When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The Brand Director of Jaguar was telling everybody months in advance that this ad campaign was coming. He's about as pro-DEI as it gets -- not just at these awards, but making it his mission to ram-rod DEI straight into Jaguar's company culture itself. Again, don't take my word for it, listen to him telling you that's exactly what is happening and that's exactly why it is happening at Jaguar.
This isn't difficult.
Ok then please explain why you are against it?
Do you think that DEI means just hiring someone who isn't qualified because of their race or gender?
Do you honestly think that a company that is in the business of making money is going to hire non-qualified people?
No. Are they going to cast a wider net - and maybe even give extra attention to minorities? Of course that's what it means.
It means that if I, as a middle aged tweed cap wearing white guy with two kids, and an ethnic minority who identifies as trans are going for the same job, and we are -equally- qualified, then chances are I'd lose out on the job. Them's the breaks. In 1950 I'd be a f'ing shoo-in, but this isn't 1950.
But if I am more qualified, no company is going to hire a lesser qualified person because of their race, sex, gender, religion, or choice of shoewear. Companies are in the business of making money.
I could likely wave my Veteran flag and they'd look at the numbers and say "wait, we have two non-traditional trans/LBGTQ staff, and here's a white guy and a trans being interviewed, but the white guy is a vet and we don't have a vet! Hire him" because it's a numbers game. Now they have two LGBTQ and a Veteran. They will report that to the board and the board will clap and say Yay we hire DEI and Vets.
But you guys think they're hiring unqualified people who can't do the job and just sit around collecting paychecks just so they can say they have a DEI staff. That's nonsense.
Source? I literally hire people at a company that has a strong DEI statement and celebrates Diversity. Do you think that we value that over people who can get the job done?
Absolutely not. It would be a disservice to our shareholders to hire people who can't grow the busniness no matter what color they are.
I think some of you believe that the silly actors in the ad are Jaguar employees and are now building cars or something.
Mercedes-Benz has an equally strong DEI statement - yet people are all "I'm not buying a new Jaguar! They are WOKE! I'm buying a Mercedes instead"
Do you think that DEI means just hiring someone who isn't qualified because of their race or gender?
Do you honestly think that a company that is in the business of making money is going to hire non-qualified people?
No. Are they going to cast a wider net - and maybe even give extra attention to minorities? Of course that's what it means.
It means that if I, as a middle aged tweed cap wearing white guy with two kids, and an ethnic minority who identifies as trans are going for the same job, and we are -equally- qualified, then chances are I'd lose out on the job. Them's the breaks. In 1950 I'd be a f'ing shoo-in, but this isn't 1950.
But if I am more qualified, no company is going to hire a lesser qualified person because of their race, sex, gender, religion, or choice of shoewear. Companies are in the business of making money.
I could likely wave my Veteran flag and they'd look at the numbers and say "wait, we have two non-traditional trans/LBGTQ staff, and here's a white guy and a trans being interviewed, but the white guy is a vet and we don't have a vet! Hire him" because it's a numbers game. Now they have two LGBTQ and a Veteran. They will report that to the board and the board will clap and say Yay we hire DEI and Vets.
But you guys think they're hiring unqualified people who can't do the job and just sit around collecting paychecks just so they can say they have a DEI staff. That's nonsense.
Source? I literally hire people at a company that has a strong DEI statement and celebrates Diversity. Do you think that we value that over people who can get the job done?
Absolutely not. It would be a disservice to our shareholders to hire people who can't grow the busniness no matter what color they are.
I think some of you believe that the silly actors in the ad are Jaguar employees and are now building cars or something.
Excellent. You've accepted that you were wrong, that this absolutely is about DEI and has been from the start. Progress!
Jaguar isn't the first brand to make this mistake. We watched Bud Light's marketing disaster with Dylan Mulvaney. If you need another example of just how badly this can (and likely will) go look no further than Disney. They openly adopted and embraced DEI and wokeism, both in company culture and in awkwardly ramming it into existing film franchises like Star Wars, and with even worse results.
Put aside your rampant emotional outbursts for a second and look at it from a business standpoint. They're going to lose money because of this, probably a lot of money, and it may even mark the end of Jaguar.
