See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255722073

Deconstructing subtle racist imagery in

television ads

Article in Journal of Business Ethics · September 2014

DOI: 10.1007/s10551-013-1798-8

CITATION READS

1 448

4 authors, including:

Haseeb Shabbir Michael R Hyman

University of Hull New Mexico State University
13 PUBLICATIONS 117 CITATIONS 193 PUBLICATIONS 1,325 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jon Reast
University of Bradford
15 PUBLICATIONS 377 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Michael R Hyman on 08 December 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads

DECONSTRUCTING SUBTLE RACIST IMAGERY IN TELEVISION ADS

Published online in Journal of Business Ethics, 9 August 2013

DOI 10.1007/s10551-013-1798-8

Haseeb A. Shabbir
Senior Lecturer in Marketing
Hull University Business School
Hull, UK
e-mail: H.Shabbir@hull.ac.uk
Phone: +44 (0)1482 463197

Michael R. Hyman*
Distinguished Achievement Professor of Marketing
New Mexico State University
College of Business
Box 30001, Dept. 5280
Las Cruces, NM 88003-8001
e-mail: mhyman@nmsu.edu
Phone: 505-646-5238
Fax: 505-646-1498

Jon Reast
Professor of Marketing, Deputy Dean
Bradford University School of Management
Emm Lane, Bradford
West Yorkshire, BD9 4JL
e-mail: J.Reast@bradford.ac.uk
Phone: +44 (0)1274 234357

Dayananda Palihawadana
Senior Lecturer in Marketing, Director MSc International Marketing Management
Leeds University Business School
Maurice Keyworth Building, University of Leeds
Leeds, LS2 9JT, United Kingdom
e-mail: dp@lubs.leeds.ac.uk
Phone: +44 (0)1133 433804

