Anybody up for boycotting Barilla Pasta?

What about FREE SPEECH??
Shud that apply only when u LIKE
what the speaker has to say??





David

so according to you being pro freedom and pointing out the freedom of the market that the free market economy is supposed to embrace is arrogance?

please please please get us a copy of the Firefly Language Dictionary, your massive deviation from english makes you hard to follow.

How do you know gay political pressure groups wear panties?

explian how you go about getting your rocks of by playing dumb.

Now wait a fat minute - there are bigots and bigots. I'll agree with JPB that this guy was just saying what he thinks. Italy is in some large part, though not all, a mama loving and respecting place through centuries of culture. Over centuries they trusted family more than any rulers in passing, and many did pass through - and I think they still do. It's a large part of their resilience and some nutsiness, including (generalization coming) some amount of pampered males through life. That's not my idea, I've read it over and over possibly a hundred times by italian writers and visiting observers. No links. I know some apparent non pampered ital males myself so I know the culture varies, but you should hear my italian teacher on the subject, whoo. The family is who you can trust (some of the time), and people have long time roles in it. This proliferated in the days of the papal states to some extent, thus Family as a term can have certain possible implications in some areas.

A huffpost article by Michael Signorile (he knows the territory) on the subject:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/why-barilla-pasta-ceo-is_b_4002085.html

The CEO of Barilla, during an interview, was asked a specific question about whether same-sex couples and families would ever be included in their ads and he said no. It's a statement about their marketing policy but I'm not sure it really rises to the level of a "public proclamation" that indicates the man is homophobic or that he has homophobic thoughts or that Barilla's corporate position is homophobic or anti-gay.

And I don't think Barilla was, "trying to influence public perception on a given issue towards their limited/discriminatory way of thinking"--not at all. Barilla, after his remarks about retaining their current ads, that show only traditional heterosexual families and couples, immediately said that he personally supports gay marriage--which actually puts him on the same side as the gay rights community in terms of that social and political issue.

If Barilla was trying to influence public perception on this issue, the gay community should be happy to know that they have this support. And, rather than trying to, "blatantly pander to those bigots of the world," Barilla's comments would actually gain him little or no support in those quarters since, in a country that currently allows no legal recognition of same-sex marriages, he's announced his support of gay marriage.

As I said in my previous post, I think the gay activist movement, particularly in Italy, is trying to parlay Barilla's remarks into political and social capital for themselves and their own issues. Barilla doesn't need this publicity, Barilla doesn't need any publicity, their brand recognition and sales do just fine. Their ad campaigns do the job of selling their pasta, and there is no compelling reason for them to tamper with success in that regard.

I think it's the gay rights movement that's trying to make hay with what Barilla said, in terms of garnering publicity and trying to exert consumer muscle. And that makes sense, particularly at a time they are trying to get specific legislation passed in the Italian senate to better protect the LGBT community from discrimination. But it seems to have resulted in considerable distortion of what the furor is about. It's not about Barilla being a homophobe or a bigot--he really seems to be neither--and it's not even about Barilla sticking to their guns about their ad images--it's about the gay activist movement trying to demonstrate their buying power, and boycott power, when a corporate CEO refuses to let a special interest group dictate his company's marketing techniques, and he tells them go elsewhere if you don't like the way we sell our product.

I feel this controversy has little or nothing to do with civil or human rights for homosexuals, or discrimination against them, but that's the mask or political spin that's been put on it by gay activist groups for their own reasons. If I thought there was any merit in this boycott, in terms of promoting gay rights, I'd be supporting it.

Because NO chairman or CEO has EVER DODGED a question in the history of journalism, right? He could have be as vague and evasive as EVERY other CEO in the history of corporate executives who didn't want to publicly answer a given question that would spark controversy.

With the state of business journalism as it is? There wouldn't have been any followup questions or followup research to a nonnanswer answer. All of these business journalist care about is unfettered access and making trouble by pressing a CEO to directly answer one of these gotcha questions is likely to get them blacklisted from future interviews with other corporate executives.

And he's an executive to global corporation not just a company based out of Italy which doesn't do business outside of Italy. You don't get to your position in a multimillion dollar corp not knowing about the global backlash that can happen from ANYTHING you say.