Ask yourself... why would Jaguar enthusiasts, most of whom are Jaguar owners, reading and posting on a Jaguar forum be worried about or upset with a company adopting a risky polarizing strategy that has already failed numerous times? It has nothing to do with x-phobes, x-ists, or any of the other silly labels you're so desperate to ascribe to anybody who dares to have a different viewpoint than your own.
No I haven't accepted that I am "wrong" - there is nothing woke or DEI about the Jaguar ad or the new concept EV. Here's a hint: a car is an inanimate object. It can't be gay, straight, manly, ladylike, queer, masculine or anything else. It's just a car. It's a thing.
The ad isn't woke - the ad contains silly characters that you apparently think are gay? Is that it? The actors are gay? or they actors are portraying gay characters? Is that why it's a woke ad? Which ones in the ad are the gays? Can you point to which one it is?
Bud Light hired Dylan Mulvaney - a known trans activist - to reach out to trans audiences. That is nothing like the silly ad by Jaguar. You have no idea if the actors are gay, straight trans. You are apparently assuming they are because they aren't wearing flannel and work boots.
"Disney and wokeism". Tell me that you listen to a lot of online outrage generators without telling me you spend a lot of time listening to online outrage generators.
Disney isn't broke. "Online agigators" OMG Ariel is black! She's a mermaid! A mythical creature! She has to be white! Disney is Woke! - Little Mermaid earns $569 million and counting, the tenth highest earning film of 2023.
There are no "rampant emotional outbursts" here, stud, but I see you've resorted to the tactic used by people losing a debate: Call names and claim hysteria.
You still can't point to anything "woke" or DEI in the Jaguar ad. Nothing. Because there's nothing in it.
There's nothing woke or DEI in the concept car. It's a car. It's an EV. It may be ugly. It may not sell. It may sell. It may be a bust. But it's not woke. It's a car. The strategy to go to EV may kill Jaguar, but they were dying anyway.
You can't point to "woke" in the ad. Instead you refer to a creative brand creator speaking in front of an audience celebrating LGBTQ and insisting that that means Jaguars are now gay or something.
Virgin Atlantic sponsors the Attitude Award that the creative brand director spoke at - is Virgin Atlantic a Woke Broke brand now? Are you going to refuse to fly on one of their planes lest you suddenly want to kiss a man or something?
Some people seem to be confusing reaching a wider market share with social agenda. If my kid was coming home telling me their teacher is reading a bunch of "it's ok to be gay" books or "how to be a trans" or having drag-queen social hour, I'd pull my kid out of the class.
If a car manufacturer has an ad that caters to gays/trans/Natives/Chinese/the Scots, the Irish (ugh), Africans, Egyptians, etc - I'd sit back and say "good for them, about time they expanded their reach and market share"
And if I knew someone closely who said "I'm not buying a car by them, because their ad had a (gay, Chinese, Native, Egyptian, Trans) person in it - I'd take them to the doctor to see if they had suddenly become retarded and need help.
Watching somebody on a Jaguar forum arguing against Jaguar's own Brand Director (you know, the person actually in charge of their ad campaign) in his own words is pure comedy.
Watching somebody on a Jaguar forum arguing against Jaguar's own Brand Director (you know, the person actually in charge of their ad campaign) in his own words is pure comedy.
Please, carry on.
Watching someone argue who doesn't know what a creative brand director actually does or responsible for is pretty entertaining too.
It's branding to reach a wider audience because the -current- audience isn't keeping them afloat or viable. These are things shareholders applaud, because without reaching a wider audience your brand dies.
I think you seem to believe that if you buy one of the new cars people will point and laugh at you and think you're gay or something. That's totally weird.
When I drive around in my Jag I'm not afraid people are going to point and laugh at me and think I don't brush my teeth or eat beans with breakfast and say "tut tut" all the time.
Jaguar's ad campaign was a massive success. Why? Because it got every. single. news. outlet. in. the. world. watching in advance of the concept reveal, and then the same every. single. news. outlet. in. the. world. watching at Art Basel when the car was revealed.
You know how many of these outlets would have been watching the reveal without the pre-campaign that offended you so terribly?
