Or they are trying to make sense of a world where ads like this (and 10 year old Brooke Shields posing provocatively in Calvin Klein Jeans) is the norm. Sure the theories get pretty nutso, but they are not being pulled out of thin air.
Sex slavery and human trafficking IS a multi billion industry, that is REAL, plenty of true, real live documentation of it, if you have the stomach for it…and there’s definitely a market for having sex with and torturing children…in Asia entire economies are based on this.
Just like everything that goes on in the world is making its way to our front door, Americans are terrified that that sick shit is coming here too. (As quiet as it is kept, it already is.) Ads like this only fuel the hysteria. So why defend it?
People ARE responding to sickness and evil in the world. They are trying to hold corporations accountable for it as well.
And yet there are hundreds of comments here to explain to us how a little girl provocatively eating a banana is the most natural thing in the world. (And it’s not…at least it shouldn’t be.)
Those of you “in the industry” are talking to the rest of us (especially those of us who loved Madmen) like we are idiots. Like we have no clue how this industry works, like sex sells isn’t the first rule of it, and it hasn’t been exploited to the point of outrage and disgust, which was exactly what Audi got, with its “mistake.”
So what I’m trying to understand is what is the purpose of all this counter commentary with the picture of the girl being so innocent? Like is it really that important for Audi to be able to use images of girls eating bananas? And not an apple? Why not an apple? Or pieces of an orange? Why the such a rigorous defense of the banana? It’s what the kid wanted to eat…Like advertisers care so much about kids appetites as they’re trying to sell something…Come on!!!