that blatantly - to some - implies otherwise. Truthfully speaking, major corporations embrace diversity as a means of remaining "competitive", not necessarilly because they have a genuine concern for equlaity. Ironically, this quite possibly could be Sony's attempt at "keeping-it-real", for a lack of a better term.

From an artistic/metaphorical expression standpoint, this would be a non-issue; mainly because art reflects a state of mind or concept - albeit positive or negative - that exists in the mind of it's creator; purely subjective.

But when your intent is to influence and motivate people to support your product, one should be more socially conscious of it's customer base; which is the reason this ad comes off as socially irresponsible, insensitive, racist, and simply put, a bad idea........unless of course it is Sony's intent to alienate it's minority customers.

If that is this case, then minorities should honor Sony's wish and refuse to purchase any of its products. In fact, even if it was not their intent, Sony should take the steps of admitting its short-sightedness - if they believe it to be so - and replace the add with one that gets their point across without disrespecting ANY social group. If not, maybe Sony should experience the sting of a "black out" boycott. Then we can really see how true that ad is!

TUNGZ