Like maybe one or two second tier online Youtube car content creators.
Because no one has cared about Jaguar in a decade or more, and without the silly ad a month ago no one would have reported on the reveal yesterday.
This is like....no duh stuff. It's not hard to grasp. Like a weiner if you buy one of the new cars apparently. Because that's how you guys are coming across - as though the car is going to make you gay now because the ad was silly.
It has been fun being part of this Jaguar flash mob. First, I got all wound up by (IMHO) the absolute goofiest ad campaign ever created by a historically important car company. OK, it's just an ad put out by the PR people. Then I got clobbered by the presentation of the physical, design study, full-scale "models". Gawd, they were gigantic, brobdingnagian pink and blue boluses on wheels, with fronts and rears like something from a BMW SUV design-team fever dream. OK, they were just the design concept studies put out by the styling people. Few design studies get fully replicated in the production models. Portions of the study will reappear, the general flavor will be represented, but the product will be untethered from the study - I DID take a liking to the side profile views of the models. I'm now going to settle down, go check the oil on my XKR, and wait to see what the actual (running) new cars will be like in the real world, after the real engineers and build fabricators have done their jobs.
"You Can't Go Home Again" (with apologies to Thomas Wolfe):
The type00 'pinky' was highlighted on Australia's National TV channel news this morning, together with reported comments by Elon Musk on woke design. Now,I cannot recall ever seeing a concept car, any car, making it to our national news. However, the news coverage quickly focused on ridicule of the embarrassment to a brand that was once well respected here.
Images of the car itself were met with universal comments . . . "ugly", "weird", "what were they thinking", "irrelevant".
It all defied the adage that any publicity is better than none. Really scary for the architects of this concept, was the distinctly adverse reaction from males and females alike. Reaction among the younger brigade? "Old and stuffy has been replaced by ugliness!" The sole unifying feature was of universal condemnation . . . and that's why it made our national news!
Overall verdict was that this was the last desperate plunge by a once-famous British car manufacturer who had "lost the plot", was being put under enormous existential pressure by Indian parent TATA, and may soon find itself swallowed up by one of several Chinese suitors who would seek to trade off Jaguar's heritage by swallowing Jaguar and re-birthing it in Beijing.
Not the sort of publicity that bodes well for Jaguar's future.
Ah well, our beauties remain.
However, the news coverage quickly focused on ridicule of the embarrassment to a brand that was once well respected here.
That's weird. The automotive press I'm reading is overwhelmingly supportive. I posted the Jaloponik link above.
Car and Driver was positive too: "While the Type 00 won't directly translate into a production car, the two-door car's imposing proportions, crisp lines, and opulent detailing provide an idea of what to expect for the reinvented Jaguar's first road-ready car in two years."
Regardless of the styling of whatever they decide to come out with the almost criminal thing to me is abandoning an established instantly recognizable logo--the leaping Jaguar and the "cat" faces on the badges. Seems to me that in advertising brands would kill to end up with such a recognizable symbol.
That's weird. The automotive press I'm reading is overwhelmingly supportive.
Car and Driver was positive too: "While the Type 00 won't directly translate into a production car, the two-door car's imposing proportions, crisp lines, and opulent detailing provide an idea of what to expect for the reinvented Jaguar's first road-ready car in two years."
You are aware that when reviewing cars professionally, if you give bad reviews instead of good reviews or at least neutral, you get barred from press releases, and cars to drive in order to review in seat experience.
Or just smart enough to not say anything bad until they can get a test drive when the car goes into production and not get barred from press release information.
That's weird. The automotive press I'm reading is overwhelmingly supportive. I posted the Jaloponik link above.
Car and Driver was positive too: "While the Type 00 won't directly translate into a production car, the two-door car's imposing proportions, crisp lines, and opulent detailing provide an idea of what to expect for the reinvented Jaguar's first road-ready car in two years."
