In today’s media landscape, decoding controversial messages has become critical for audiences. One such controversial media text is NIVEA’s ad campaign titled “White Is Purity.” This ad generated immense criticism and backlash for its alleged promotion of white supremacy and racism (Sayogie et al., 2023). By applying Stuart Hall’s encoding/decoding model, this essay explores the preferred meaning intended by the media producers and examines one popular negotiated or oppositional reading. By analyzing mainstream reviews, criticism, and social media responses, we can gain insights into the power dynamics between producers and audiences in determining the meaning of controversial media.
The Media Producers’ Preferred Meaning
According to Stuart Hall’s encoding/decoding model, media texts often carry a dominant ideology called “preferred reading.” In the case of NIVEA’s “White Is Purity” campaign, the media producers’ preferred meaning can be interpreted as an association between the color white and purity in skincare. They may argue that the ad aimed to communicate the effectiveness and purity of their products by using the color white. From the producers’ perspective, this meaning would align with their branding strategy and resonate positively with their target audience (Lomborg & Kapsch, 2020).
However, the producers’ preferred meaning can be problematic when examined critically. The ad’s association of purity exclusively with the color white reinforces narrow beauty standards and overlooks the diversity of skin tones and cultural contexts (Shankar, 2020). This narrow representation perpetuates a singular notion of purity that is Eurocentric and exclusionary. By prioritizing the aesthetic appeal of the color white, the producers may inadvertently neglect the broader implications of their messaging and fail to consider the potential harm it can cause to marginalized communities. In light of these considerations, it becomes evident that the media producers’ preferred meaning, although grounded in marketing strategies, can be flawed and perpetuate harmful stereotypes. According to Lomborg & Kapsch (2020), the critical analysis of the ad necessitates a deeper examination of the implications of their messaging beyond surface-level interpretations. It highlights the importance of a nuanced understanding of cultural diversity and the need for advertisers to be mindful of the potential impact of their representations on diverse audiences.
A Negotiated Reading – Criticism and Opposition
Despite the media producers’ intended meaning, a negotiated reading emerges among specific audiences. Critics and individuals on social media platforms opposed the ad, arguing that it promotes white supremacy and racism. For instance, a Twitter user, Scott Bellows, criticized NIVEA’s ad, stating, “Come on #Nivea. This is so racist that I do not even know where to begin. Speechless. In future, refer to clothes or products, not colors.” His tweet reflects the concerns many raised regarding the ad’s racial connotations.
The opposition to the ad extends beyond social media platforms, with individuals and organizations calling out NIVEA for its lack of sensitivity and cultural awareness (Sayogie et al., 2023). This negotiated reading challenges the media producers’ preferred meaning and highlights the potential harm caused by their messaging. It demonstrates the power of the audience to engage with media texts and challenge dominant narratives critically. By voicing their opposition, audiences can prompt media producers to reconsider their messaging and reflect on the broader implications of their representations. The negotiated reading, fueled by criticisms and opposition, reinforces the importance of promoting cultural sensitivity and inclusivity in media campaigns (Tyler, 2020). It emphasizes advertisers’ need to conduct thorough research and consultation to ensure their messaging does not perpetuate harmful stereotypes or reinforce oppressive systems. The negotiated reading serves as a reminder that audiences are not passive recipients of media messages but active participants who can shape the narrative and challenge inappropriate content.
Another Negotiated Reading – Cultural Insensitivity
In addition to accusations of racism, another negotiated reading of the NIVEA ad revolves around cultural insensitivity. Some critics argue that the ad appropriates and commodifies the concept of purity, which holds different cultural meanings across diverse communities (Sayogie et al., 2023). By associating purity solely with the color white, the ad disregards the complexities of cultural diversity and reinforces Eurocentric beauty standards. The negotiated reading that highlights cultural insensitivity raises essential questions about the responsibility of advertisers to be aware of the implications of their messaging (Tyler, 2020). It underscores the need for sensitivity to cultural differences and a more inclusive approach to representation. The ad risks alienating and marginalizing audiences who do not align with the dominant narrative by failing to acknowledge the diverse cultural meanings associated with purity. This negotiated reading urges media producers to conduct more thorough research and consultation when crafting their messages. It emphasizes the importance of cultural competence in advertising, whereby advertisers should actively seek to understand and respect the cultural nuances of their target audience (Wang & Chen, 2021). By doing so, they can avoid perpetuating harmful stereotypes and foster inclusivity and representation that resonates with diverse communities.
Oppositional Reading – Racial Representation and Harmful Stereotypes
Among the various responses to the NIVEA ad, an oppositional reading focuses on perpetuating harmful racial stereotypes. According to Stuart Hall’s encoding/decoding model, media texts are often encoded with a dominant ideology or preferred meaning. In this case, the media producers may have intended to associate purity with the color white in a skincare context. However, the oppositional reading challenges this dominant ideology by highlighting the negative impact of the ad’s messaging on marginalized communities. The oppositional reading aligns with a broader discussion surrounding representation and the need for more inclusive and diverse media portrayals. Xie et al. (2022) state that Stuart Hall argued that audiences could adopt an oppositional reading when their social position directly conflicts with the preferred meaning. In the case of the NIVEA ad, audiences who identify with communities historically marginalized or subject to racial discrimination may reject the notion that purity is solely associated with the color white. Instead, they perceive the ad as perpetuating harmful racial stereotypes and reinforcing the belief that whiteness is superior (Wang & Chen, 2021). This oppositional reading challenges the media producers’ preferred meaning and disrupts the dominant ideology encoded in the ad. It reflects the power dynamics between media producers and audiences, highlighting how audiences actively engage with media texts and construct interpretations based on their social positioning and lived experiences. The oppositional reading demonstrates the audience’s agency to reject and contest the preferred meaning, advocating for more inclusive and socially conscious media representations.