*Please send all correspondence regarding this manuscript to Michael R. Hyman

0
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
DECONSTRUCTING SUBTLE RACIST IMAGERY IN TELEVISION ADS
ABSTRACT
Although ads with subtle racist imagery can
reinforce negative stereotypes, advertisers can
eliminate this problem. After a brief overview
of predominantly U.S.-based research on the
racial mix of models/actors in ads, a
theoretical framework for unmasking subtle
racial bias is provided and dimensional
qualitative research (DQR) is introduced as a
method for identifying and rectifying such ad
imagery. Results of a DQR-based study of
622 U.K. television ads with at least one
Black actor indicate (1) subtle racially biased
imagery now supersedes overt forms, and (2)
the most popular ad appeals often mask
negative stereotypes. Implications for public
policy and advertisers, as well as
recommendations for future research, are
discussed.
Keywords: advertising, negative stereotypes,
negative imagery, subtle versus overt racial
bias, dimensional qualitative research
General category: Marketing and Consumer
Behavior
In their philosophical treatise, Cohen-
Eliya and Hammer (2004) argued that
stereotypical images in ads, by reinforcing
negative racial stereotypes, deter people from
breaking a bad habit: holding racially biased
beliefs. Cohen-Eliya and Hammer note that
the typical uncritical viewing of ads allows
such stereotypes to be “transmitted in a way
that prevents people from internalizing their
belief in equality….[by failing to] neutralize
the influence of their….deep-rooted acquaint-
ance with stereotype norms” (p.170).
Consumers also are sensitive to this problem.
A government-sponsored survey in the U.K.
—the Independent Television Commission’s
Boxed In study on negative stereotypes in ads
(Sancho and Wilson, 2001)—revealed many
respondents were concerned that “Advertise-
ments were…guilty of creating or reinforcing
stereotypes at a subtle or even subliminal
level” (2001, p.34).
The term subliminal racism—coined by
Arthur Graham in 1972 (Image Analyst,
2009)—denotes ‘subtle racial bias’, which is
racism that operates below the threshold of
awareness. Subsequently called modern
racism (McConahay, 1986), aversive racism
(Gaertner and Dovidio, 1986), and ambivalent
racism (Katz and Hass, 1988), subtle racial
bias has become synonymous with covert
racism, which refers to “those subtle and
subversive….practices, policies and norms
utilized to mask structural racial apparatus”
(Coates, 2008, pp.211-212).
Studies based on the well-established
Implicit Association Test—which rely on
response latencies to good/bad words paired
with images of Black/White faces—reveal
that people show implicitly prefer in-group
(own race) to out-group (other race) members
(Klauer, et al., 2007; Rachlinski, Johnson, and
Guthrie, 2009). Neurobiology studies show
that Whites’ efforts to suppress unintentional
racial bias can impair cognitive ability
temporarily (Richeson et al., 2000). Observa-
tional studies indicate that subtle racial bias
leaks through nonverbal behavior (Richeson
and Shelton, 2005). Thus, subtle racial bias is
a real psychological phenomenon rather than
a delusional politicized lamentation (Coates,
2008).
Several researchers have argued that
subtle racial imagery has superseded blatant
racism in advertising (e.g., Bristor, Lee, and
Hunt, 1995; Coltrane and Messineo, 2000;
Kern-Foxworth, 1994). Overt racial images in
ads have explicit stereotypical associations; in
contrast, subtle racial images in ads are
obscure. This overt-to-subtle shift in negative
stereotyping, often involving Blacks, is
1
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
exemplified by the evolutions of Aunt
Jemima and Uncle Ben (Kern-Foxworth,
1994; Merskin, 2001).
The extant ad literature provides no tested
criteria for differentiating overt from subtle
racial images. Several researchers (e.g.,
Barthel, 1988; Cowie, 1977; Pines 1977)
argued that ‘image structure’ can create subtle
racial bias; hence, “a fuller understanding of
racism requires a scrutiny of how these
images are constructed” (Bristor, Lee, and
Hunt, 1995, p.49). Although general deter-
minants of racially biased imagery are known
—for example, objectification, trivialization,
tokenism, aggressiveness, cross-sex roles, and
passivity (Bristor, Lee, and Hunt, 1995;
Coltrane and Messineo, 2000)—they do not
differentiate between subtly and overtly
biased images. Although imagery-based
typologies grounded in cultural-text analysis
provide a useful initial assessment, “the
nature of ideology and the fact that much
advertising is culturally encoded in signs,
symbols, and icons” (Bristor, Lee, and Hunt,
1995, p.49) complicates the use of such
typologies for deconstructing subtle racial
imagery.
The largely visual and multi-modal nature
of ads, as well as the mental associations they
induce (Williamson, 1994), hinder direct
assessment of cognitive internalizations and
stereotypical images (Cohen-Eliya and
Hammer, 2004). This ‘regressive effect’
(Cohen-Eliya and Hammer, 2004) precludes
viewers from recognizing subtle stereotypical
images in ads and monitoring the effects on
their attitudes and behaviors.
The prevalence and deconstruction of
subtle racial imagery are intertwined and form
the dual objectives for the subsequently
discussed empirical study. Specifically,
dimensional qualitative research (DQR)
(Cohen, 1999; Shabbir, 2011) is used to
assess (1) subtle racial imagery, and (2)
sophisticated associative but neutral appeals
that can mask negative stereotypes (Coates,
2008) in televised ads from the U.K.
The exposition proceeds as follows. After
a brief overview of predominantly U.S.-based
research on the racial mix of models/actors in
ads, a theoretical framework for unmasking
subtle racial bias is provided and DQR is
introduced as a method for identifying ads
with negative stereotypes. Then, a DQR-
based study of U.K. television ads with Black
actors reveals both overt and subtle racial
imagery. (Blacks constitute the largest ethnic
minority in the U.K (Sudbury and Wilber-
force, 2006).) Finally, implications for society
and advertisers are explored and areas for
future research are discussed.
RACIAL STEREOTYPES IN ADS:
A BRIEF LITERATURE REVIEW
Table 1 summarizes the results of many
U.S.-based empirical studies on the racial mix
of models/actors in ads for adults. These
studies often considered several variables
from the set shown in the Figure.
-------------------------------------
Insert Figure and Table 1 here
-------------------------------------
Both cross-sectional (e.g., Cox, 1970;
Kassarjian, 1969; Lee and Joo, 2005; Millard
and Grant, 2006; Paek and Shah, 2003; Taylor
and Lee, 1994) and longitudinal (Bowen and
Schmid, 1997; Humphrey and Schuman,
1984; Plous and Neptune, 1997; Stevenson,
1992a, 1992b, 2002, 2007) studies have been
conducted. Typically, magazine or television
ads were evaluated, with the latter limited to
cross-sectional analysis.
The studies summarized in Table 1 gener-
ally report three trends in U.S. magazine ads
from the mid-1940s to the mid-1980s: (1) the
percentage of ads with Blacks increased
rapidly from meaningfully less than the
incidence of Blacks in the general population
to slightly more than the incidence of Blacks
in the general population (e.g., Stevenson,
1992a, 1992b; Humphrey and Schuman,
1984; Kassarjian, 1969), (2) Blacks were
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
decreasingly portrayed as blue-collar workers
and increasingly portrayed as professionals or
entertainers (e.g., Stevenson, 1992b. 2007;
Zinkhan, 1986), and (3) of ads with a Black
model, the percentage of Blacks who played a
major role in the ad increased (e.g., Lee and
Joo, 2005). Since the mid-1980s, these three
trends have continued (e.g., Plous and
Neptune, 1997, Stevenson, 2007). In addition,
the stereotype of Asian-Americans as a work-
centric ‘model minority’ emerged (e.g., Paek
and Shah, 2003; Taylor, Landreth, and Bang,
2005; Taylor and Lee, 1994) while Hispanics
remained underrepresented relative to the
U.S. Census and excessively depicted in
minor roles (e.g., Lee and Joo, 2005; Paek
and Shah, 2003).
The studies of U.S. television ads since
the 1970s confirm that Blacks were appearing
increasingly as skilled employees who played
a major role in the ad (e.g., Licata and
Biswas, 1993; Wilkes and Valencia, 1989).
Nonetheless, Whites frequently were depicted
in major roles, shown exercising more
authority, and involved in more family set-
tings and cross-sex interactions (Coltrane and
Messineo, 2000). Blacks appeared excessive-
ly in service settings, sports/athletic contexts,
and in ads for financial services, fast food,
and athletic/sports products (Henderson and
Baldasty, 2003; Mastro and Stern, 2003); in
contrast, Asians appeared excessively in work
settings and in ads for technology products
(Mastro and Stern, 2003; Taylor and Stern,
1997).
For Black characters in ads, a ‘dominant
group ideology’ may be transmitted through
numerical misrepresentation, negative role
portrayal (especially inadequate family life),
manipulated screen presence (through token-
ism, objectification, trivialization, low activity
levels, camera distance, and reduced exposure
time), status and power imbalance, and
stereotyped cultural values (Bristor, Lee, and
Hunt, 1995). Unlike their Native American
spokescharacters, companies updated historic-
ally Black spokescharacters—such as Aunt
Jemima and Uncle Ben—to eliminate
negative stereotypical aspects (Merskin,
2001). Nonetheless, negative stereotyping of
Black females remains an issue despite
reformulations of traditional Black female
characters in ads (Fuller, 2001).
Although helpful for spotting broad trends
in the frequency and portrayal of non-Whites
in ads, the studies assessing viewers’ attitudes
have yielded mixed results. A few studies
showed Whites responded similarly or more
favorably to ads with non-White models
(Bush, Gwinner, and Solomon, 1974; Martin,
Lee, and Yang, 2004; Schlinger and Plummer,
1972); in contrast, other studies showed
integrated or all-Black casts in ads may or
may not elicit a backlash among some White
college students and adults (Cagley and
Cardozo, 1970; Stafford, Birdwell, and Van
Tassel, 1970). Several studies showed people
identify more with and respond more
favorably to ads with same-race models/actors
(Qualls and Moores, 1990, Sierra, Hyman,
and Torres, 2009); yet, one study showed that
Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics identified most
with ads containing Black actors, and another
study showed members of all races evaluated
ads with Black actors more favorably than ads
that used White actors (Appiah, 2001).
Relative to Whites, non-Whites often were
more aware of and responded more favorably
to ethnically resonant ads (Forehand,
Deshpandé, and Reed, 2002; Martin, Lee, and
Yang, 2004; Schlinger and Plummer, 1972).
Thus, almost all empirical studies on the
racial mix of models/actors in ads examined
incidence rates and viewers’ responses to
infer racial imagery in ads. Although
informative, these cross-sectional and
longitudinal studies relied on basic content
analyses and statistics to assess overt racial
imagery in overwhelming U.S.-only samples
of magazine or television ads. As a result,
their findings are limited in two ways: (1)
they are not safely generalizable to non-U.S.
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
settings, and (2) they offer little guidance to
ad designers or regulators because they
pertain to the corpus of ads.
The first limitation implies that if the
U.S.-based censuses that dominates academic
journals contain idiosyncratic findings
(Taylor, 1997), then generalizing from them
would be unwise; hence, studies embedded in
alternative socio-cultural contexts are needed
to broaden our understanding of racial
imagery in contemporary ads. Despite the
socio-cultural similarities between the US and
the UK, important differences exist; for
instance, UK ads tend to be less informative,
rely on a soft- rather than a hard-sell
approach, and focus more on entertaining the
viewer (Nevett, 1992). A study grounded
within the UK context would help to ascertain
the prevalence of overt or subtle racial
imagery in advertising worldwide.
The second limitation, which implies a
single ad cannot perpetuate stereotypes
reinforceable only by the combined effect of
all ads, is both more important and less
obvious. As the depiction and incidence of
ethnic models/actors in ads are logically
independent, mere censuses—which charac-
terizes many of the US based studies—cannot
fully gauge subtle racial imagery in ads.
These studies offered no testable criterion for
differentiating overt from subtle racial
imagery and could suggest only a few vague
rules of thumb, such as do not depict ethnic
