E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Pier Marco Tacca / Getty Images Contributor
Members of the public walk past a new Benetton advertising poster campaign displayed on a wall on Nov. 16, 2011 in Milan, Italy. The posters, part of a new campaign by the United Colors of Benetton entitled 'UNHATE,' created by the newly formed UNHATE Foundation, was given a worldwide launch in Paris on Nov. 16, presented by Alessandro Benetton, Executive Deputy Chairman of Benetton Group SpA.
Unhatefoundation.org
Chinese Paramount Leader Hu Jintao and President Barack Obama
Fashion house Benetton, known for controversial advertising, may be pushing the envelope even further with the new UNHATE campaign.
The Vatican objected to the use of the pope's image today.
Update: Bottom line: Benetton withdraws ad showing pope-imam kiss
Unhatefoundation.org
North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong Il and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak
As the Wall Street Journal reports:
For the new campaign, Benetton's in-house communication agency Fabrica doctored pictures of leaders –- without their permission. Mr. Benetton says he doesn't expect them to complain because it promotes a message of peace.
While I appreciate the creativity of the effort, the use of news photographs without permission of the subjects strikes me as unethical and unfair.
What do you think?
Leave a Comment:
Everyone knows the Pope would NEVER kiss a guy that old!
What are they thinking?
Promoting Peace? No one in their right mind would think that these pictures are promoting peace. They should enforce a law for using these pictures with out these people consents.
controversial? For stupid people yes.
I disagree, and I think you too easily dismiss the idea here. You can already see clearly what these photos are intended to reveal. The reactions people will have to them will predictably be negative in the majority, at least from what I've read. But why? Why the controversy? The Catholic church is one of the largest, wealthiest most powerful institutions on the planet, so why does one artist's statement irk them so much?
Fear.
Fear is the answer. The meaning in these images is not so much within the images themselves but in each of us, our personal reaction, which I assume the artist assumed would be discomfort, anger, perhaps disgust. But each of us should be conscious of how we feel, and ask ourselves whether it's actually rational or productive to voice opposition to something just because it conflicts with our accepted norm, both of sexuality and the relationships between world leaders.
How does it make you feel to imagine a world in which Barack Obama might lay a smacker on Hu Jintao? Personally, the idea that such powerful men could cross these accepted barriers is a comfort to me. It gives me hope for the future for humanity to overcome the divides that hold us back.
While I certainly am not anti-gay, those pictures were a little tough to take. In my opinion, the pictures depict them as being couples embracing. Maybe because the are well known figure heads, they seem strange to me...
For the mere fact that heads are slanted to the left or right, eyes are closed and faces are pressed against each other does not symbolize "UNHATE" to me. What it shows to me is sexuality. Unhate could be symbolized in many different ways (what happened to having a dinner together, gathering at a game, shaking hands or laughing together in a room. This to me, seems to send a blatant expression of sexuality and in a light that could be preceived as unfavorable to the subjects (if they did not concent to their images being used in such a way).
Tasteless!!
Mouth to mouth kissing doesn't equal peace. On the cheek/forehead kissing, or a comfortable embrace would have been so much better for advertising the idea of peace. And it would have been cute and funny, not repulsive. Tell us how much Benetton paid for these ads?
Not a good symbol of unhate. Plus, they used the images without permission from the photographers or the subjects. What did they expect? A big juicy wet one on the mouth?
Yuck. Don't like the ads, don't get the message (I agree with the previous comment: it isn't "unhate," it's "sex") and, even worse for Benetton, it won't improve their image or their sales. Poor, Benetton, very very poor.
You need therapy, hater.
It's ridiculous to call anyone who doesn't enjoy this a hater. Even homosexuals should dislike this because it is untrue and makes people feel uncomfortable about homosexuality in general. This truly is tasteless and accomplishes absolutely nothing. If he was truly trying to promote peace he should have done something more universally acceptable, if he was promoting gay rights he should have used something less provocative, no Catholic is ever going to be more accepting after seeing their Pope insulted by being made to appear as if he were engaging in an activity that is both against his faith and morals. I am personally very offended.
You need your head returned to level, twit.
Hate the ads. But f**k Benetton for caving in to a religious figure, first and foremost. Pathetic.
I am not Catholic, but I hope the Vatican sues.
I am not Catholic....that's it.
Too bad the Catholic Church isn't as concerned with their precious priests doing more than kissing the poor unfortunate altar boys.
The images depict a level of intimacy far beyond "unhate," so far beyond that it's clear that Benetton is far more interested in promoting Benetton than "unhate."
Art is not always meant to make the viewer feel comfortable like a Norman Rockwell painting(which is also beautiful art). Sometimes it is meant to illicit an uncomfortable reaction.
