Gillette's controversial toxic masculinity commercial A Critical Discourse Analysis of Gillette's 'We Believe: The Best a Man Can Be' commercial with the use of Legitimacy Theory
Author
Hvornum, Ditte
Term
4. term
Publication year
2024
Submitted on
2024-01-02
Abstract
This thesis examines why Gillette’s 2019 “We Believe: The Best a Man Can Be” commercial about toxic masculinity triggered widespread backlash. Using Critical Discourse Analysis (of language, imagery, genre, and social context) with multimodal tools, and drawing on Legitimacy Theory to assess the types of legitimacy claimed, the study deconstructs how the message is conveyed. The empirical material is the commercial itself. Findings indicate Gillette relies heavily on mood and emotional appeals, effectively visualizing the harms of toxic masculinity and offering examples of positive male behavior, yet it neither explains nor shows how the company will act itself, weakening credibility. Released amid the politically charged post-MeToo climate, the ad challenges gender power relations and hegemonic masculinity, while the sister brand Venus benefits from gendered pricing (“pink tax”), which appears hypocritical. Through the lens of Legitimacy Theory, Gillette seems to have overestimated its goodwill, limiting audience tolerance despite efforts to appear a good corporate citizen. The thesis concludes with guidance for cause-related marketing: choose an issue clearly related to the company, select an appropriate support approach (e.g., partnerships with non-profits), and audit and address internal misalignments before launch.
Dette speciale undersøger, hvorfor Gillettes 2019-reklame “We Believe: The Best a Man Can Be” om toksisk maskulinitet udløste omfattende modreaktioner. Med Kritisk Diskursanalyse (af sprog, billeder, genre og social kontekst) og multimodale værktøjer samt løbende inddragelse af Legitimacy Theory vurderes, hvilken legitimitet virksomheden søger at opnå. Det empiriske materiale er selve reklamefilmen. Analysen viser, at Gillette primært bruger stemning og følelsesappel, og at reklamen effektivt visualiserer konsekvenserne af toksisk maskulinitet og eksempler på positive mandlige handlinger. Derimod forklarer eller viser Gillette ikke, hvordan virksomheden selv vil handle, hvilket svækker troværdigheden. Lanceringen fandt sted i en politisk ophedet post-MeToo-kontekst; reklamen udfordrer både kønnenes magtforhold og hegemonisk maskulinitet, mens søstermærket Venus samtidig profiterer af kønsdifferentierede priser (“pink tax”), hvilket fremstår som hyklerisk. Set gennem Legitimacy Theory overvurderede Gillette sin goodwill, og publikum udviste derfor begrænset tolerance trods forsøg på at fremstå som en ansvarlig virksomhed. Specialet afslutter med anbefalinger til cause-related marketing: vælg en sag med tydelig relevans for virksomheden, fastlæg en passende støtteform (fx samarbejde med non-profits), og afdæk samt adresser interne uoverensstemmelser før lancering.
[This apstract has been generated with the help of AI directly from the project full text]