models/actors in stereotypical job or social
settings. Given the lack of a testable criterion
for evaluating subtle racial imagery in ads, the
current study serves as a preliminary investi-
gation of subtle racial imagery in ads.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Although several researchers have con-
ducted imagery-sensitive text-analysis-based
studies (Bristor, Lee, and Hunt 1995), and
other researchers have argued that subtle
racism has superseded blatant racism
(Coltrane and Messineo, 2000; Kern-
Foxworth, 1994), extant research methods are
ill suited for identifying ads with subtle racial
bias. For example, these methods are
insensitive to subtle racial imagery masked by
the fusion of non-racial content with racial
elements.
Visual masking implies that neutral
appeals can conceal the often-subliminal
manner in which people perceive messages. It
follows that if the masking appeal was
removed, then increased conscious processing
would reveal the problematic content (Smith
and Rogers, 1994). One goal of the
subsequently discussed study is to determine
the prevalence of this masking phenomenon.
Ideomotor theory suggests that primed
stereotypes automatically can evoke stereo-
type-consistent behavior (Bargh, Chen, and
Burrows, 1996; Dijksterhuis et al., 1998). The
principle of ideomotor action is exemplified
as “every representation of a movement
awakens in some degree the actual movement
which is its object” (James, 1890, p.526).
Although the term ‘priming’ was not coined
until Lashley (1951), James was referring to
the priming effects of imagining or thinking
about behavior.
Ideomotor theory implies that subtle racial
imagery may be primed, at a supraliminal
level, with neutral components in ads; thus,
exposure to relevant situational cues could
activate these representational structures and
influence behavior (Bargh, Chen, and Bur-
rows, 1996). Supraliminal primes are present-
ed so weakly that people may become aware
of them through cognitive inquiry but remain
unaware of their influence. Primes like
stereotypical imagery will be more accessible
to targeted groups than to non-stereotyped
groups due to a lower activation threshold in
the former groups (Levy, 1996; Shih et al.,
2002). One explanation for this phenomenon
is the heuristic function of stereotypes: to
guide decision making under cognitively
taxing circumstances (Bodenhausen and
Hamilton, 1993; Bodenhausen and Lichten-
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
stein, 1987; Gilbert and Hixon, 1991).
Racial imagery operates along a continu-
um of viewer awareness, with overt images at
one endpoint and subliminal images at the
other endpoint. Subtle racially biased images,
identifiable through DQR-based ad decon-
struction, lie between these two extremes in a
preconscious awareness zone (Shabbir and
Thwaites, 2007).
Ideomotor-behavioral priming activation
—which social psychologists generally accept
—posits that a stereotype-activated attitude
(and associated behavior) often occurs
unintentionally (Bargh, 1994). For instance,
students walked more slowly if primed with
elderly stereotypes and acted more rudely if
primed for rudeness rather than politeness
(Bargh, Chen, and Burrows, 1996). Women
first exposed to gender-stereotypical ads
scored lower on a math exam than women
first exposed to neutral ads (Davies et al.,
2002). Positive stereotypes also have a
preconscious effect. Relative to unprimed
students, students primed with the concept of
‘God’ gave more money to strangers (Shariff
and Norenzayan, 2007). In Europe, people
supraliminally primed for honesty were more
likely to pay for public toilet usage (Schorn,
2009). Thus, subtle racial images could
activate—given the priming effect of subtle
racial imagery—a passive perception-
behavior effect.
Research Questions
The main focus of the current study is to
determine the preponderance of ads with
subtle racial bias. Note that this bias may be
created by priming elements in ads, namely
appeals that mask underlying racial bias.
Thus, racial imagery can be deconstructed by
analyzing the effect of removing masking
appeals. Concerns that ‘stereotypical
variables’ (Taylor and Stern, 1997) may
associate Black actors with low-involvement
products (Bailey, 2006; Henderson and
Baldasty, 2003) suggest testing for
differences in racially biased images by
product category. Thus, the following three
research questions guide the current study:
RQ#1: What is the incidence of racist
imagery in television ads?
RQ#2: What are the primary ad appeals that
mask underlying racist imagery?
RQ#3: What is the association between
product categories and overt or subtle
racial bias?
RESEARCH APPROACH
Content analysis is well suited for
assessing the prevalence of subtle imagery
because “Meanings are transmitted covertly
and indirectly, and accordingly, they are not
subjected to the audience’s scrutiny in the
sense that they are not absorbed by the
audience in a cognitive and conscious
manner” (Cohen-Eliya and Hammer, 2004,
p.166). Hence, content analysis allows careful
and holistic scrutiny of subtle ad images
(Bristor, Lee, and Hunt, 1995). Because
contemporary ads often entail multiple and
simultaneously shifting layers of content, a
research tool is required that can deconstruct
each layer in a systematic and comprehensive
manner.
DQR-based content analyses combine
teleological and deontological perspectives
into a single mechanism for studying the
intrinsic and extrinsic psychological
dimensions of advertising (Shabbir and
Thwaites, 2007). Indeed, such analyses can
identify traditionally determined manifest
variables through constructed narratives or
profiles of ads that integrate assumptions
about latent phenomena. Because they are
“useful in adding objectivity to coder
evaluation,” DQR-based content analyses are
ideal for identifying ad appeals that conceal
negative imagery (Shabbir and Thwaites,
2007, p.81). For advertising scholars,
consumer groups, business ethicists, and
regulatory bodies, DQR-based content
analyses are ideal for studying subtle negative
stereotypes in ads.
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
Brief Overview of DQR
DQR, as proposed by Cohen (1999), was
meant to enhance the quality of qualitative
consumer research via systematic application
of a cognitive-behavioral framework. Cohen
adapted his framework from the Lazarus
(1973) BASIC ID model, which was designed
to assist clinical psychologists. In multiple
studies, Lazarus (1973, 1989) showed how his
BASIC ID framework—B for behavioral, A
for affect, S for sensation, I for imagery, C for
cognition, I for interpersonal relations, and D
for drugs (really physical modality, but like
place in the 4Ps acronym, called drugs for
mnemonic memorability)—offered a compre-
hensive approach to psychiatric interventions
and diagnosis. His framework assumes that
people move, feel, imagine, think, and relate
to one another (Cohen, 1999; Lazarus, 1973).
Thus, “every condition that human flesh and
the psyche is heir to can be accounted for” by
the BASIC ID modalities, such as “[l]ove,
hope, faith, ambition, greed, optimism, joy,
sexual drive, assertiveness, disappointment,
anticipation, anger, disgust, fear, grief,
ecstasy, surprise, failure, awe, contempt,
acceptance, boredom, or whatever other
action, feeling, sensation, mental picture,
idea, personal bond, or physical factor a
person may experience” (Lazarus, 1989,
p.16). To adapt the Lazarus (1973) framework
for consumer research, Cohen (1999) added
an eighth modality: the second S in Cohen’s
BASIC IDS mnemonic represents socio-
cultural aspects.
Researchers have applied the BASIC IDS
dimensions to determine whether humor
conceals underlying deceptive claims in TV
ad narratives (Shabbir and Thwaites, 2007),
explore tourists’ ‘experiential journeys’
(Woodside and Drew, 2011), deconstruct
consumer-generated videos (Berthon, Pitt,
and DesAutels, 2011), categorize consumer
responses about body-enhancing products
(Markley and Davis, 2011), and assess
donors’ motives towards bequest-giving
behavior (Sargeant and Shang, 2011).
Advertisers can use the eight BASIC IDS
modalities to construct ad narratives, and
coders can be trained to identify ads with
germane modality-related elements and to
assess the effect of removing those elements
(Shabbir and Thwaites, 2007).
Application of DQR
The BASIC IDS framework permits a
comprehensive assessment of ads. By
constructing and then content analyzing ad
narratives or profiles based on BASIC IDS
modalities, researchers can (1) identify the
modalities that contribute most to a biased
image, and (2) study the effect of different
modalities on image by manipulating adjacent
modalities or related neutral structures within
constructed narratives or profiles (Shabbir and
Thwaites, 2007). The following example
illustrates this procedure.
A Television Ad Narrative with Subtle
Racial Bias. A Black [imagery] golfer
attempting a shot during a tournament
[behavior] kills [behavior] [imagery] [socio-
cultural] a seemingly all-White gallery and
causes a squirrel in a nearby tree to faint
[behavioral]. The narrator attributes
[cognitive] the deaths to the golfer’s failure to
apply deodorant [sensory] that day. Next, the
golfer’s [imagery] day had he used deodorant
[cognitive] is replayed. Then, the deodorant
container is shown with the slogan ‘start right,
end right’ [cognitive] [imagery], with the
revived squirrel clapping its hands
[behavioral] in delight [imagery]. In the
background, the gallery cheers [behavioral]
[socio-cultural].
The key indicator of subtle racial bias is a
neutral element that masks an underlying
negative stereotype (Coates, 2008). In the
previous example, the neutral element is the
use of humor. Indeed, the stereotype of the
‘foul-smelling Black’ would be more obvious
if the humor element was removed. A humor
appeal normalizes the stereotype of the Black
athlete with bad body odor, thus shifting the
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
image from negative to positive or neutral.
This ad is subtly biased because subjectively
removing the humor appeal would make the
underlying racial imagery of the ‘foul-
smelling Black’ more apparent. The simple
remedy: show both a Black and a White
golfer guilty of offensive body odor, thus
negating any stereotypical imagery.
This example suggests how using the
BASIC IDS framework to isolate ad
components can help evaluators imagine the
effect of removing one or more of those
components on perceptions of underlying
racial stereotypical images. Although this
approach precludes fixed criteria for racial
stereotypes, the use of narratives permits a
more complete and integrated assessment of
overall image.
RESEARCH DESIGN
First, the typologies for advertising
appeals, product types, and racially biased ads
are discussed. Then, sampling, coder training,
and reliability issues are addressed. A pre-test
phase was conducted to (1) train coders in
constructing narratives and to determine the
key appeal and product types, and (2)
differentiate between ads containing (a) racial
and non-racially biased imagery and (b) overt
and subtle racial imagery. Consistent with
similar content analysis studies (e.g., Carlson
et al., 1993; Peterson, 2002; Shabbir et al.,
2007), the non-parametric χ2 test was used to
assess statistical differences.
Coding Typologies
Ad Appeal Categories. The predominant
appeals found in the pre-test were humor, sex,
guilt, threat, testimonial, and comparative.
Although other ad appeals exist, support for
these six appeals includes seminal articles that
argue they are the most widely used (Biswas,
Olsen, and Carlet, 1992; Huhmann and
Brotherton, 1997; Pollay, 1985). In the main
study, and consistent with Shabbir and
Thwaites (2007), ads with multiple appeals
were coded for their primary appeal.
Humorous ads included any of three
humor forms: arousal-safety-based humor
(i.e., amusing content that causes emotional
arousal), incongruity-based humor (i.e., any
joke or pun requiring some viewer effort to
‘solve’), or disparagement-based humor (i.e.,
ridicule, sarcasm, or fun directed at another
being) (Speck, 1991; Shabbir and Thwaites,
2007). Ads contained a sexual appeal if they
included “nudity, scantily dressed models of
either gender, and any form of sexual
suggestiveness including the implicit or
explicit benefit of gaining attractiveness in
sexual or sensual ways through the use of the
item advertised” (Biswas, Olsen, Carlet, 1992,
p.14). Ads contained a guilt-inducing appeal
if they applied any of three guilt forms:
reactive guilt (i.e., response to overt act
violating one’s internalized standards for
acceptable behavior), anticipatory guilt (i.e.,
consequences of violating one’s internalized
standards), or existential guilt (i.e., awareness