Ack, I think I meant implications, not inferences. Oh, well.

I still think the answer was a corporate gaffe, and a real toss off of homosexuals, expressing genuine distaste, but I do get advertising re family as a concept for the many in Italy, and potentially received well all over except for the matter of the gaffe interview. (Some may remember my father started the tv department at a big ad agency back in the day - I don't need instruction about it.)

It remains that I don't have to buy that pasta anymore.

I'll have to try Maestri Pastai again.

You really have difficulty focusing your attention in anything approaching a specific manner. We're discussing specific remarks by a corporate CEO, directed at a specific group, and that group's reaction to those comments.

I was talking specifically about Barilla's dismissive attitude toward those, particularly homosexuals, who might object to the exclusively heterosexual families shown in that company's ads. It was arrogant for him to tell a specific group, like homosexuals, to go elsewhere if they don't like his company's ads--he's telling a group of consumers that Barilla doesn't need their business. No one was saying that Barilla doesn't have the freedom to market their products as they wish to, but the manner in which Barilla framed his remarks was taken as a throwing down of the gauntlet, and the gay activist community immediately accepted the challenge by calling for a boycott of Barilla--they took his attitude as being arrogant, and the boycott was their response.

As a temporary digressive interlude, as is my way, I'll link the Maestri Pastai people. Of course I can't hear it myself anymore since I need a new iMac to get adobe flash, but some of you may enjoy it.
http://www.maestripastaiusa.com/

As it happens, I've no idea what their corporate opinion is re gays, but it seems to be about well made pasta.

at some point you have to say " if you dont like my product then go buy the other guys" . it is not possible to please everyone, and often it is not in our best interests to try. the gay rights political pressure groups
have long tended to be as militant and as inreasonable as PETA, which is a great yardstick to use for deciding when to tell the agitators "go **** yourself".

Barilla was not arrogant, he was exercising good business sense.

edit: the restaurant down the street has a printed philosophy that the customer should always get what they want, they will remake or refund your money for any reason. I happen to know that he also has outrageous food costs and often does not pay his bills on time. a good business man will not go to sny length to make every single person who walks through the doors happy, and trying to do it will lead to ruin.

Quote firefly -
I feel this controversy has little or nothing to do with civil or human rights for homosexuals, or discrimination against them.


Me - we all know that, you are instructing the converted with a red herring.

I admire the man for not dodging the question. And he stated both the corporate position, in terms of their advertising, and his personal views in support of same-sex marriage.

The gay activist community could also have chosen to ignore his remarks. It's a moot point who started the "controversy" and what its aim is. No one really expects Barilla to start showing same-sex couples and families in their ads, so what's the real goal of this boycott, other than to use Barilla's remarks as a ruse to gain public support for pro-gay issues, particularly in Italy where important pro-gay legislation is pending in their senate?

The Barilla CEO has already apologized if his remarks offended anyone. I honestly don't think he meant to be derisive of homosexuals, but I think he was less than diplomatic in the manner in which he conveyed that his company would not be pressured into changing their marketing strategy simply to hold onto business from gay consumers or gay pressure groups that didn't agree with it. It was his saying they could take a hike if they didn't like Barilla's marketing tactics that's really what this furor is about. And it's really more of a furor, I'm not sure there is any real "controversy". He ticked off some segments of the gay community with his attitude. They are angry. And they are seeking revenge with a boycott.

But, just because some people feel ticked off by his remarks and attitude, that's also reality in the world of business and product marketing, where a company can choose not to interject controversial elements into their ads which might detract attention from the product they are trying to sell. And this is an Italian product, which tries to maintain its Italian identity, and, as osso has pointed out, the concept of family, a certain type of family, is really deeply embedded in the Italian psyche. The music in Barilla's commercials is Italian music, and often features well known Italian voices, like Andrea Bocelli. They are selling Italy, along with their Italian product, and Italian family image, and same-sex marriage is not legal in Italy. It actually wouldn't make sense for them to feature homosexual families in their ads.

