Let’s Make Fun of Black Women’s Hair for A Buck.

I’m catching up on my Google Reader today, and I see Melissa has another Assvertising post up about this gem of an ad:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJirDEII2Sc[/youtube]

Yep, that’s pretty much nothing but fail. No questions there. Then, I start reading the comments (I have avoided just about every comment section on every blog on the web for the last several months, so this is big thing for me) and see a link that Scott Madin has posted to the Sociological Images blog, which has yet another really messed up KGB ad:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_54smbVC3JQ[/youtube]

Um, excuse me? Is this company for real? Did I just watch a commercial asserting that black women getting weaves don’t know what “natural” means, and of course, when they find out what it does mean, it means animalistic hair?

I don’t even have words for this. Regardless of your thoughts on weaves, you have to admit that this shit is foul.

**There is also, of course, the issue of Chris Rock’s movie, the lead-in to the offensive ad in question in the above linked post, which should be taken into consideration here. I’m not convinced that Chris Rock isn’t doing anything other than what the commercial is doing as well. That will be the subject of another post.

***On a completely unrelated note: Why would anyone use this service anyway? Why would anyone pay to find information that is freely available all over the internet (and judging from the commercials, you’d get bad information anyway)? From the handful of ads that I could stomach, everyone is using a smartphone, an iPhone or Blackberry, both which should have internet access. It’s clear which demographic they are aiming for. So the “away from the computer” argument just doesn’t hold. Who would pay someone a buck a pop for information that they can get for free as part of their phone plan? So yeah, the combination of the really offensive nature of these ads with the audience that they seem to be going for…is just odd.