of one’s well-being relative to another’s well-
being) (Huhmann and Brotherton, 1997).
Threat-based appeals were assessed by
isolating aversive stimuli (or threats), with
fear as a consequence. In contrast to fear, a
“threat is an appeal to fear, a communication
stimulus that attempts to evoke a fear
response by showing some type of outcome
that the audience (it is hoped) wants to avoid”
(LaTour and Herbert, 1996, p.45). Fear is
more difficult to identify in a content analysis
because it is the idiosyncratic emotional
response arising from a threat-based stimulus.
Often, what people perceive in an ad as fear is
actually the underlying threat stimulus.
Testimonial ads contained at least one
person—for example, a satisfied customer or
well-known personality—who endorsed the
advertised product. This endorsement can
take numerous forms, ranging from personal
testimonials of product usage to voice-over
narratives about the advertised product’s
utility. Comparative ads provided a “direct
comparison between a promoted brand and
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
one or more of its dimensions/attributes”
(Goodwin and Etgar, 1980, p.187). Although
advertisers use other appeals, only six of 74
pre-test ads included none of these six
appeals.
Product Type Categories. The FCB
(Foote, Cone, and Belding) matrix is an
established planning tool that advertisers use
to classify consumer involvement with
products (Ratchford, 1987). Under this two-
dimensional matrix, high/think products are
functional, high-purchase-risk goods like cars,
appliances and insurance; high/feel products
are luxurious, high-purchase-risk goods like
cosmetics, jewelry, and fashion clothing;
low/think products are consumable, function-
al, cheap, and low-purchase-risk goods like
staple foods, household products, and motor
oil; and low/feel products are small-luxury,
low-purchase-risk goods like alcoholic bever-
ages, chocolate, and cigarettes (Weinberger
and Spotts, 1989). Although newer planning
frameworks exist (Belch and Belch, 1993),
the FCB grid remains a popular product
classification scheme (Choi, Lee, and Kim,
2005); hence, it was used to classify products
by type.
Racially Biased Ad Categories. The
extant literature provides no tested criteria for
differentiating overt from subtle racially
biased ads. Although guidelines exist for
causes of racially biased imagery in general—
for example, objectification, trivialization,
tokenism, aggressiveness, cross-sex roles, and
passivity (Bristor, Lee, and Hunt, 1995;
Coltrane and Messineo, 2000)—they do not
differentiate overt from subtly biased
imagery.
Pretest results confirmed the three-
category racial imagery scheme for
classifying ads: (1) non-racially biased ads,
which portray non-White characters in
ethically neutral roles and thereby do not infer
any inferiority on the part of non-White
actors; (2) overt racially biased ads, which
contain an inferior image of a non-White
character that is not more easily identified by
removing a neutral appeal, and (3) subtle
racially biased ads, which contain an inferior
image of a non-White character that is more
easily identified by removing a neutral appeal.
This typology is consistent with the need to
assess both cognitive and emotional meaning
when studying stereotypes in ads (Cohen-
Eliya and Hammer, 2004).
Sample
The research entailed two phases: a pilot
study designed to evaluate the viability the
approach adopted and a main study designed
to evaluate a larger sample of UK television
ads. For the pilot study, ads run on the three
main terrestrial commercial channels were
recorded during five consecutive days.
(Results of content analyses based on
consecutive-day sampling are more general-
izable than results from non-consecutive-day
sampling (Choi, Lee, and Kim, 2005; Riffe,
Lacy, and Fico, 1998).) To avoid observation
inflation, duplicate ads were removed. In
addition, seven ads that did not use one of the
six predominant appeal types were discarded.
Ultimately, 127 ads with at least one Black
character were selected from a pool of 545
unique ads.
For the main study, ads also were
recorded from the same three channels during
42 consecutive late-Autumn days. A total of
2646 ads were recorded, of which 834
contained at least one Black actor. The 212
duplicate ads were removed, leaving a final
sample of 622 ads.
Coder Training and Reliability
Two research assistants naïve about the
research questions coded the ads. They were
trained during eight sessions and both worked
on a previous DQR-based content analysis.
Training included explanations about the
different ad appeals, product categories, types
of racially biased ads, and modality-based
narratives. After training, the assistants
practiced coding 38 ads excluded from
subsequent analyses. For most coding
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
inconsistencies, the assistants examined the
ad jointly, discussed the basis for their
disagreement, and then agreed to a single
code. The few remaining inconsistencies were
resolved by the researchers.
To avoid bias caused by coders’ non-
verbal displays or utterances, the assistants
viewed and coded ads, ad profiles, and ad
narratives independently. Hence, the pilot
study provided additional training for
deconstructing DQR-based narratives as
objectively as possible.
Ads were classified as overtly biased
when the removal of any associated appeal
did not mediate the severity of the Black
character’s inferior image. For example, an ad
for a cleaning product portrayed an elderly
Black female on her hands and knees cleaning
a floor while her White employers stood
nearby and chatted casually. In this case,
removing the testimonial appeal from the ad
does not mitigate the blatant inferior depiction
of the Black domestic worker and thus the ad
would be classified as overtly racist. Ads
were classified as non-racially biased when
Black actors were characterized neutrally. If
the depiction of the Black actor did not
suggest any direct element of inferiority, then
the ad was deemed ethically neutral. For
example, an ad for a confectionary brand
depicted several children consuming the
product. The one Black child actor was
depicted smiling like the other non-Black
children. This ad was deemed ethically
neutral.
Table 2 shows the inter-coder reliabilities
for the pilot and main study, which were
assessed with the Perreault and Leigh (1989)
reliability measure rather than the less
accurate Cohen’s K (Rust and Cooil, 1994).
(Note: Both coders identified the identical set
of Black actors; hence, the reliability of this
variable is 1.0.) These reliabilities range from
0.80 to 0.99, which meets or exceeds the
critical value of 0.80 (Perreault and Leigh,
1989).
------------------
Insert Table 2
------------------
To control for excess positives—i.e.,
excessively flagging ads as overtly or subtly
biased—a third person unfamiliar with DQR
also coded the ads. This person’s assessments
did not differ meaningfully from the other
coders’ assessments. When the third coder’s
data were added, inter-coder reliability
decreased slightly but remained at or above
the critical 0.80 value.
FINDINGS
The percentage of aired television ads
with at least one Black actor is 31.5% (834 of
2646), which is greater than the 23% reported
by Sudbury and Wilberforce (2006) and twice
the 15% reported by Taylor (1997). Although
31.5% greatly exceeds the proportion of
Blacks residing in the UK—estimated at 3.3%
of the population (Office of National
Statistics, 2013)—the incidence of Black
actors indicates nothing about the depiction of
Blacks in ads (Entman and Rojecki, 2000;
Kern-Foxworth, 1994). Taylor (1997) may
have noted the overrepresentation of Blacks
in UK ads reflected a shift to diversify ad
content, but Sudbury and Wilberforce (2006)
cautioned that it “isn’t about quotas; it’s about
the way blacks are portrayed” (p.465), and
Bristor, Lee, and Hunt (1995) asserted the
“potentially positive effects of including more
African-Americans in advertisements are
often mitigated by racist elements that suggest
African-American inferiority” (p.48).
RQ#1 is ‘What is the incidence of racist
imagery in television ads?’ After removing
duplicates, a sample of 622 ads with at least
one Black actor was analyzed. Racial
imagery—either overt or subtle—appeared in
68.3% of those ads (n=425, χ2=85.048, df = 1,
p<0.001). Non-racial imagery (i.e., no
suggested inferiority) appeared in 30.17%
(197 of 622) of ads. These percentages affirm
incidence alone is a poor indicator of ethnic
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
diversity in ads because it ignores the
characterization of ethnic actors. The
pervasiveness of negatively biased imagery
dictates that advertisers depict minorities
more carefully.
Of 425 ads identified as racially biased,
25.2% were classified as containing overt rac-
ial bias (n=107, χ2=104.009, df=1, p<0.001).
Coder more readily perceived an inferior
image for Black actors in the remaining
74.8% (318 of 425) of racially biased ads
once associated appeals within the ads were
removed. Clearly, a far greater percentage of
racially biased ads were subtly rather than
overtly bias (318 versus 107, χ2=104.755,
df=1, p<0.001).
RQ#2 is ‘What are the primary ad appeals
that mask underlying racist imagery?’ The
prevalence of appeal types across each
category of racial bias type reflects the
general prevalence of appeal types in the
sample. The most common appeal type in
racially and non-racially biased ads are sexual
appeals, constituting 34.0% of non-racially
biased ads, 31.8% of all racially biased ads,
32.7% of overtly biased ads, and 31.5% of
subtly biased ads. For subtly biased ads,
sexual appeals are significantly more pre-
valent than humor appeals (χ2=10.864, df=1,
p<0.001). In contrast, guilt appeals appeared
least frequently, constituting 1.52% of non-
racially biased ads, 5.88% of all racially
biased ads, 5.61% of overtly biased ads, and
5.97% of subtly biased ads. For subtly biased
ads, the preponderance of guilt appeals and
comparative appeals (the second least
prevalent appeal) did not differ significantly
(χ2=20.596, df=1, p<0.001).
RQ#3 is ‘What is the association between
product categories and overt or subtle racial
bias?’ Racial imagery as a percentage of total
ads within each appeal type ranged from
62.3% for testimonials to 89.3% for guilt
appeals (χ2=17.695, df=1, p<0.001). Overt
racial imagery ranged from 32.4% for fear-
based appeals to 14.5% for comparative
appeals, and concomitantly subtle racial
imagery ranged from 67.6% for fear-based
appeals to 85.5% for comparative appeals
(χ2=15.805, df=1, p<0.001). For product cate-
gory, the prevalence of total racial imagery
ranged from 64.5% for low/feel products to
72.1% for low/think products. Overt racial
imagery ranged from 23.3% for high/think
products to 28.7% for low/feel products.
Concomitantly subtle racial imagery ranged
from 76.7% for high/think products to 71.3%
for low/feel products. Statistically, the type of
racial bias was unrelated to product category.
-----------------
Insert Table 3
-----------------
DISCUSSION
Unbiasedness depends on similarity of
portrayals across racial groups; hence, the
current DQR-based study reinforces that
depiction frequency cannot reveal whether or
not portrayals of minority groups in ads are
unbiased. In fact, the results reported here
echo previously reported findings, namely
that racial bias in ads has shifted from overt to
subtle (Bristor, Lee, and Hunt, 1995; Entman
and Rojecki, 2000; Kern-Foxworth, 1994;
Sweeney, 2005). However, the finding that
racially biased imagery is unrelated to product
category contradicts earlier studies. For
example, Asian-Americans appeared more
frequently in ads for products related to work
and affluence, such as banks, retail outlets,
and telecommunications (Taylor and Stern,
1997), and Blacks were (1) overrepresented in
ads for fast food chains, music/films, and
technological products, (2) equally represent-
ed in ads for vacation destinations, leisure,
and groceries, and (3) underrepresented in ads
for the government and retail sectors
(Sudbury and Wilberforce, 2006). Indeed, the
consistency observed across appeal and
product types indicates the generic diffusion
of subtle racial imagery across all advertising
appeal and product categories, implying that
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
racially biased cues may be an unintended
consequence of contemporary advertising
practice.
Seemingly, DQR-based content analysis
permits accurate assessment of racial imagery
by allowing viewers to decode the subtle
nature of contemporary stereotypical images.
In addition, the emergent finding of common
racially biased imagery in ads has important
teleological implications for society and
advertisers. The lower incidences reported for
