“Offensive” And “Disgusting”: A Critical Analysis Of Audi’S Advertisement On Used Cars And Women 

Through juxtaposition, the selected advertisement (Yang, 2017) has distastefully likened the choice of a wife to that of a used car. Many netizens found it “offensive” (Zheng, 2017) and “disgusting” (Wang, 2017), and one cannot help but question the advertisers’ insensitivity. In this essay, I will adopt a feminist lens, and employ Serafini’s “three analytical perspectives” (Serafini, 2010) to examine the underlying issues. I believe that this advertisement is largely targeted at the male population, and it justifies and reproduces the idea of “male gaze” (Mulvey, 1975), which warrants further scrutiny.

A Perceptual Analytical Perspective

I will first address the important scenes in this advertisement. It opens with a wide shot in an idyllic outdoor setting. Just as a couple is about to take their vows, a woman suddenly interrupts the ceremony. To the disbelief of everyone, she rushes up the stage and inspects the bride. Alarmed, the groom (presumably the son) pulls the woman away. While returning to her seat, the woman turns around and produces an “okay” signal, to the relief of the couple. However, her facial expression suddenly changes. Since it is shown that the bride immediately covers her chest area frantically after the change, we can assume that the older lady was focusing her attention on the bride’s bosom. As the scene progresses, the pace of the background music accelerates. The advertisement then shifts to the setting of a road. As a red car zooms past the screen, we can hear a male voice asserting, “An important decision must be made carefully”. It then simulates an online shop that sells pre-owned and approved Audi cars, and concludes with a male narrator again, saying “Assured by official certification”.

A Structural Analytical Perspective

In the subsequent analysis, considering the semiotic and narrative elements (Luke, 1996) of the advertisement, it is clear that the advertisers had designed it primarily with a male audience in mind. From the perspective of semiotic elements, one can observe how the advertisers have made use of different techniques to appeal to a typical male viewer. The opening of the advertisement first introduces us to a public space with wide shots, giving viewers a generic sense of the environment, instead of a sense of intimacy that we get from close-ups. Besides, from the beginning till the entrance of the sedan, supported by the increasing tempo of the background music, the pacing of the advertisement quickens, leaving little room for contemplation. Furthermore, it makes use of bright lighting and colour (e. g. red metallic car) to draw the viewer’s attention. According to Luke (1996), these technical features are rather typical of a male-targeted advertisement, and will aid in the “structuring of gendered meaning” of the latter. Moreover, we can also examine its narrative elements to demonstrate its “masculinity”.

On the surface, some may argue that a central “goal-oriented heroine” seems to play a more significant role here, and hence we should not perceive this advertisement as a masculine one. This “heroine” single-handedly interrupts an outdoor wedding ceremony, and dictates the choice of her daughter-in-law. Her verbal and body languages are also rather domineering, indicating a complete control. In addition, the viewer can only see the father-in-law’s face for less than a second, suggesting that he is a less important member of the family. These instances appear to support the stance that the producers of the advertisement are trying to be gender-inclusive. However, if we were to pay attention up till the end of the advertisement, we will realise its underlying male bias, which is underscored by the condescending tone of the voiceovers. Even with a primary female character, the presence of a male voiceover and its egotistical lines seem to imply that the female is only allowed to play a substantial role because of his approval. It functions like “the voice of God”, dictating one’s (man’s) judgment on top of another’s (woman’s), hence possessing an overarching control over the whole plot.

An Ideological Analytical Perspective

Having interpreted images of the advertisement through its “codes and conventions” (Serafini, 2010), it is now timely for us to consider the underlying socio-cultural issues. We should first note that the advertisement in question serves to promote cars, which are traditionally associated with masculinity. Through mass media, this association, together with the notions of independence, power, and adventure-seeking (think Fast and Furious), are often reproduced and collectively characterized as masculine qualities in many cultures (Balkmar, 2012; Landström, ‎2006; Quinn, 2007). Objectively, there is nothing morally unacceptable here, and this also largely explains the advertisers’ original intention to produce an advertisement for male audiences. However, what is erroneous about this advertisement is that it justifies and reproduces “male gaze”, and worst of all, through women.

By stereotyping the Asian mother-in-law as an assertive and demanding individual, it places her in power to assess her would-be daughter-in-law on men’s behalf, hence replicating the influence of men in a patriarchal society. In fact, this character’s very existence allows men to hide behind the façade of “inclusivity” and continue to intensify their superficial scrutiny on young females, thus endorsing a “hierarchy that keeps women separate and divided” (Lazar, 2006). This is reminiscent of The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood (2010). In this novel, women in authority (like Aunt Lydia and Serena Joy) are cold and brutal, and they constantly secure their position by manipulating other women.

It is through the former that the patriarchal system survives, as they hold onto however much power they are allocated. It can be said that women in this instance, like the mother-in-law in the advertisement, are the very people who are disadvantaged in a patriarchal system, and yet are the most valuable instruments that those in power (i. e. men) can use to exert control. In conclusion, I believe that the concepts behind the advertisement in question are inherently problematic, hence necessitating further examination. It is little wonder that it triggered widespread public outcry, prompting us to question the legitimacy and continual existence of “male gazes” in a postfeminist era.