|
The marketing of some children's books is getting increasingly gender-specific. In fact, some book marketers are forcing a gender stereotype that needn't be forced. The same can happen in marketing certain products to grown-up girls and boys. Don't let this happen to you!
* * * * *
I attended a baby shower this past weekend, and got into a great conversation about favorite children's books. That happened to be the theme for the gathering, making it easy to find a $20 gift and not spend a lot more on baby clothes or random items that the parents-to-be would likely return. It also generated fun discussions among the co-ed crowd about what we read when we were young. Book titles such as Good Night Moon (the expectant couple got a Good Night Vermont version - now there's a clever idea), A Wrinkle In Time and A Secret Garden all came up. Most of the books mentioned among us were simply great works, with no need for gender-specificity.
When I then read an article in the TimesOnline (UK), How Judging A Book by its 'Girlie' Cover Is Putting Boys Off Reading," by Alexandra Frean, it made me wonder. According to her piece, some children's books are getting more gender-specific marketing these days.
The interesting thing to note here is that girls will read books with packaging of any color (pinks or primaries, or - imagine, some sort of fresh, non-cliched, color!), while boys will do what they can to avoid pinks and purples (no surprise). Especially for 11-year-olds, the age of most concern for the organizations mentioned in the article, the stereotyped approach may really limit boys in their exploratory reading. As Frean wrote:
"Wendy Cooling, of Bookstart, a charitable programme that encourages children to read, said she was dismayed that publishers were now using gender-specific marketing for certain children’s books. Whereas girls were not put off boys’ books, which tended to have primary colours, few boys dared to be seen reading a pink or purple book, even though they might otherwise enjoy it."
If studies show that girls already tend to read more than boys (and I'm guessing this is a fact in the U.S. as well as the UK), why would we want to steer boys away from any that might catch their interest?
Girls don't actually NEED pink marketing to figure out what they like or want to read. On the other hand, boys seem to need for the books (or any product, I'm guessing) to just NOT BE PINK (or purple etc). Seems easy enough.
The book marketers in Frean's story forced a gender stereotype that needn't be forced. The same can happen in marketing certain products to grown-up girls and boys. Don't let this happen to you.
Instead, take care that your products aren't "covered" in a way that belies their incredibly non-gender-specific, wonderful insides - just like a great children's book.
|
Comments
give me a break!
Posted by: pat furey | 09.27.07
As a parent with children of both genders, I can't say I've actually encountered this problem Andrea.
There are certain series aimed at slightly older kids that are very gender specific (e.g. The Baby Sitters Club books which are for girls, and the Matt Christopher sports books, which are for boys)
But didn't we have the Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew growing up?
For younger kids you have your Disney Princess machine which is appealing to girls counterbalanced by Thomas The Tank Engine's boy empire- but those are more product tie-ins in book form than "literature"
I've found the vast majority is still pretty gender neutral -- even the packaged chapter books. And that my kids like both-- the gender neutral and the gender specific.
Posted by: Tangerine Toad | 09.27.07
Andrea,
My position is pretty clear on this: I believe gender-specific marketing can be harmful, depending on what is being marketed. Our world is made up of more than one gender, one color, one ethnicity. Good story telling is best when it represents reality.
Posted by: Lewis Green | 09.27.07
This reminds me of a shopping experience a few years ago. When I took up golf, I was horrified to find that most clubs and bags designed for women were also in "girlie" colors - pinks, purples, teals, light blues, etc. (Of course, I have no problem with the pink = breast cancer association when properly noted.) It was difficult to find golf equipment which were designed for women but were also appropriate for a beginning golfer who wanted to be taken "seriously" - especially on most male-dominated golf courses. The gender stereotype in packaging and colors unfortunately applies to various consumer goods - not just health/beauty aids. Marketers need to ask their target (women of all ages - mothers, daughters, etc.) what role their products' colors play in both conveying the brand's positioning and reinforcing the female targets' identity before they color the world pastel.
Posted by: AnnaMaria Turano | 09.27.07
The pink golf bag is a great, classic example, AnnaMaria. And, there are places where pink/pastels may well be colors that your target market will be attracted to (cellphones may be one example), but marketers must always go back to asking their target market - as you mention. Consumers are only getting more sophisticated and marketing-savvy, so marketers have got to be on top of the subtleties. What if the product was incredibly wonderful and tons of women would like it for whatever reason, but the brand slapped on the color pink at the last minute as an "extra" detail they just knew all women would be attracted to? Yikes. Unless you get it from the source (your current customers' mouths) seemingly "final step" marketing issues (like packaging design/color) could well ruin a great product that might otherwise sell itself.
And - Tangerine Toad, you make a good point, as well. A lot of it has to do with the consumer. If parents don't buy the ones with pink/purple, kids may never come across them. The classics (and maybe this is part of what makes them classics) don't have to bother with gender-specificity because they are good books that kids and parents love. That is all the "marketing" they need.
Posted by: Andrea Learned | 09.27.07
Not sure that was really my point, Andrea.
There are "classics" like The Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew that are clearly designed to appeal to one gender more than the other.
Kids know early on (age 2 or 3) what's for "boys" and what's for girls: there was an unintentionally funny article in the New York Times magazine about a leftist-feminist mom who has a daughter with a Disney Princess fixation http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/24/magazine/24princess.t.html?ex=157680000&en=3887685b453b9e60&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
It's silly to pretend there's no difference between boys and girls. But there's plenty of ground in between that appeals to both sexes and I've found the key to parenting is "everything in moderation"
As for the pink golf bags, Im not sure what the point there is: do you all see a market for gray golf bags aimed at women? Do you feel that most women would choose a darker or not-traditionally-feminine color golf bag if they had the option?
Posted by: Tangerine Toad | 09.27.07
I agree. It is important not to overdue the targeting. As marketers I think we get excited about research, profiles, and such; and I think we should continue to do so as long as they prove effective. However, there is always that slice of the base that is a-typical. I have a good friend who's husband has no idea what to do with a hammer, but she is very much a handy-woman. Is Craftsman targeting her? Maybe. It is almost always the case that there will be more than one target customer profile that is worth creating a product "cover" for.
J
Posted by: j. renoe | 09.27.07
Because you haven't heard enough from me already...
I thought I recognized the book accompanying this post (Bailey Street Kids, "Pirates Don't Wear Pink Sunglasses") And sure enough when I asked my 9 year old son about it, he said he'd read it, as had most of his (male) friends, that the series "wasn't for boys or girls" and that the whole pink sunglasses thing was a joke about pirates.
Thus proving once again that we should never judge a book by its cover ;)
(Sorry, that was just too easy to pass up!)
Posted by: Tangerine Toad | 09.27.07