This is because this is their Lane. They don't have to lead everything with political ideology and act like it's a personality trait. They generally are commenting on the product itself. None of the ancillary BS that For some reason grown men can't seem to stop doing an online forums. Honestly, this is one of the weirdest things I've seen in a very long time.
yah! Except for the whole, it catches on fire for no reason so often that Jaguar had to buy them back
Wait, this isn't a feature of EVs? But I also understand this is not all of them and honestly not the majority. And requires a specific set of circumstances. That being said, I'm probably not going to get one. In fact, I'm about 95% sure I wouldn't unless one came along for just like an absolute fantastic price. Much like Mr. Clarkson. I also have a farm and on this Farm I can have and I-Pace, parked way out in the field 😂 My point was not necessarily talking about reliability just in general overall looks and styling compared to everything being force-fed super futuristic designs. We are allowed to like things. I'm not sure how that affects anyone else, so not sure why so much negativity.
You still can't point to anything "woke" or DEI in the Jaguar ad. Nothing. Because there's nothing in it.
If a car manufacturer has an ad that caters to gays/trans/Natives/Chinese/the Scots, the Irish (ugh), Africans, Egyptians, etc - I'd sit back and say "good for them, about time they expanded their reach and market share"
And if I knew someone closely who said "I'm not buying a car by them, because their ad had a (gay, Chinese, Native, Egyptian, Trans) person in it - I'd take them to the doctor to see if they had suddenly become retarded and need help.
What Car?
This was a car ad with no car !?!
The ad had nothing to do with selling or even showing a car. It was strictly ideological agenda.
your GCNET List is not about target consumer audience. It is extremely exclusive to base everything on ideology and the color of your skin rather than a good reason to purchase a vehicle for a broad audience without being exclusionary.
I also understand this is not all of them and honestly not the majority, And requires a specific set of circumstances.
(*) yes, those specific circumstances are: all 2019 model year. They attempted an update for repairing this issue, but it did not work so they are buying back all with this issue.
Originally Posted by tergitkerd
My point was not necessarily talking about reliability just in general overall looks and styling compared to everything being force-fed super futuristic designs.
Yes, I get your point. You prefer the classic vehicle look not the ultra modern. The concept design is very impractical from a engineering and design point of view. Jaguars reliability has not been great so I just can't imagine buying one of these EV's and crossing my fingers. I'm pretty sure if you have a lot of disposable income and a good reason to virtue signal this could have a reason to exist at that price point. the rest of us will just have to move on to a car that we want and enjoy for its own virtues not what we are told should be our virtues.
(*) yes, those specific circumstances are: all 2019 model year. They attempted an update for repairing this issue, but it did not work so they are buying back all with this issue.
Yes, I get your point. You prefer the classic vehicle look not the ultra modern. The concept design is very impractical from a engineering and design point of view. Jaguars reliability has not been great so I just can't imagine buying one of these EV's and crossing my fingers. I'm pretty sure if you have a lot of disposable income and a good reason to virtue signal this could have a reason to exist at that price point. the rest of us will just have to move on to a car that we want and enjoy for its own virtues not what we are told should be our virtues.
Sadly outrage and tribalism are somehow becoming virtues in and of themselves. And while I do like the classic design, I also like this concept, outside of all the noise, it is cool imo. Pink color sucks but it's just a color. I'd never buy one because I am a bit more practical and though I could afford it, if not throw my money away like that ..on any vehicle. If I could rent one for a week, for sure I'd do it. I don't rightly give an f's what others think and honestly don't understand how one can virtue signal with a car lol. How a bunch of metal, rubber, plastic, glass, and..rock? can somehow be "woke" is beyond me and requires mental gymnastics to reach. Lord Musk said it was. Master Elon likes the guy and says the things people like to waste their time and lives being mad about so, I guess that makes it woke. I mean let me put it another way. I am the IT Director of a particular auto division of a global manufacturing entity. As corporate culture is nowadays for MOST businesses, there is a massive DEI component to our structure and we have to sit through some terrible and ignorant things. Some of our ads are borderline at best. Does this mean, then, that our products are woke? Trust me, while I am being vague for Internet privacy reasons, I'm willing to bet there is a very high probability that most everyone here has used some of our products yet have no idea about any of this. And that's the point, most large corporations are run by Millennials nowadays and they have brought all that stuff with them. So is it only "woke"if it public? Again I ask, how would a product, exactly, be woke unless it is a direct woke product (like Targets famous "tuckable swimwear" for kids).