overt racial imagery, relative to subtle racial
content, reinforces the need to avoid a focus
on only the observable or manifest indications
of racial content. Studies investigating only
overt types of racial imagery, or those
inferring subtle racial content from incidence
of overt imagery, tend to underestimate the
subtle prevalence of racial imagery in
contemporary ads or human behavior in
general (Coates, 2008).
Although the DQR-based approach
provides a useful diagnostic tool for isolating
negative ethnic imagery in ads, it alone
cannot ensure the elimination of subtle
racially biased ads. Instead, companies and
public policy makers should view this tool
within the wider context of correction and
prevention of racial imagery in ads. In
essence, the DQR-based approach does not
serve as a stand-alone measure against all
racial imagery; rather, it offers one workable
method for clearing ads of unethical content.
Indeed, corrective measures at the creative
design level of ad construction should be
contextualized within the broader framework
of regulation.
Indeed, the perpetuation of stereotypical
imagery and public policy are linked directly.
“When stereotypic words and images and
culturally or racially biased standards appear,
they actually perpetuate ethnic and racial bias
and inadvertently work against affirmative
action and goals and policies forbidding
discrimination” (Pickens, Rao, and Roberts,
1977, p.6). As suggested by ideomotor theory,
subtle racial bias in ads may have a
preconscious effect, whereby society’s anti-
discrimination agents are unable to monitor
and evaluate it.
The high level of subtle and blatant racial
imagery in UK television ads has implications
for advertisers. First, it suggests that self-
regulation in general requires more robust
tools and techniques for ad clearance and that
the DQR-based content analysis provides one
such tool. The concomitant use of DQR-based
analysis and complementary techniques (e.g.
semiotic analysis) by ad agencies can answer
the call by Gowri (2004) for ethical
evaluations based on qualitative analysis.
Through more robust training and detection
methods, self-regulation can once again
resume its role as ‘soft law’ (Hondius, 1994)
and complement societal-control mechanisms
in a “user friendly and practitioner based
regulatory manner” (Boddewyn, 1989, p.24).
The results from our study complement
the recommendations of Bristor, Lee, and
Hunt (1995); because existing codes of
conduct are insufficient, advertisers should
adopt additional measures, such as hiring
more ‘minority creatives’ to design and
develop ads. A report for the Institute of
Practitioners in Advertising (IPA) (2001)
claimed “There is little data about ethnic
minorities working in the marketing industry,
perhaps this is a case for positive action…
[and] an area for the IPC to investigate
further” (p.9). IPA president Stephen Wood-
ford stated “There aren't enough people from
ethnic minorities in advertising…[so] we need
to address this for both moral and pragmatic
reasons” (Benady, 2003). Although some
strides have been made, such as establishing
an ethnic minority monitor, they are
insufficient for industry-level cultural change.
Codes of conduct alone cannot preclude
subtly biased ads. For example, the current
codes for the Advertising Standard Authority
(ASA) and the Institute of Public Relations
included specific references to racial offense,
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
but details about controlling subtle racial bias
are minimal. Instead, the soft language
inherent to such codes tends to condone or
contextualize subtle racial bias in ads; for
example, the statement in the Committee of
Advertising Practice’s code that “hairstyles or
hobbies lie at the ‘safer’ end of the spectrum”
(Committee of Advertising Practice, 2008,
p.26) almost invites advertisers to use subtle
stereotypes like dreadlocks for Blacks (Kern-
Foxworth, 1994). Furthermore, codes can
augment but not replace human judgments
about ethical behavior (Hyman, Skipper, and
Tansey, 1990). Thus, current codes of conduct
do not, and no code of conduct ever could,
preclude subtly biased ads.
The ASA often justifies ignoring
consumer complaints about problematic ads
that include humorous or other neutral
appeals, i.e., the advertiser intended no
offense and should not be blamed for
consumers’ misinterpretations. By identifying
the role of masking appeals in concealing
racially biased imagery, the DQR-based
approach described here suggests that the
ASA should re-visit its position on this issue.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE
RESEARCH
The DQR-based study summarized here
only focused on television ads as a means for
perpetuating subtle racial bias. To reveal
caveats in the inadvertent use of soft language
to condone or contextualize racial bias in ads,
a detailed analysis of ad industry codes of
conduct may help (Wotruba, 1997). Such an
analysis could offer anecdotal evidence for an
industry-initiated effect on ad agencies and
may reveal limitations counterintuitive to self-
regulation.
Another limitation was the a priori
selection of ad appeals. However, ads coded
in the pre-test and pilot study confirmed the
viability of coding these appeals. Although
testimonial appeals are diverse, reliability
scores for each appeal examined exceeded the
conventionally accepted 0.8 threshold. That
said, future studies should consider appeal-
specific deconstructions, which would allow
further deconstruction of testimonial appeals
into sub-types identifiable by structure and
style.
In addition, researchers could develop
complementary methods for studying
stereotypical imagery and providing an
integrated framework for exploring masking
in ads. Semiotic analysis —facilitated by the
DQR approach—could delineate sub-
components of racial imagery into the
‘stereotypical or racial cues’ that consumers
use as heuristics for evaluating ads. They also
could determine if subtle racial imagery in ads
follows the same structure among various
product categories, differs longitudinally or
seasonally, and differs by media (e.g.,
newspapers, Internet, billboards). A large-
scale study could determine which DQR
modalities contribute to particular forms of
subtle racial imagery.
Research on masking effects caused by
the various ways Black images are organized
and framed in ads may reveal the overall
effect of stereotypical imagery on consumer
attitudes. DQR-based analyses preclude a
psychologically detailed explanation of the
relationship between stereotypical imagery
and masking because such analyses measure
only manifest content and not underlying
latent structures or relationships.
CONCLUSION
Analogous to carbon dioxide—high
concentrations can be fatal yet its detection
requires special instruments—the psychology,
sociology, and advertising literatures suggest
that subtle negative racial imagery in ads has
an insidious effect on consumers’ racially
related attitudes. Mere censuses of minority
actors in ads cannot determine the represent-
ations of ethnic groups and the consequences
of those representations. By uncovering layers
of meaning and deconstructing racial imagery
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
into its subcomponents, DQR-based content
analysis can help advertisers, scholars,
consumer groups, business ethicists, legal
experts, and regulators detect subtle racial
bias. Because its proper application requires
no special abilities, anyone can use DQR for
this purpose.
To counteract deceptive ads, corrective
ads “can be a solution to some of the cases
identified by watchdog agencies such as the
FTC, but the objective of these agencies
should be toward prevention rather than cure”
(Aditya, 2001, p.749). Similarly, subtle
negative stereotypes in ads are best addressed
by eliminating them from ads rather than
running problematic anti-stereotype ad
campaigns (Murji, 2006). The DQR-based
study summarized here suggests the negative
depiction of Blacks in ads somewhat offsets
the increased prevalence of Black actors in
ads. Although deploying more Black actors is
insufficient and cannot alone create diversity
in advertising, truly diverse ads with Black
actors cannot stereotype Blacks negatively.
REFERENCES
Aditya, R.N. (2001). The psychology of
deception in marketing: A conceptual
framework for research and practice.
Psychology & Marketing 18(7), 735-761.
Appiah, O. (2006). Ethnic identification on
adolescents' evaluations of advertisements.
Journal of Advertising Research 41(5), 7-
22.
Bailey, A.A. (2006). A year in the life of the
African-American male in advertising: A
content analysis. Journal of Advertising
35(1), 83-104.
Bargh, J. (1994). The four horsemen of
automaticity: Intention, awareness, effici-
ency, and control as separate issues.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hills-
dale, NJ.
Bargh, J.A., Chen, M. and Lara, B. (1996).
Automaticity of social behavior: Direct
effects of trait construct and stereotype
activation on action. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 71(2), 230-244.
Barthel, D. (1988). Putting on appearances:
Gender and advertising. Temple University
Press, Philadelphia, PA.
Belch, G. E. and Belch, M.A. (1993).
Introduction to advertising and promotion:
An integrated marketing communication
perspective. Richard D. Irwin, Inc.,
Homewood, IL.
Benady, A. (2003). Minority retort in The
Independent. Available at www.Independ-
ent.co.uk/news/media/minority-retort-
539533.html (accessed 5 July 2008).
Berthon, P., Pitt, L. and DesAutels, P. (2011).
Unveiling videos: Consumer-generated ads
as qualitative inquiry. Psychology &
Marketing 28(10), 1044-1060.
Biswas, A., Olsen, J. E. and Carlet, V. (1992).
A comparison of print advertisements from
the United States and France. Journal of
Advertising 21(4), 73-81.
Boddewyn, J.J. (1989). Advertising self-
regulation: True purpose and limits. Journal
of Advertising 18(2), 19-27.
Bodenhausen, G. V. (1993). Emotion, arousal,
and stereotypic judgments: A heuristic
model of affect and stereotyping. In D. M.
Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (eds.), Affect,
cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive
processes in group perception, (pp. 13-37).
Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
Bodenhausen, G.V. and Lichtenstein, M.
(1987). Social stereotypes and information-
processing strategies: The impact of task
complexity. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 52(5), 871-880.
Bowen, L. and Schmid, J. (1997). Minority
presence and portrayal in mainstream
magazine advertising: An update.
Journalism & Mass Communication
Quarterly 74(1), 134-146.
Bristor, J.M., Lee, R.E.G. and Hunt, M.R.
(1995), Race and ideology: African-
American images in television advertising.
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing
14(1), 48-59.
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
Bush, R.F., Gwinner, R.F. and Solomon, P.J.
(1974). White consumer sales response to
Black models. Journal of Marketing 38(2),
25-29.
Cagley, J.W. and Cardozo, R.N. (1970).
White response to integrated advertising.
Journal of Advertising Research 10(2), 35-
39.
Carlson, L, Stephen J. G. and Norman K.
(1993). A content analysis of environ-
mental advertising claims: A matrix
method approach. Journal of Advertising
22(3), 27–39.
Choi, S.M., Lee, W.N. and Kim, H.J. (2005).
Lessons from the rich and famous: A cross-
cultural comparison of celebrity endorse-
ment in advertising. Journal of Advertising
34(2), 85-98.
Coates, R.D. (2008). Covert racism in the
USA and globally. Sociology Compass
2(1), 208-231.
Cohen, R.J. (1999). What qualitative research
can be? Psychology & Marketing 16(4),
351-367.
Cohen-Eliya, M. and Hammer, Y. (2004).
Advertisements, stereotypes, and freedom
of expression. Journal of Social Philo-
sophy 35(2), 165-187.
Coltrane, S. and Messineo, M. (2000). The
perpetuation of subtle prejudice: Race and
gender imagery in 1990s television
advertising. Sex Roles 42(5/6), 363-389.
Committee of Advertising Practice. (2008).
Television advertising standards code.
Available at www.cap.org.uk/cap/codes
(accessed 15 December 2009).
Cowie, E. (1977). Women, representation and
the image. Screen Education 2(3), 15-23.
Cox, K.K. (1969-1970). Changes in
stereotyping of Negros and Whites in
magazine advertisements. Public Opinion
Quarterly 33(4), 603-606.
Cox, K.K. (1970). Social effects of integrated
advertising. Journal of Advertising
Research 10(4), 41-44.
Davies, P.G., Spencer, S.J., Quinn, D.M. and
Gerhardstein, R. (2002). Consuming
images: How television commercials that
elicit stereotype threat can restrain women
academically and professionally. Persona-
lity and Social Psychology Bulletin 28(12),
1615-1628.
Dijksterhuis, A., Spears, R., Postmes, T.,
Stapel, D., Koomen, W., Knippenberg,