Social Media as a Platform for Audiences’ Voices
Social media platforms significantly shape the discourse around controversial media texts like NIVEA’s “White Is Purity” ad. According to Wolfram (2022), Stuart Hall’s model recognizes the active participation of audiences in meaning-making. Social media provides a space for audiences to voice their opinions and critique problematic media content, effectively challenging the dominant ideology and the preferred meaning encoded in the ad. The NIVEA ad sparked intense discussions and generated a flurry of responses on platforms like Twitter, where users shared their opinions and criticisms. Basdogan et al. (2020) state that with their broad reach and instantaneous nature, social media platforms allow audiences to engage in public debates and express their opposition to the ad’s messaging. Through retweets, comments, and hashtags, individuals can amplify their voices and contribute to the collective negotiation of meaning (Basdogan et al., 2020). This widespread engagement on social media highlights the democratizing potential of these platforms. Audiences can challenge dominant narratives and influence the reception and interpretation of media texts. Social media functions as a catalyst for change, urging media producers to be more mindful of their messaging and promoting accountability for the social impact of their content. The power dynamics between media producers and audiences shift as social media empowers audiences to construct and contest meaning actively.
Power Dynamics – Audience as Active Participants
The analysis of NIVEA’s controversial ad through Stuart Hall’s encoding/decoding model reveals the power dynamics between media producers and audiences. While the media producers may have intended a specific message, audiences actively engage with the text and construct interpretations based on their social positioning. Stuart Hall posits that audiences can adopt dominant, negotiated, or oppositional readings depending on their social situation (Xie et al.,2022; Wolfram, 2022). In the case of the NIVEA ad, the negotiated and oppositional readings challenge the dominant ideology encoded in the ad, reflecting the diverse perspectives and experiences of the audience (Avineri, 2020). These readings demonstrate the agency and influence audiences possess in shaping the meaning of media texts. While the media producers may hold power in creating and disseminating the ad, the audience’s active participation disrupts the notion of passive reception. Audiences bring their cultural backgrounds, values, and social positions into meaning-making, asserting their agency and contesting the dominant ideology. Social media platforms further amplify the power dynamics between media producers and audiences. According to Avineri (2020), audiences now have a platform to voice their opinions, challenge dominant narratives, and hold media producers accountable for their messaging. The democratizing nature of social media empowers audiences, shifting the balance of power and demanding more inclusive and responsible media representations.
In brief, the controversy surrounding NIVEA’s “White Is Purity” ad exemplifies the challenges of decoding controversial media texts. By applying Stuart Hall’s encoding/decoding model, we have explored the media producers’ preferred meanings and examined negotiated and oppositional readings. The power dynamics between media producers and audiences are complex, with audiences actively engaging with media texts and challenging the preferred meanings. Social media platforms have become important spaces for audiences to voice their opinions and critique inappropriate content. By acknowledging the power of audiences in shaping meaning, media producers can strive for more inclusive and responsible media representations, ensuring that their messages align with diverse perspectives and avoid unintended controversies and negative backlash.
References
Avineri, N. (2020). Audience (and Audience Design). The International Encyclopedia of Linguistic Anthropology, pp. 1–5.
Basdogan, M., Ozdogan, Z., & Bonk, C. J. (2020). Understanding the Diverse Field of” Educational Technology” as Revealed in Twitter Job Postings: Encoding/Decoding Approach. Qualitative Report, 25(8).
Lomborg, S., & Kapsch, P. H. (2020). Decoding algorithms. Media, Culture & Society, 42(5), 745-761.
Sayogie, F., Husein, A. M., Puspitasari, E. D., & Ni’Mah, N. (2023). RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN WESTERN BEAUTY PRODUCT ADVERTISEMENTS. Медиаобразование, (2), 329-336.
Shankar, S. (2020). Nothing sells like whiteness: Race, ontology, and American advertising. American Anthropologist, 122(1), 112–119.
Tyler, D. C. (2020). Culture in communication: Dolce & Gabbana’s Chopsticks Backlash. Available at SSRN 3568980.
Wang, Y., & Chen, W. (2021, August). Cross-cultural communication strategies research of socializing apps during the internet era. In 2021 5th International Seminar on Education, Management and Social Sciences (ISEMSS 2021) (pp. 454-460). Atlantis Press.
Wolfram, G. (2022). Encoding/Decoding: von Stuart Hall (1980). In Schlüsselwerke: Theorien (in) der Kommunikationswissenschaft (pp. 325-340). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Xie, Y., Yasin, M. A. I. B., Alsagoff, S. A. B. S., & Hoon, L. (2022). An overview of Stuart Hall’s encoding and decoding theory with film communication. Multicultural Education, 8(1), 190-198.
write