By now, almost everyone has seen the new Gillette ad criticizing toxic masculinity and urging men to be better men:

Reactions range from offense at Gillette’s corporate moralizing to genuine appreciation and celebration.  Slate captured the corporate logic effectively:

The wide range of reactions was, of course, the point: to create a conversation starter. To rile people and get them talking about Gillette. To increase brand recognition amid Gillette’s declining market share and, ultimately, make Procter & Gamble more money. Much of the criticism of the ad has revolved around the company’s motives.

Yet P&G can have financial incentives and still make an ad worth lauding. These two things are not mutually exclusive. And this ad is a step in the right direction, because the more we collectively hear the message that sexual harassment is unacceptable, that bullying is wrong, and that helping victims is noble, the more this message will shape our—and our children’s—everyday choices. We need to get messages like this from our leaders, teachers, parents—andfrom television shows, movies, books, songs, and advertisements. Cultural shifts happen when every aspect of culture embraces and normalizes a change.

Some business law professors commenting on Twitter took the same position.  Iowa Law’s Greg Shill immediately saw the play:

A boring take on the shaving ad: Harry’s & DSC made surprising inroads on a routine toiletry product (where brand loyalty is normally high), and after years of hemorrhaging market share Gillette found the perfect way to show (rather than tell) they’re “not your grandpa’s razor.”

— Greg Shill (@greg_shill) January 16, 2019

Nicole Iannarone also saw the brand boosting implications and how the business judgment rule will protect the Gillette (P&G) board from any second guessing by disgruntled investors:

4.5m views=LOTS of attn for @Gillette. Even w 4x as many dislikes as likes and calls to boycott, bus judgment rule hard to overcome as many reasons to argue as in co’s best interest. We Believe: The Best Men Can Be | Gillette (Short Film) https://t.co/s9offVFUcI

— Nicole Iannarone (@NicoleIannarone) January 15, 2019

As Joshua Fershee pointed out after the Nike ad, the business judgment rule protects a board for its marketing decisions.  Even if others dislike it or they think it was a poor decision.

And Gillette certainly has its detractors.  New York’s Josh Barro panned the ad after celebrating the Nike ad, seeing it as more accusatory than uplifting:

This is important: Instead of offering the man something, the slogan now asks him to do something. Gillette has spent decades making him the best razors it could; now it’s the man’s turn to deliver.

Whatever this is, it isn’t marketing.

Gillette’s message — that something has too often gone wrong in masculinity, and that men ought to evaluate whether they are doing enough to combat bullying and mistreatment of women — is correct. But the viewer is likely to ask: Who is Gillette to tell me this? I just came here for razors. And razors barely even feature in Gillette’s new campaign.

From a business perspective, I see it differently.  Let’s face it:  Razors are essentially commodities.  Unlike Barro, I’m skeptical that there are any real differences between Harry’s, Dollar Shave Club, or Gillette.  It’s blades on a stick folks.  Consumers will either be drawn to a brand or they’ll just buy the cheapest readily available option.  (Confession:  I get my razors at Costco.  It’s blades on a stick.)  Gillette doesn’t want to compete on price against the new entrants so it needs to offer a brand razor buyers want. 

Barro felt as though Gillette shouldn’t be taking this approach because of the way it called men out, perhaps offending its customer base.  I suspect Barro may have assumed that the users are almost always the buyers.  Although many men do buy their own razors, many women also buy razors and other products for families.  By one count, women drive 70-80% of all consumer purchasing.  From this angle, it’s not surprising that women known for making ads for, among other things, feminine hygiene products created the ad.  If you want a man in your life to be his best self or if you’re a woman fed up with toxic masculinity, a Gillette razor might appeal to you.  

Even though some may see this as a cynical marketing move, Gillette has been remarkably consistent on these issues.  They ran a similar campaign a few years ago in India.  This Forbes piece captures it well:

If Gillette were purpose-washing—where it uses the optics of “doing good” in a malevolent way to make a buck—the company wouldn’t possess a prior track record. There are scores of companies who claim to be purpose-driven when in fact they are purpose-washing. They use the concept of “purpose” not to change society, but solely to make a buck.

I don’t see this as the case with Gillette. They possess a track record of being purpose-driven.

Six years ago the company launched a campaign in India titled “Gillette Soldier for Women.” Its goal was not about men turning women into soldiers; rather the company was pushing men to stand up for women. “Because when you respect women,” as the advert insisted, “you respect your nation.” 

Presumably, Gillette had a good experience with that campaign before unveiling this one in the American market.

Over the long term, it also helps that Gillette is absolutely right on the issue.  The American Psychological Association recently released guidelines for treating boys and men.  They found that traditional masculinity has real downsides for men:

Although boys and men, as a group, tend to hold privilege and power based on gender, they also demonstrate disproportionate rates of receiving harsh discipline (e.g., suspension and expulsion), academic challenges (e.g., dropping out of high school, particularly among African American and Latino boys), mental health issues (e.g., completed suicide), physical health problems (e.g., cardiovascular problems), public health concerns (e.g., violence, substance abuse, incarceration, and early mortality), and a wide variety of otheWhor quality-of-life issues (e.g., relational problems, family well-being; for comprehensive reviews, see Levant & Richmond, 2007; Moore & Stuart, 2005; O’Neil, 2015). Additionally, many men do not seek help when they need it, and many report distinctive barriers to receiving gender-sensitive psychological treatment (Mahalik, Good, Tager, Levant, & Mackowiak, 2012).

Looking at my own life, I don’t think an overly stoic, traditional masculinity has served me particularly well.  One of the APA’s identified markers is the rejection of help.  I’d probably have been happier and healthier if I had sought help when I needed it.  Instead, men often suffer needlessly for fear of showing weakness.  This likely contributes to the negative outcomes that fall on men–early deaths, suicides, mental health problems, and lower graduation rates.  To remind myself of that, I might grab the Gillette brand razors the next time I’m stocking up at Costco.  After all, even people that don’t shave with razors are buying them:

I don’t even shave with razors. But I’m about to go buy some @Gillette.

— Aaron D. Ford (@AaronDFordNV) January 16, 2019