Julianne Malveaux on Business and Economics and Commentary

 

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ADVERTISING ? NO WAY

BY JULIANNE MALVEAUX

 

            I was counting on settling in to some exciting tennis with this week’s US Open games, but instead have settled into yet another racial controversy.  Time Magazine’s news peg on the Open was a cover featuring Venus and Serena Williams, with a hot title – The Sisters vs. The World.  Between the covers, there’s some carping from Williams competitors, and some mean-spirited race talk from two Martina’s – Hingis, who seems to be smarting that the Williams brand of power tennis threatens her #1 ranking, and Navratilova who seems to chafe at life out of the limelight.

 

            Martina Hingis said that Venus and Serena get endorsements because they are black.  She added, “They have had a lot of advantages because they can always say ‘It’s racism’.” Navratilova, who must have had her head in the sand for the past six years, says the Williams’ have been “treated with kid gloves”.  “People have been afraid to criticize them because they don’t want to be called racist.”  Navratilova seems to have been watching a different tennis game than I’ve been watching since Venus Williams turned pro in 1994.  Both Venus and Serena have been treated to scathing criticism and unconscionable bias on the part of their competitors and the tennis commentators.  John McEnroe, hardly the gentleman of the tennis court, has had the temerity to lecture them on demeanor, and Chris Everett, offering commentary, just about pulls out pom-poms to cheer on their opponents.  The Williams sisters seem to have weathered all criticism, winning Grand Slams, and pocketing millions of dollars in earnings and endorsements.  Does Hingis have a point, though?  Did Reebok sign Venus Williams to a $40 million contract only because she is black?  The concept, actually, is laughable.  I don’t know how things are done in Switzerland, where Hingis lives, but in the United States profit is the bottom line.  Venus’ contract with Reebok reflects the extent to which she “sells” in the market.  There’s no such thing as affirmative action advertising.  People get contracts because their image sells.

 

            What Martina Hingis and her ilk forget is that African Americans represent a $561 billion market in the United States.  It’s a market that is younger and more urban than the general population, a market that has tuned in to tennis because of the charisma and visibility of Venus and Serena Williams.  Reebok sells athletic shoes and clothing, and is looking for ways to expand their base.  Venus Williams, with her winning ways, lean elegance, and incandescent smile, has been their ticket to ride.

 

            Were she simply black (that is black and untalented), she wouldn’t have a ticket to ride.  Williams has been out there for seven years, building her image and endorsements slowly.  While other players had endorsement contracts in their teen years on the junior tennis circuit, the Williams girls eschewed junior tennis for education (and it shows when you compare their interview composure with that Hingis offers) and their family covered many of their expenses.  No wonder Richard Williams breaks into a spastic dance when his daughters win.  He is gleefully viewing his return on investment.

 

            Hingis’ ire at the Williams sisters is certainly understandable.  She has earned $16.2 million from tennis – almost twice as much as Venus and more than three times as much as Serena.  But she has hardly garnered the big-ticket, high visibility endorsements that the Williams have – she has no Reebok or Doublemint endorsements, and hasn’t gotten the centerfold attention the Williams’ girls command – with photo spreads in magazines like Vogue and Essence.  Hingis may be number one in the rankings, but she’s way down the list in endorsements and visibility.

 

            In this country, though, the Williams girls are an exciting phenomenon.  They are ebony rarities in a sport that has, to date, been mostly white.  They don’t smoke, drink, or curse, projecting the clean-cut image that most corporate advertisers insist on for their spokespersons.  And they can effectively hawk products among African Americans, and also among the many young women who have become interested in tennis because of the Williams’ visibility.

 

            Indeed, Hingis and Navratilova contribute to the Williams earnings with their controversial carping, which only serves to sharpen the focus on women’s tennis.  According to most ratings measures, audiences are more likely to watch women’s tennis than men’s, and tennis rivalries only serve to bring more attention to the game, and to its stars, Venus and Serena Williams.  I wouldn’t be surprised if the Williams girls snap up another endorsement contract after the US Open.  As endorsement dollars rain down on them, though, Martina Hingis ought to take notes.  The bottom line in advertising isn’t race.  In the parlance of the ‘hood, it’s about the Benjamins.  The color of money is green, not black, and as long as the Williams image sells, they’ll elbow Hingis out in endorsements, if not on the tennis court.


Back