RACIST has name on UT advertising school?

[JBJ 3654]

 

40 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

yeah, honestly for me, it's a moment of "oh, old white dude makes racially insensitive comment, film at 11" type of moment.

ad agencies target demographics all the time. mcdonald's famously went after black folks with their ads. 

i'm just sort of ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ about the whole thing.

I agree. And without any context, we can't even say that.  Racial ambiguity is a well-recognized goal to broaden campaigns. 

These are the people who spend 2 months debating the exact shade of blue-green the ocean should be for your next vacation.

[PRONG HORN 3111]

2 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

mcdonald's famously went after black folks with their ads.

 

Didn't black people already like McDonald's?  It's not like they were attracted by the targeted ads.  Same thing with Red Lobster.  If they started targeting Afro dollars with lots of black ads, it would only be to reinforce black loyalty.  

[DonkeyCigars 144]

9 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

 

Regardless--I'm not losing any sleep over this.  Anybody who has dealt with him knows that Stan Richards is a complete asshole.  And the fact that he is a complete asshole is reflected in the leak of his comments and how fast the long knives came out once it became public.

Yes, so much this.

[Kyle 207]

10 hours ago, Reagan1k said:

I'm having a hard time understanding the outrage and fallout with this one, especially in the context of all the other things we should certainly be addressing.

. . . maybe I'm wrong, but I'd be one to tap the brakes here before I storm the gates with pitchforks.  

Without further context, this seems to be a poor choice of words for use in 2020, but might not merit tarnishing an entire career.

This is my reaction when 99% of Millenial Twitters want to sew a yellow star on everyone that disagrees with them and send them to the ovens ... I mean kind of hard to take it seriously when Biden, Trudeau, Gov. Blackface-Klansman, etc., all get passes ... 

[Kyle 207]

7 hours ago, Liquor and Poker said:

Know a guy who works there.  Been a rough week.  Richards' comments may kill all the creatives' jobs.

"Ends justifies the means."

[Elvis 3365]

Marketing is defacto the targeting of demographics and stereotypes to leverage their predispositions to drive sales. Also, 87 year olds should not be on zoom calls.  Gotcha culture has no winners, only losers.  

[Born Burnt 6171]

20 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

Anybody who has dealt with him knows that Stan Richards is a complete asshole.  And the fact that he is a complete asshole is reflected in the leak of his comments and how fast the long knives came out once it became public.

This fact stood out to me as well. Why did his own people leak the information and seem to immediately turn on him? It seems a couple of you have direct experience or knowledge of the man.  What do people at the company generally think about him? Is this just a couple of rogue employees?

[Ghost of LL 15504]

1 minute ago, Born Burnt said:

This fact stood out to me as well. Why did his own people leak the information and seem to immediately turn on him? It seems a couple of you have direct experience or knowledge of the man.  What do people at the company generally think about him? Is this just a couple of rogue employees?

I don't know.  I don't deal with his company.  My experience with him is social (quasi-social/quasi-charitable), and I found him to be a complete dick.

[Steel Shank 9417]

From what I understand he runs a pretty tight ship. Employees are penalized for being late to work (8:30am). I know a while back it was mandatory for males to wear ties. Any of you familiar with ad agencies know they tend to lean heavily towards a more laid back corporate culture. One thing going for The Richards Group is that they are privately owned, so they were able to pay a bit more to employees instead of some large ass holding company. While Stan may have been a hardass, he was generally well respected in the community. I'm sure he, like anyone in position of authority, has his detractors. I'll certainly defer to any current or former employees.

[Sgt Hulk 13698]

i've lost a fuck ton of sleep over this and I dont think ill be able to move on with life until something is done to be honest

[achooloco 1065]

Petition to change title of thread?

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

keep in mind also that the definition of "white supremacist", in most of our lifetimes, has gone from "a person who believes in the inherent genetic supremacy of the white race" to "someone who dares to argue against Critical Race Theory". 

I would like to see the research confirming even a measurable amount, let alone a significant portion or majority, of the client base is "white supremacist". 