To show these two aging statesmen engaged in a passionate embrace with their lips locked, while it's not going to bring peace to this conflict, it does tell us something about ourselves. What is more ridiculous to us: Two men showing love for each other in this way or violent, unending conflict between countries.
Precisely. Absurd.
I imagine the creator of these images wished to incite controversy and illicit a resemblance of thought in a world resting on the waves of hate.
Love it or hate it, the intention to create a reaction has worked.
These are really bad. Really in poor taste. How sad that we have been reduced to this type of shock advertising to make money. That's all this is about, you know. Benetton could care less about hate or unhate. What are their income statements looking like these days. Sad.
Who do these people really think they are? I don't care who is the President or the
Pope, but I have enough decency to at least respect the office of the
Presidency and the Pope. Way out of bounds and absolutely disgusting. Shame
on Benneton. Not the venue and I resent them trying to shove homosexuality
down my throat. I for one will not support Benneton in this type of
brainwashing and overt indoctrination.
Good for you EmbraceTruth. I stopped shopping at their stores years ago. Too many freaks.
-
"I resent them trying to shove homosexuality
down my throat"
Very telling of YOU, "Embrace Truth."
Embrace homophobia is a better moniker for you
@Roxy Ro If you want people to accept homosexuality then why would you approve someone aggressively insulting peoples faith with homosexuality. I don't think he is trying to promote your agenda at all. He is just trying to piss people off, and the hate will end up being directed at those who least deserve it, and probably not the creator of the ads or the company that used them.
Roxy,Roxy, don't get your panties all in a bind. I suppose you're OK with
Catholic Priests molesting little boys though.
I am not afraid of homosexuals.
What a crass attempt at gaining attention for a brand way past its prime.
Pathetic.
Offensive.
Tasteless.
Sophomoric.
And, to NOT get permission from the subjects! Here come the lawyers. I hope Benetton gets sued into the Dark
Age.
Another lesson in "moving the needle" - the wrong way…
Way to go, Benetton.
You've done it again.
I think the very provocativeness people are commenting on is the very point of these type of campaigns. I think they are fantastic and the bottom line is that they used publicly released photos of public figures, so get over that and think about the real issues being discussed BEHIND the images!
So you'd approve of an ad campaign showing two blatantly homosexual males holding sawed-off shotguns at the heads of bound and gagged heterosexual parents and their infant child while "engaging" each other?
It would certainly be provocative. But that would never make it "art." That which is not beautiful is not art, regardless of what they taught you in the homosexual-dominated schools. And, no, beauty is NOT all in the eye of the beholder, else there is no such thing as beauty. There are common values. There IS Truth.
It would get people talking about relevant issues.
But it would not be moral.
And not because it offended homosexuals.
It trivializes one of the most important issues of our time--coexistance--by reducing it to an ad campaign for clothing. If they really wanted to make a difference in the world, why didn't they quietly make a corporate donation to a charity like the ADL? Precisely because that would not garner any notice. They become like a nude runner who streaks through a the Masters Tournament because it's the only way they'll ever be seen on TV. And just as pathetic.
I find it totally offensive and completely counter productive towards their stated goal. Such behavior is totally inappropriate. My culture, my traditions, my beliefs, you are free to live your life the way you see fit, just don't ever expect me to approve. Nor would I go out of my way to purchase a sweater from such a company.
More pure crapola by the tired and no longer at all edgy brand. Give it up and head off to the graveyard Benetton.
oh no! You aren't wholeheartedly going along with the agenda of the social engineers who say you must love, promote and fully accept homosexuality- and anything else they say.
I like the obama - hugo Chavez picture. Two peas in a pod.
Well, I don't know about the Korean one or the one with Pres. Obama, but the one with the Imam and the Pope is friggin' hot. Look at the Imam's body language - he looks like he's waited to kiss (roll your "R") Ratzinger for YEARS!
And now, in this one beautiful moment for the cameras, he lets loose with a passionate embrace and a deep and meaningful kiss. Look at how much they have in common! Both leaders of world religions that believe in the existence of imaginary friends! They both wear funny little hats! And both religions hate gay people - who better to engage in homosexual acts than two closet cases...Brilliantly done! Just brilliant!
Benneton - next time can we use The Prophet Mohammad and Jesus?
Only make Mo white and Jesus black - with J's loincloth draped alluringly over his hipbones, with Mo grabbing a handful of Christ's wavy hair as they smooch?
Pretty please?
Or maybe the Fred Phelps (in a dominatrix-drag?) madly making out with a gay soldier....cause that would just be awesome!
Or Rick Santorum making Santorum! Perfect!
John Boehner kissing Harry Reid would have been better or maybe Mahmoud Abba kissing Eric Cantor.