A.V. and Scheepers, D. (1998). Seeing one
thing and doing another: Contrast effects in
automatic behavior. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 75(4), 862-871.
Dominick, J.R. and Greenberg, B.S. (1970).
Three seasons of Blacks on television.
Journal of Advertising Research 10(2), 21-
27.
Entman, R. and Rojecki, A. (2000). The Black
image in the White mind: Race and media
in America. University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, IL.
Forehand, M.R., Deshpandé, R. and Reed II,
A. (2002). Identity salience and the influ-
ence of differential activation of the social
self-schema on advertising response.
Journal of Applied Psychology 87(6),
1086-1099.
Fuller, L. (2001). Are we seeing things? The
Pinesol lady and the ghost of Aunt Jemima.
Journal of Black Studies 32(1), 120-131.
Gaertner, S.L. and Dovidio, F.J. (1986). The
aversive form of racism. Academic Press,
New York, NY.
Gilbert, D.T. and Hixon, J.G. (1991). The
trouble of thinking: Activation and
application of stereotypic beliefs. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology
60(4), 509-517.
Goodwin, S. and Etgar, M. (1980). An
experimental investigation of comparative
advertising: impact of message appeal,
Information load and utility of product
class. Journal of Marketing Research
17(2), 187-202.
Gowri, A. (2004). When responsibility can't
do it. Journal of Business Ethics 54(1), 33-
50.
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
Henderson, J.J. and Baldasty, G.J. (2003).
Race, advertising, and prime-time tele-
vision. Howard Journal of Communication
14(2), 97-112.
Hondius, E. (1994). EC directive on unfair
terms in consumer contracts: Towards a
European law of contract. Journal of
Contract Law 7, 34-52.
Huhmann, B.A. and Brotherton, T.P. (1997).
A content analysis of guilt appeals in
popular magazine advertisements. Journal
of Advertising 26(2), 35-46.
Humphrey, R. and Schuman, H. (1984). The
portrayal of Blacks in magazine advertise-
ments: 1950-1982. Public Opinion
Quarterly 48(4), 551-563.
Hyman, M.R., Skipper, R. and Tansey, R.
(1990). Ethical codes are not enough.
Business Horizons 33(2), 15-22.
Image Analyst. (2009). Welcome! Available
at www.subliminalracism.com/ (accessed 1
October 2011).
Institute of Practitioners in Advertising.
(2001). Agency Census Report 2001.
Available at ipa.co.uk/Content/Agency-
Census-2001 (accessed 11 March 2011).
James, W. (1890). The race question.
Methodist Review 72, 115-120.
Kassarjian, H.H. (1969). The Negro and
American advertising, 1946-1965. Journal
of Marketing Research 6(1), 29-39.
Katz, I. and Hass, R.G. (1988). Racial
ambivalence and American value conflict:
Correlational and priming studies of dual
cognitive structures. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 55(6), 893-905.
Kern-Foxworth, M. (1994). Aunt Jemima,
Uncle Ben, and Rastus: Blacks in adver-
tising, yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.,
Westport, CN.
Klauer, K.C., Voss, A., Schmitz, F., and
Teige-Mocigemba, S. (2007). Process
components of the implicit association test:
A diffusion–model analysis. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 93(3),
353–368.
Lashley, K.S. (1951). The problem of serial
order in behavior. In L.A. Jeffress (ed.),
Cerebral mechanisms in behaviour: The
Hixon symposium, (pp.112-146). Wiley,
New York, NY.
LaTour, M.S. and Herbert, J.R. (1996). There
are threats and (maybe) fear-caused
arousal: Theory and confusions of appeals
to fear and fear arousal itself. Journal of
Advertising 26(3), 45-59.
Lazarus, A.A. (1973). Multimodal behavior
therapy: Treating the ‘BASIC ID’. Journal
of Nervous and Mental Disease 156(6),
404-411.
Lazarus, A.A. (1989). The practice of
multimodal therapy: Systematic, compre-
hensive, and effective psychotherapy. Johns
Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
Lee, K.Y. and Joo, S.H. (2005). The portrayal
of Asian Americans in mainstream maga-
zine ads: An update. Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly 82(3), 654-671.
Levy, B. (1996). Improving memory in old
age through implicit self-stereotyping.
Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 71(7), 1092-1107.
Licata, J.W. and Biswas, A. (1993).
Representation, roles, and occupational
status of black models in television
advertisements. Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly 70(4), 868-882.
Markley, R.M. and Davis, L. (2011). A
dimensional qualitative research approach
to understanding medically unnecessary
aesthetic surgery. Psychology & Marketing
28(10), 1027-1043.
Martin, B.A.S., Lee, C.K.C. and Yang, F.
(2004). The influence of ad model ethnicity
and self-referencing on attitudes: Evidence
from New Zealand. Journal of Advertising
33(4), 27-37.
Mastro, D.E. and Stern, S.R. (2003).
Representations of race in television
commercials: A content analysis of prime-
time advertising. Journal of Broadcasting
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
& Electronic Media 47(4), 638-647.
McConahay, J.B. (1986). Modern racism,
ambivalence, and the modern racism scale.
Academic Press, Orlando, FL.
Merskin, D. (2001). Winnebagos, Cherokees,
Apaches, and Dakotas: The persistence of
stereotyping of American Indians in
American advertising brands. Howard
Journal of Communication 12(3), 159-169.
Millard, J.E. and Grant, P.R. (2006). The
stereotypes of Black and White women in
fashion magazine photographs: The pose of
the model and the impression she creates.
Sex Roles 54(9/10), 659-673.
Murji, K. (2006). Using racial stereotypes in
anti-racist campaigns. Ethnic and Racial
Studies 29(2), 260-280.
Nevett T. (1992). Differences between
American and British television
advertising: Explanations and implications.
Journal of Advertising 21(4), 61-71.
Office of National Statistics (2013). PEEG,
Current Estimates, Population Estimates by
Ethnic Group Mid-2009, http://www.ons.
gov.uk/ons/taxonomy/index.html?nscl=Pop
ulation+ Estimates+by+Ethnic+Group#tab-
data-tables (accessed 20 June 2013).
Paek, H.J. and Shah, H. (2003). Racial
ideology, model minorities, and the ‘not-
so-silent partner’: Stereotyping of Asian
Americans in US magazine advertising.
Howard Journal of Communication 14(4),
225-243.
Perreault Jr., W.D and Leigh, L.E. (1989).
Reliability of nominal based data on
qualitative judgments. Journal of Market-
ing Research 26(2), 86-97.
Peterson, R.T. (2002). The depiction of
African American children's activities in
television commercials: An assessment.
Journal of Business Ethics 36(4), 303-314.
Pickens, J.E., Rao, P.W. and Roberts, L.C.
(1977). Without bias: A guidebook for
nondiscriminatory communication. Interna-
tional Association of Business Communi-
cation, San Francisco, CA.
Pines, J. (1977). The study of racial images.
Screen Education, 23, 24-32.
Plous, S. and Neptune, D. (1997). Racial and
gender biases in magazine advertising.
Psychology of Women Quarterly 21(4),
627-644.
Pollay, R.W. (1985). The subsiding sizzle: A
descriptive history of print advertising,
1900-1980. Journal of Marketing 49(3),
24-37.
Qualls, W.J. and Moore, D.J. (1990).
Stereotyping effects on consumers'
evaluation of advertising: Impact of racial
differences between actors and viewers.
Psychology & Marketing 7(2), 135-151.
Rachlinski, J., Johnson, S.L., Wistrich, A. and
Guthrie, C. (2009). Does unconscious
racial bias affect trial judges? Notre Dame
Law Review 84(3), 1195-1246.
Ratchford, B.T. (1987). New insights about
the FCB grid. Journal of Advertising
Research 27(4), 24-38.
Richeson, J.A., Baird, A.A., Gordon, H.L.,
Heatherton, T.F., Wyland, C.L., Trawalter,
S. and Shelton, J.N. (2003). An fMRI
investigation of the impact of interracial
contact on executive function. Nature
Neuroscience 6, 1323-1328.
Richeson, J.A. and Shelton, J.N. (2005). Brief
report: Thin slices of racial bias. Journal
of Nonverbal Behavior 29(1), 75-86.
Riffe, D., Lacy, S. and Fico, F. (1998).
Analyzing media messages: Quantitative
content analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc., Hillsdale, NJ.
Rust, R.T. and Cooil, B. (1994). Reliability
measures for qualitative data: Theory and
implications. Journal of Marketing
Research 31(1), 1-14.
Sancho, J. and Wilson, A. (2001). Boxed in:
Offence from negative stereotyping in
television Advertising. Independent
Television Commission, London, UK.
Sargeant, A., and Shang, J. (2011). Bequest
giving: Revisiting donor motivation with
dimensional qualitative research. Psycho-
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
logy & Marketing 28(2), 980-997.
Schlinger, M.J. and Plummer, J.T. (1972).
Advertising in Black and White. Journal
of Marketing Research 9(2), 149-153.
Schorn, R. (2009). Influencing willingness to
pay by supraliminally priming the con-
cept of honesty. Advances in Consumer
Research 36, 463-466.
Shabbir, H. (2011). Dimensional qualitative
research as a paradigmatic shift in
qualitative inquiry: An introduction to the
special issue. Psychology & Marketing
28(2), 977-979.
Shabbir, H. and Thwaites, D. (2007). The use
of humor to mask deceptive advertising:
It's no laughing matter. Journal of
Advertising 36(2), 75-85.
Shariff, A.F. and Norenzayan, A. (2007). God
is watching you: Priming God concepts
increases prosocial behavior in an
anonymous economic game. Psycho-
logical Science 18(9), 803-809.
Shih, M., Ambady, N., Richeson, J.A., Fujita,
K. and Gray, H.M. (2002). Stereotype
performance boosts: The impact of self-
relevance and the manner of stereotype
activation. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 83(3), 638-647.
Sierra, J.J., Hyman, M.R. and Torres, I.M.
(2009). Using a model's apparent
ethnicity to influence viewer responses to
print ads: A social identity theory
perspective. Journal of Current Issues &
Research in Advertising 31(2), 41-66.
Smith, K.H. and Rogers, M. (1994).
Effectiveness of subliminal messages in
television commercials: Two experi-
ments. Journal of Applied Psychology
79(6), 866-874.
Speck, P.S. (1991). The humorous message
taxonomy: A framework for the study of
humorous ads. Current Issues and
Research in Advertising 13(1), 1-44.
Stafford, J.E., Birdwell, A.E. and Van Tassel,
C.E. (1970). Integrated advertising—
White backlash? Journal of Advertising
Research 10(2), 15-20.
Stevenson, T.H. (1992a). A content analysis
of the portrayal of Blacks in trade
publication advertising. Journal of
Current Issues & Research in Advertising
14(1), 67-74.
Stevenson, T.H. (1992b).The portrayal of
Blacks in business publication
advertising. Journal of Marketing
Management 2(2), 26-33.
Stevenson, T.H. (2002). The portrayal of
African-Americans in business-to-
business catalog advertising. Journal of
Current Issues & Research in Advertising
24(2), 41-49.
Stevenson, T.H. (2007). A six-decade study
of the portrayal of African Americans in
business print media: Trailing, mirroring,
or shaping social change? Journal of
Current Issues & Research in Advertising
29(1), 1-14.
Sudbury, L. and Wilberforce, F. (2006). The
portrayal of black people in UK
television advertising: Perception and
reality. Journal of Consumer Behaviour
5(5), 465-476.
Sweeney, C. (2005). ‘One of them, but
white’: The disappearance of Negro: An
anthology (1934). Women: A Cultural
Review 16(1), 93-107.
Taylor, C.R., Landreth, S. and Bang, H.K.
(2005). Asian Americans in magazine
advertising: Portrayals of the ‘model
minority’. Journal of Macromarketing
25(2), 163-174.
Taylor, C.R. and Lee, J.Y. (1994). Not in
vogue: Portrayals of Asian Americans in
magazine advertising. Journal of Public
Policy & Marketing 13(2), 239-245.
Taylor, C.R. and Stern, B.B. (1997). Asian-
Americans: Television advertising and
the ‘model minority’ stereotype. Journal
of Advertising 26(2), 47-61.
Taylor, C.R. (1997). The effects of actors,
race in commercial advertising: Review
and extension. Journal of Advertising
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads
20(1), 54-60.
Weinberger, M.G. and Spotts, H.E. (1989).
A situational view of information content
in TV advertising in the U.S. and U.K.
Journal of Marketing 53(1), 89-94.
Williamson, J. (1994). Decoding advertise-
ments: Ideology and meaning in adver-
tisements. Marion Boyars Publishers.
Ltd., London, UK.
Wilkes, R.E. and Valencia, H. (1989).
Hispanics and Blacks in television
commercials. Journal of Advertising
18(1), 19-25.
Woodside, A. and Martin, D. (2011). Gestalt
modeling of international tourism be-
havior: Applying dimensional qualitative
research in constructing grounded theory.
Psychology & Marketing 28(2), 998-
1026.
Wotruba, T.R. (1997). Industry self-
regulation: A review and extension to a
global setting. Journal of Public Policy &
Marketing 16(1), 38-54.
Zinkhan, G.M. (1986). Changes in
stereotypes: Blacks and Whites in
magazine advertisements. Journalism
Quarterly 63(3), 568-572.
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads

Table 1

U.S.-based Empirical Studies on the Racial Mix of Models/Actors in Ads for Adults

Study Sample Findings about Ads

Magazine
Shuey, Mass • Only 0.6% of ads contained an African-American
King, and circulation • Black depictions: 96.7% (7 of 213) as unskilled laborers, with remainder as entertainers or athletes
Griffith magazines;
(1953) 1949-1950
Kassarjian Mass • Percent of unique ads with Black models less than 0.3%
(1969) circulation • Demographics of Black models: 80% male and 92% adult
magazines; • U.S. Blacks depicted as laborer/service worker decreased (78.0% in 1946, 52.1% in 1956, 13.5%
1946, 1956, in 1965) and as entertainer/sports figure increased (14.9% in 1946, 35.9% in 1956, 59.4% in 1965)
1965 during period
• Few U.S. Blacks depicted as managers/professionals (8.7% in 1965)
Cox (1969- Women's and • Percent of ads with Black models increased from 0.57% in 1949-1950 to 2.17% in 1967-1968
1970) general interest • Percent of Blacks depicted in above skilled labor level grew from 6.1% in 1949-1950 to 71.3% in
magazines; 1967-1968
1949-1950 and • Percent of Blacks depicted as professionals, businessmen, students or clerical workers grew from
1967-1968 0.0% in 1949-1950 to 21.0% in 1967-1968
Cox (1970) Women's and Essentially same results as Cox (1969-1970)
general interest
magazines;
1967-1968
Colfax and Mass From 1965 to 1970:
Sternberg circulation • percent of ads with Blacks increased from 2.2% to 4.0%
(1972) magazines; • ads with Blacks as musicians dropped by 50% (from 80% to 41%)
1965-1970
Bush, Black Fashion • Percent of ads in Ebony and Essence portraying blacks in major roles greater than other magazines
Resnick magazines, (39% compared to 68% in Ebony and Essence)
and Stern Ebony and • 71% of ads depict blacks in power neutral positions and 58% in minor roles
(1980) Essence.
19
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads

Study Sample Findings about Ads

Humphrey Current event • Percent of ads with Black models rose markedly from 1950 to early 1980s (to roughly 10% in
and and women’s current events magazines)
Schuman magazines; • In Time (1980): Blacks seven (three) times more likely than Whites to appear in government-
(1984) 1950, 1979- sponsored (non-profit) ad; Blacks overrepresented as sports figures (in 7% of ads); Whites more
1982 likely than Blacks to appear idle (58% versus 35%); both groups generally shown in middle-class
occupations
Zinkhan, Women's and • Update of Cox (1969-1970) reported 80.9% of ads with Black models depicted them at above
Cox, and general interest skilled labor level, (versus 71.3% in 1967-1968)
Hong magazines;
(1986) 1983
Stevenson High • Ads with at least one Black model: 4.7% in 1966, 9.5% in 1976, and 9.4% in 1986
(1992a) circulation • Percent of models in ads who are Black: 3.8% in 1966, 5.9% in 1976, and 3.7% in 1986
trade • Although increased to 53% in 1986, Blacks continue to lag Whites (87%) in depiction as
magazines; manager/professional
1966, 1976, • Blacks rarely shown alone
1986
Stevenson Mass • Percent of ads with Black models: 3.1% in 1957, 3.6% in 1967, 15.4% in 1977, and 13.8% in 1987
(1992b) circulation • Percent of models in ads who are Black: 1.0% in 1957, 1.5% in 1967, 6.1% in 1977, and 7.8% in
business maga- 1987
zines; 1967, • Blacks portrayed in blue-collar jobs decrease from 67% in 1967 to 21% in 1977 and to 7% in 1987
1977, 1987
Taylor and Consumer Reflect ‘model minority’ stereotype of Asian Americans, as Asian models:
Lee (1994) magazines on • appear more often in ads for technology-based products (75.4%)
business, • appear far more often in the popular business and science/mechanics magazines than in women's
science/ or general interest magazines
mechanics, • frequently depicted as co-worker in business setting (business setting: 60.0% of ads with Asians,
women, and 34.8% of ads with Blacks, and 30.2% of ads with Hispanics
current events; • seldom depicted in family or social settings (home setting: 4.1% of ads with Asians, 3.2% of ad
1992-1993 with Blacks, and 6.6% of ads with Hispanics
• often played major role in ad (50.8% of ads with Asians, 37.0% of ads with Blacks, and 47.4% of
ads with Hispanics)
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads

Study Sample Findings about Ads

Taylor, Same as Taylor Essentially same results as Taylor and Lee (1994)
Lee, and and Lee (1994)
Stern
(1995)
Bowen and Nine mass • From 1987 to 1992, percent of ads with Blacks rose from 6.8% to 10.6%, but ads with Asians
Schmid circulation dropped from 2.5% to 1.8% and ads with Hispanics dropped from 1.5% to 0.6%
(1997) magazines; • For ads in which they appeared, Blacks played major role in 20.9%, Asians in 19.4%, and
1987 and 1992 Hispanics in 38.5%
• In the 67.5% of mixed-ethnic ads, Whites tend to outnumber non-Whites 3 to 1; Whites depicted in
formal or work settings and had little face-to-face interaction with non-Whites
Plous and Fashion • Percent of ads with Blacks increased from 8.3% in 1980s to 11.8% in 1990s
Neptune magazines • Except for Black females in White women's magazines, Blacks were underrepresented in
(1997) targeted at magazines targeted at Whites
Blacks and • White women shown almost twice as often (17.4%) as non-Whites (9.2%) in low status positions
White; 1984- • Most animal prints—patterned after a predatory animal, appeared on Black women (69.8%) than
1995 on White women (23.3%)
Paek and Mass • Reflect ‘model minority’ stereotype of Asian Americans as highly educated, proficient with
Shah circulation technology, and affluent
(2003) news • Blacks and Latinos given relatively minor roles
magazines; • Blacks prominently represented in sports ads and older than other minorities
2000 • Latinos portrayed as relatively poor
Lee and Various • Ads reflect ‘model minority’ stereotype of Asians as hardworking, intelligent, and highly skilled in
Joo (2005) consumer math and science
magazines; • Played major role: 73.2% of ads with Asians, 72.4% of ads with Blacks, and 51.1% of ads with
2000-2001 Hispanics
• Appeared in business setting: 62.4% of ads with Asians, 40.1% of ads with Blacks, and 53.2% of
ads with Hispanics
• Appeared as family member: 13.2% of ads with Asians, 18.3% of ads with Blacks, and 20.0% of
ads with Hispanics
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads

Study Sample Findings about Ads

Taylor, Business, tech, • Asian Americans often depicted as 'model minority': hardworking, tech-savvy, business oriented,
Landreth, fashion, and successful, and well assimilated
and Bang sport • 10.4% of ads contain Asian Americans, so overrepresented relative to population incidence
(2005) magazines; • Asian Americans played major role less frequently than Whites or Blacks (64.2% versus 91% or
2003-2004 73.2%)
• Asian Americans more likely to appear in ads for tech products and depicted in work settings
• Asian Americans infrequently depicted in women’s magazines (3.7% of ads)
Bailey Study #1: hop- Study #1:
(2006) hop magazines • Ads for clothes, shoes, and accessories frequently included African-American males
Study #2: two • Likely to be depicted in major roles and alone
Black and two Study #2:
mainstream • African-American men depicted less frequently in mainstream magazines than in hip-hop
magazines magazines
• Likely to depicted in major roles
• Although represented in ads for a more diverse set of products, types of interactions and roles
played similar to ads in hip-hop magazines
Millard and Fashion • Proportion of black women slightly less than 13%, which was roughly the proportion of blacks in
Grant magazines; the U.S. in 2001
(2006) 1999 • Relative to black women, white women portrayed less often in submissive or sexual pose
Stevenson Mass • Of ads depicting people, the percent depicting Black models: 3.1% in 1957, 3.6% in 1967, 15.4%
(2007) circulation in 1977, 13.8% in 1987, 15.9% in 1997, and 24.7% in 2005
business • Of people in ads, the percent of Black models: 1.0% in 1957, 1.5% in 1967, 6.1% in 1977, 7.8% in
publications; 1987, 11.4% in 1997, and 17.1% in 2005
1957, 1967, • Percent of Blacks in U.S. population between 11.0% and 12.8% from 1957 to 2005
1977, 1987, • Blacks depicted as manager/professional: 8% in 1957, 17% in 1967, 48% in 1977, 41% in 1987,
1997, 2005 44% in 1997, and 32% in 2005
• Blacks depicted in blue-collar job: 77% in 1957, 83% in 1967, 35% in 1977, 8% in 1987, 3% in
1997, and 3% in 2005
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads

Study Sample Findings about Ads

Television
Dominick Day time and Ads with Blacks roughly doubled to 11% from 1967 to 1969
and prime time TV, • Blacks more likely to be active in sale and to play major role
Greenberg major • Few Black-only casts in ads
(1970) networks; • Blacks often appear in public service announcements
1968-1969
Bush, Day time and • In 1974, 13% of ads contained Blacks
Solomon, prime time TV, • Ads with Blacks have more characters than ads without Blacks
and Hair major • Greater percent of Blacks in public service and promotion ads than in product ads
(1977) networks; • From 1973 to 1974, slight increase in ads with Blacks playing major role
1973-1974
Wilkes and Prime-time • Percent of ads with Blacks increasing (26%)
Valencia TV, major • Blacks increasingly depicted in racially integrated and large groups
(1989) networks; 1984 • Hispanics underrepresented (6%) relative to population incidence
• Blacks and Hispanics primarily in minor or background roles
Licata and Top five • Black representation (32.5%) exceeded percent of Blacks in U.S. population in 1991
Biswas overall and • Percent of ads showing blacks in major roles grew to 45% from roughly 10% in 1967-1968
(1993) Black-targeted • Blacks in skilled occupations grew to 89.3% from 71.3% in 1967-1968
prime time TV
series; 1990-
1991
Taylor and Prime-time • Asians appeared in 8.4% of ads, Hispanics in 8.5% of ads, Blacks in 31.8% of ads, and Whites in
Stern TV, major 97.7% of ads
(1997) networks; 1994 • Whites played major role in 90.8% of ads, Asians in 47.1% of ads
• Asians tended to appear in non-family settings
• Asians tended to appear in ads for items associated with affluence and work life.
Coltrane Twenty high • Whites more prominent than Blacks (86% versus 11% of characters) and exercise more authority
and rated TV • Whites shown more than Blacks in family settings (39.5% versus 26.1%) and in cross-sex
Messineo series; 1992- interactions (67.3% versus 50.3%)
(2000) 1994 • Blacks shown more than Whites as aggressive and active (70.8% versus 47.8%)
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads

Study Sample Findings about Ads

Henderson Prime-time • Non-Whites in 37.5% of ads
and TV, major • Blacks only minority routinely represented; e.g., Latinos in less than 1% of ads
Baldasty networks; 1999 • All-White cast in 62.4% of ads; totally non-White cast in ads rare
(2003) • Non-Whites usually secondary characters; 46.4% of ads showed minorities only in peripheral roles
• Whites often appear for upscale products, beauty products, and home products (e.g., non-fast
food); non-Whites often appear for low-cost, low-nutrition, and athletic/sports products
Mastro and Prime-time • Blacks generally portrayed in fairly and at general population rate; other non-Whites
Stern TV, major underrepresented relative to general population
(2003) networks; 2001 • Product category related to actors’ race: ads with Blacks most likely about financial services and
food (19.7%); ads with Asians most likely about technology product ads (30.2%); ads with
Hispanics most likely about soap/deodorant
• Ads with Asians tend to depict them at work and less active than Blacks or Whites
• Tend to portray Blacks and Whites as old adults, but Asians and Hispanics as young adults
Other
Stevenson Business-to- • Of catalogs depicting people, 42.2% contained a Black model and 23.1% contained an Asian or
(2002) business direct Hispanic model
mail catalogs; • Of pictures with people, 7.9% contained a Black model, 3.0% contained an Asian or Hispanic
no date given model, and 93.6% contained a White model
• Occupation of Blacks and Whites depicted similarly: roughly 50% in blue-collar role and 25% in
managerial/professional role
• Blacks shown separated in 62% of ads and with Whites as peers in 35% of ads
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads

Table 2

Inter-coder Reliabilities

Pilot Study Main Study

Two coders Two Three
coders coders
Appeal type 0.96 0.99 0.95
Product category 0.93 0.98 0.95
Racial imagery type 0.85 0.84 0.80
Overall 0.92 0.92 0.92
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads

Table 3

Racially Biased and Non-Racially Biased Television Ads

Non-
Racially Signifi- Signifi-
Racially χ2 Overt Subtle χ2
Biased cance cance
Biased
Humor 86 34 22.6 <0.001 24 62 16.8 <0.001
Sexual 135 67 22.3 <0.001 35 100 30.6 <0.001
Guilt 25 3 17.3 <0.001 6 19 6.8 <0.050
Fear 34 11 11.8 <0.050 11 23 4.2 <0.050
Testimonial 76 46 7.4 <0.050 21 55 15.2 <0.001
Comparative 69 36 10.4 <0.010 10 59 34.8 <0.001
High/Think 103 53 16.0 <0.001 24 79 29.4 <0.001
High/Feel 106 42 27.7 <0.001 28 78 23.6 <0.001
Low/Think 101 39 27.5 <0.001 24 77 27.8 <0.050
Low/Feel 115 63 15.2 <0.001 33 82 22.0 <0.050
Total 425 197 107 318

26
Subtle Racist Imagery in Ads

Figure

Variables Often Considered in U.S.-based Studies on the Racial Mix of Models/Actors in

Ads

• Percent of different ethnicities in general population

• Percent of ads with actors/models of different ethnicities

• Percent of actors/models in ads of different ethnicities

• Actor/model demographics, such as sex, apparent income, and adult/child

• Occupation depicted by actors/models of different ethnicities (e.g., blue-collar,

manager/professional)

• Percent of actors/models of different ethnicities:

o to appear in single-ethnicity ads

o to appear in mixed-ethnicity ads and interact with one another

o to appear in ads for different product types

o to appear in ads with different settings (e.g., family, home, work, social)

o to play a major, minor, or background role in the ad

27