[Shaggy3.0 1695]

On 10/18/2020 at 9:26 PM, Lobo said:

Join me on my zoom Thursday if you have time.  We've got an exciting panel with deadly serious action items on the back end.  I think you'll be pleased.

You gonna go full Toobin?

 

[Guest Lobo]

Toobin Snake Boogie, baby!

[Catdaddyhorn 3444]

On 10/20/2020 at 10:57 AM, SwanderedTalent said:

keep in mind also that the definition of "white supremacist", in most of our lifetimes, has gone from "a person who believes in the inherent genetic supremacy of the white race" to "someone who dares to argue against Critical Race Theory". 

I would like to see the research confirming even a measurable amount, let alone a significant portion or majority, of the client base is "white supremacist". 

I love how Critical Race Theory has suddenly become such the outrage du jour of people who probably know negative fucks about it and had never even heard the term more than 4 or 5 months ago. 

Edited October 22, 2020 by Catdaddyhorn

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

16 hours ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

people who probably know negative fucks about it and had never even heard the term more than 4 or 5 months ago. 

oh that's me all right

[irishtexan 11459]

He used the wrong words to make his point. He should have contextualized it by saying "the directive from the client was to make a multi-cultural appeal and my opinion is that this piece skews to heavily in an appeal to african americans." 

Where he fucked up and lost the client was when he said their clientele were white supremacists. No one wants to be known as the preferred motel chain of the KKK, even if that is true. And your ad agency can't be the source of that research if/when it goes public.

When you combine those two things, he seems like a bigoted simpleton who doesn't understand the complexities of race relations or the sensitivity of the black experience in America today. I still think they're making way too big of a deal out of this. 

 

[Armybrat 40764]

Very good synopsis, Mick.

[Born Burnt 6171]

For those who thinks it's reasonable to wonder if this person should be representing the university, here is a new article that presents more information about his company:

https://www.businessinsider.com/old-school-advertising-agency-richards-group-faces-claims-racism-sexism-2020-10

 

Inside the biggest independent ad agency, The Richards Group, where some say an old-school culture that included all-male retreats fueled racism and sexism

In late 2019, executives from PF Chang's China Bistro came by The Richards Group's office after the ad agency won their business. 

The Dallas-based agency was known to regularly host games to entertain clients and visitors, and agency founder Stan Richards described this one to the PF Chang's execs as "I'm not eating that," a variation on "two truths and a lie," where agency employees would read descriptions of four Asian dishes, one of which was fake. If the client guessed wrong, one of the employees explained, they would "send all 752 of us on a trip to Asia for free."

The real foods, the script went, included turtle jelly, "now available at your local Chinese supermarket," which "might not make for the best complement to peanut butter." Duong Dua, or Vietnamese coconut worms dipped in fish sauce, was described as "Creepy. Crawly. Nope." 

The fake entry was for a dish called "Firecracker Cricket Legs."

"Plant-based food doesn't have to mimic meat to sound appetizing. In the Philippines, sometimes it can mimic bugs. Like the Labassin Waterfall restaurant's snacky dish Firecracker Cricket Legs," the script read.

Agency leaders asked everyone to chant "I'm not eating that!" at the end of each description.

The blowback in the building was immediate. Two employees said they declined to participate in the exercise, which some described as "tone-deaf," xenophobic "schoolyard humor," and "racist." 

Richards told Business Insider he didn't see the script beforehand and didn't realize it would be a problem until he learned that some employees had been offended, at which point he apologized.

A PF Chang's a spokeswoman said the chain "would never knowingly participate in anything that demeans or negatively characterizes" Asian food and culture, adding, "We are guided by those foundational values and seek partners who are similarly aligned." The chain ended its relationship with The Richards Group in April due to pandemic-related budget cuts.

The Richards Group now faces steep losses after racist comments by the founder

Richards built a steady business over 44 years by creating classic campaigns like Motel 6's "We'll leave the light on." Today, it's the largest independent agency in the US, with some 600 employees and around $200 million in revenue last year.

But now its founder is out and the agency faces steep losses in the wake of racist comments Richards made earlier this month. 

The 87-year-old had called a proposed ad campaign for Motel 6 "too Black" and said it might alienate the chain's "white supremacist constituents," AdAge first reported.