I am curious about what this boycott is supposed to accomplish. What is it they want Barilla to do? Is that at all clear?

the company is supposed to use thug approved promotional massaging.

No, osso, I don't think "we" all know that.

The link you posted to the article by Michael Signorile also suggests this is a LGBT civil rights issue, and that it should be used to drag Italy into the 21st century on that score.

Tsar has called the Barilla CEO a homophobe and has accused him of using this controversy, and his statement regarding his company's ads, to spread a bigoted anti-gay position, and to pander to those who hold such views.

That view definitely suggests this matter has to do with anti-gay discrimination and the civil rights of homosexuals. I don't think that is the case, and I think the "red herring" in this instance is the kind of view espoused by tsar.

I also am not offended that Barilla's commercials still show only the woman in the family doing the cooking and serving. Or that the ads feature only young attractive upscale people in somewhat posh surroundings.

I'm not buying Barilla's life-style, I'm only buying their pasta, because I like it, and I don't expect their ads to make a social statement, or even to reflect reality, few ads do.

Ah, I see your point - but I don't think most of us are taking Guido Barilla as against their civil rights (I still take him as homophobe but not the worst on the planet), and I doubt Tsar actually does think Barilla is against civil rights, which is why I said wait a minute when he was implying the bigotry was meant as a corporate scheme. I think corporate scheme came first, having to do with italian culture, generalizing again. I took the comment as antihomosexual too, the hell, no, tone. I'll think about it and read some more.

I'm softening of course because I didn't know he was from Parma. (kidding, kidding).

all of these American jokers who are getting all worked up about how Barilla sells its products would be much more useful if they took that same energy and applied it to the fact that a just released study has the USA 44th out of 86 nations in income inequality.

modern americans remind me of an old joke about guys who dont even know which hole to put their dick in.

More to the point, and more on topic for this thread, is the fact that a judge has just ruled to legalize same-sex marriage in New Jersey--and Gov. Christie vows to fight that.
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/nj_superior_court_gay_marriage_ruling.html

Before Americans get worked up about who Barilla chooses to put in their ads, they should be more focused on the opposition to same-sex marriage in this country that keeps homosexual couples from being able to marry in all 50 states. That's more important than how an Italian company chooses to hawk their pasta.

ok, this is so far off being based in reality even I can't laugh at it, and I can laugh at just about anything.

So suddenly some executive is homophobic because he said they aren't going to change their marketing plan to include non-traditional families? You saying he/they are actually and actively prejudiced against gay people over this?

What if an overwhelmingly larger group of people.....college and university students, approached Barilla and said they would like to see them run ads highlighting young people sitting in dorm rooms and small apartments eating and enjoying their pasta?
College students are infamous for living on tight budgets, pasta is cheap, college students eat a ton of pasta.....maybe (I'm thinking proably) more than traditional families. In reality, they may be one of the strongest consumer bases for pasta consumption in this country.

So, if Barilla said to this group of people that are a much larger group then many others "no, we're going to stick with basing our ads on traditional family units, even though you may/probably purchase more of our product than they do", would that make them bigoted/prejudiced against college/university students? Woud that make them hate mongers against people who are trying to get a higher education, and carbing up on their product so they can have a full belly while studying?

Why doesn't Barilla show black families in their ads? Do they hate blacks as well?
Why don't they have commercials showing Asian families eating their product? I don't think I've seen any people in wheelchairs eating their pasta either. There is definite discrimination going on against people who are "differently abled"

They must hate dogs and cats and other house pets, because I know they don't show them in their commercials.

I'm going to stop using Barilla until they start showing a family with at least 1 person in a wheelchair eating dinner with a cat sitting on the window sill, and a dog licking its butt under the table.

Those bastards should be reported to the NAACP, the ADA, and the ASPCA. What the hell, report them to PETA as well. It's cruel they sell a product a dog doesn't want to eat.

According to the Sydney Morning Herald’s Giles Hardie, Barilla made the comments in response to president of the Chamber of Deputies of Italy, Laura Boldrini’s “calls to alter the image of families in Italian advertisements that portray mothers seving food to fathers and children.”

From what I've found about Boldrini, she's a human rights activist who speaks out about women's issues in Italy.