This is the ad that sparked heated comment on many US conservative blogs and web sites. It belongs to a campaign that promotes ‘absolut scenarios’ under the slogan ‘In an Absolut world’. This one, dedicated to the Mexican market, shows a 1830s-era map when Mexico included several Southwestern US states, including California and Texas. An AP wire writes that ‘Mexico still resents losing that territory in the 1848 Mexican-American War and the fight for Texas independence.
But this ad ignited heated comments, like : “In an Absolut world, a company that produces vodka fires its entire marketing department in a desperate attempt to win back enraged North American customers after a disastrous ad campaign backfires,” on web sites like Malkin.
Absolut said the ad was designed for a Mexican audience and intended to recall “a time which the population of Mexico might feel was more ideal.”
“As a global company, we recognize that people in different parts of the world may lend different perspectives or interpret our ads in a different way than was intended in that market, and for that we apologize.
The very same US activists who gained the withdrawal of this campaign by Absolut are probably today demonstrating for the ‘freedom of Tibet’.
Maybe could they consider just for a minute the Chinese stance and understand what it means to have part of what you consider your own territory, based on historical facts, amputated.
The integrity of a national territory is among the most sensitive issues in the international law. This question can not be highjacked by a public relations campaign like the one we are witnessing.
The question is not if I’m advocating for the Chinese or promoting the oppression of the Tibetans. The question is that the future of a territory (and consequently the relationship between two people) should not been adressed through a world opinion campaign that seems better marketed than an ad for Absolut.