Major clients including Motel 6, The Home Depot and Keurig Dr Pepper fired the agency. The Richards Agency has lost an estimated 40% of its business and may have to lay off around 40% of staff, Richards told The Wall Street Journal.

A Motel 6 representative said the company was "outraged" by the statements, calling them inaccurate and "in direct opposition of our values and beliefs as an organization." 

Richards, for his part, said he "didn't really do anything wrong." He said he rejected the ad because it wasn't broad enough in its appeal. He also pointed fingers at the ensuing media coverage.

"I used three words to say why I was rejecting it, and those are the three words that caused such a tremendous uproar and cost us a lot of business," he said. "What's sad about that is that somebody who was on our payroll, that we were paying, decided that he or she was going to do something that would destroy the agency, so somebody went to the media with it, and it had a profound effect." 

According to more than 10 current and former employees who spoke to Business Insider, the agency is mostly staffed by forward-thinking people. But they said episodes like the Motel 6 and PF Chang's ones stemmed from a rigid, old-school workplace where people were required to abide by strict clock-in times, the founder hosted all-male retreats, and no parental leave was available until 2019.

Some insiders said that the agency has fallen behind as the industry has begun reckoning with its lack of gender and racial equality and that its future remains uncertain under new leadership.

The agency spokeswoman issued a statement saying, "The 600 people who call The Richards Group home deserve respect, and the chance to focus on positive contributions and apply their talents to work they can feel proud of.

"The outpouring of support from messages and on social channels from current and former employees, clients, and industry partners is astounding. Their words and experiences are being shared proudly — not anonymously — and are powerful reminders that, while not perfect, this is a special place where a whole lot of good people have built careers, done great work, and built lifelong relationships that they value."

"Our goal is to evolve, address needed improvements, and embrace a new future for our agency," she said.

Some said they experienced racism while working at the agency

The Richards Group has confronted accusations of cultural insensitivity before.

In 2011, Summer's Eve pulled a campaign made by the agency that was criticized for playing on racial stereotypes.

In 2018, the agency produced a Christmas card titled "Make the North Pole Great Again" that referenced President Trump and the idea of making "reparations" for misfit toys. A former employee said it led to contentious meetings where others had to explain to Richards why the card was inappropriate.

The spokeswoman said the card was meant to be a commentary on national discourse and not a political statement.

Like most ad agencies, The Richards Group's leadership remains overwhelmingly white and male. According to the Association of National Advertisers, 75% of ad industry employees were white, 9% Asian, 8% Hispanic, and 6% Black as of 2019. Some people of color said they experienced racist behavior, overt or otherwise, while working at the agency.

Brandi Rand, a senior social strategist at The Richards Group from 2014 to 2016, was one of just a few Black employees during her tenure. She said her desk was placed outside Richards' glass-walled office, where guests would be sure to see her when they toured the office.

"I felt tokenized. I felt like I was there to say, 'We have diversity!'" said Rand. 

The agency said race, gender, and sexual orientation had no influence on seating arrangements.

Another Black woman who worked at the agency until 2019 said the first week she was there, the man who had recruited her saw her speaking with a colleague and asked, jokingly, if they were having a "secret Black meeting."

The Richards Group has a sister agency, Lerma, a Hispanic marketing firm, housed in another building, and some people who worked there said they felt like they were second-class. They said Lerma employees weren't allowed to use the gym or eat the free food on offer in the agency's main building. 

One said he had never heard of an Hispanic employee going on one of Richards' all-male trips; another said that if she ever saw more than two Hispanic people in the main building, it was "a lot."

Richards said he never met many of Lerma's employees but that he "can't imagine that anybody in either organization would feel like a second-class citizen when we do everything we can possibly do to make them feel important and appreciated."

The agency has recently paid more attention to staff diversity. In February, it started an employee group called We@TRG devoted to diversity and inclusion. After Richards stepped down, the agency said it planned to conduct an internal audit, schedule bias training, review all client work, commit to increasing minority representation, and hire an executive focused on diversity.

Some saw earlier efforts as half-hearted, though.

Rand said the agency once called her to sit on a panel with The Marcus Graham Project, a Dallas-based nonprofit that exposes nonwhite college students to the ad industry. She later learned that none of the college student participants ended up getting job offers at the agency while she worked there, though.

Before leaving the agency in 2016, Rand said she also reviewed four classes of interns and saw nearly everyone was white.

"What is the purpose of this if, ultimately, none of them are hired?" Rand asked. "We've got to do better."

Richards told Business Insider he has long promoted diversity by trying to get local Black teens interested in the ad industry by sponsoring scholarships and working with groups like The Marcus Graham Project.

"It's a difficult thing to do, because our industry is not particularly diverse, and it's hard to find Black and Hispanic individuals who we can bring into the firm," he said. "[It] has not been a successful effort, but it has been going on for 30 years."

Stan Richards led his company with an old-school style that included all-male trips and strict attendance rules

Most employees who spoke to Business Insider said they saw Richards as a traditionalist who spoke from a place of ignorance, not malice, and that this was reflected in the agency culture.

Counter to the freewheeling culture of the typical ad agency, The Richards Group was rule-bound. There were only three levels of employees: entry-level; group leads; and Richards himself, which enabled him to consolidate control. Richards considered human resources wasteful, and there is no formal HR department. The criteria for bonuses is murky to many, though the spokeswoman said they're based on performance.

Two people said sharing any information about one's salary with colleagues has long been a fireable offense. The spokeswoman declined to comment.

Asked about his leadership style, Richards pointed to a profit-sharing plan that puts aside 15% of each employee's salary to encourage people to stay.

Richards was known for showing up at the office at 7 each morning to use the in-house gym. The agency had a strict 8:30 AM check-in time, and employees were known to ask colleagues to enter their four-digit codes for them if they were running late or take selfies in front of a clock in the elevator when they made it in on time. According to a 2011 Inc. profile, Richards wanted employees to be at their desks early before clients arrived and "dressed to impress, in case that client walked in the door."

If staffers were late more than three times in one month, the company took money from their annual bonus and gave it to those with fewer latenesses. At all-staff meetings at the end of each year, Richards named those who'd been late most often as a joke. The company also took $8.63 from people's bonuses for each day they didn't bill for their time down to the quarter hour — an amount the spokeswoman said had to do with how much time it took accounting to track down delayed timesheets. She also said the lateness policy has been suspended during the pandemic.

Richards regularly took select groups of employees on his private jet to go deep-sea fishing in the Gulf of Mexico or skiing near his cabin in Deer Valley, Utah.

For years, these excursions were only open to men, who were often picked by Richards himself. Even when women began being included, mingling of the genders was still prohibited.

Richards paid for these trips himself and limited his interactions with women outside the workplace out of respect for his since-deceased wife, Betty. (He also wouldn't ride in a car alone with a woman.) After she died, he said, he scheduled an equal number of trips for both genders.

Richards said work matters were discussed on these trips and acknowledged that "there was a little bit of favoritism" shown to agency veterans. But he insisted that attendance didn't influence employees' careers, and that the only requirement for going on the trips was that they knew how to ski or fish.

Some insiders said Richards had a right to use his private time and property as he wished. But one former employee said that because these were staff trips, they doubled as work functions. One employee described the trips as "Stan time, because he signs your raises."

The agency presented a challenging environment for parents

Some teams, like new business development, are led primarily or exclusively by women; Richards estimated that around 70% of staff are female. But employees said the agency was a tough place for working mothers.

The Richards Group did not offer paid parental leave until mid-2019, and a former employee said the common line would-be parents heard was that they should leave for a job with better benefits and return when their children were older.

Brandi Rand said she saved up sick and vacation days during her pregnancy to use after the birth. She said despite being promised that she would continue to lead her clients upon returning, she never regained her previous responsibilities. Soon afterward, she quit.

The agency spokeswoman declined to comment.

Parental leave was added after a group of women pushed for the change and leadership saw it cost more to replace the parents who were on leave, insiders said. The spokeswoman said leadership made the "long overdue" change last year because it was "the right thing to do."

Some employees say The Richards Group now has an opportunity to redefine itself

Richards was succeeded by creative director Glenn Dady, a 40-year vet of the agency and well regarded as a creative leader.

But some current and former employees voiced disappointment that he hesitated in calling for Richards' departure. One person said he also initially defended the founder's Motel 6 comments.

"People were surprised to see Glenn's empathy for Stan versus the agency and the people he had hurt — he decided to forgive Stan on behalf of 700 people," said another employee. "It's just poor instincts."

According to the spokeswoman, Dady told employees the day Richards' Motel 6 comments were reported: "We need to move forward and we need to get back to the reason we are all here: to do great work."

Still, some have expressed hope that the agency can remake itself by abandoning the uncompromising culture built by Richards over more than 40 years.

"This is a pivotal time for accountability, transparency, and impactful change," said Brandi Rand, the former social strategist. "I am optimistic Dallas, and the industry in general, can evolve. It has to."

"For a long time, [there's been] an internal surge to become a better agency — I've always viewed it as building it up from the ground up as the original fleet starts to retire," the second employee said. "We were hoping it would be a new dawn, and now here we are."

[NeverMarryAStripper 21800]

I am very much against having UT schools named after donors.  That name should be something that is bestowed, after careful consideration, to someone associated with the University (alumni, professor, etc.) as an honor earned, not something that is purchased.  Unfortunately, as our athletic department knows all too well, the big money donors usually have massive egos that need to be constantly stroked.

My degree is from the UT school of Business, not the Red McCombs School of Business.

Edited October 26, 2020 by NeverMarryAStripper

[TwiceHorn 31365]

On 10/26/2020 at 9:04 AM, NeverMarryAStripper said:

I am very much against having UT schools named after donors.  That name should be something that is bestowed, after careful consideration, to someone associated with the University (alumni, professor, etc.) as an honor earned, not something that is purchased.  Unfortunately, as our athletic department knows all too well, the big money donors usually have massive egos that need to be constantly stroked.

My degree is from the UT school of Business, not the Red McCombs School of Business.

Totally agreed.  My degree is from the College of Engineering, period.

The Cockrell family has long supported Texas engineering.  There's a building, numerous scholarships, and numerous chairs and professorships.  The naming is unnecessary and I think is just an effort to keep up with the Whartons and Kelloggs and etc. of the world.

[Guest Lobo]

I'm still torn on that subject.  Some of the people these schools are named after, in addition to donating money, gave back in many other ways to the University.  Others are just assholes who stroked a big check and needed affirmation/validation.  

Like the Steve Hicks School of Social Work.  Sure he got his name on it because of money, but he also shared very personal struggles with alcohol abuse and domestic issues that came with that, because he wanted students and alumni alike that people that appear to have it all figured out/successful often have other demons to cope with and it was because of counselors and addiction specialists like them that he was able to come out the other side. 

The Butler School of Music is so named because of a huge gift, but also because the Butlers are the two nicest, most humble wealthy people in Texas.  Period.  Full stop.  

I like those kinda stories.  Some of the other ones on campus were basically lifelong assholes who finally went legacy-shopping in the twilight years to make up for something else. 

[J.R. Juniors Junior Jr. 1084]

27 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I'm still torn on that subject.  Some of the people these schools are named after, in addition to donating money, gave back in many other ways to the University.  Others are just assholes who stroked a big check and needed affirmation/validation.  

Like the Steve Hicks School of Social Work.  Sure he got his name on it because of money, but he also shared very personal struggles with alcohol abuse and domestic issues that came with that, because he wanted students and alumni alike that people that appear to have it all figured out/successful often have other demons to cope with and it was because of counselors and addiction specialists like them that he was able to come out the other side. 

The Butler School of Music is so named because of a huge gift, but also because the Butlers are the two nicest, most humble wealthy people in Texas.  Period.  Full stop.  

I like those kinda stories.  Some of the other ones on campus were basically lifelong assholes who finally went legacy-shopping in the twilight years to make up for something else. 

Or Dell, who bought the medical school naming rights for the absolute minimum.  He's since donated more, but at the time people in the University fundraising community thought he got the naming on the cheap, especially since the gift was $5 million/year over 10 years.  There are people who make larger donations than that at UCLA and only get a research specialty center within a hospital named after them