The story of Fearless Girl, as told by the marketers who created her
In this video from the Mumbrella360 Australia conference – Elizabeth Serotte, vice president marketing communications at State Street Global Advisors, explains where the idea for the iconic Fearless Girl campaign came from
During the following video, Elizabeth Serotte, vice president marketing communications at State Street Global Advisors, explains where the idea for the iconic Fearless Girl statue came from.
The campaign, created by Wall Street investment firm State Street Global Advisors, placed a bronze statue of a girl staring down New York’s iconic Charging Bull statue as part of the company’s campaign for greater diversity on boards.
Speaking to the audience during June’s Mumbrella360 Australia conference in Sydney, Serotte says: “When I took my first job in marketing a number of years ago, it did feel a little like going over to the dark side.
“I certainly never imagined that working for a B2B financial services firm was going to be the job that offered me the opportunity to work on a campaign that was so viral and impactful and really did make a difference.”
Although she admits most people are probably more likely to have heard of the Fearless Girl campaign rather than the company who created her, she explains: “the company and who we are and what we stand for actually a really important part of the story.”
I think the concept and execution of Fearless Girl is amazing. And what it has done to galvanize a feeling for many people is equally powerful. What I find distasteful and upsetting frankly is how the original artist’s intention for the Bull has been appropriated and distorted. What is was interpreted as meaning, appropriated to mean, by the people behind Fearless Girl, is not what it actually meant as a piece. They changed the meaning of the Bull to suit their own ends. And they weren’t evangelists of a righteous cause doing this… but instead finance and ad people. Which adds a deep layer of cynicism to this.
The idea and execution are superb. And I stand by people with whom this message resonated. But the people and way of operating behind it are frankly [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines]. A man spent $400k of his own money to produce a symbol of hope to the American people in a dark time and it had nothing to do with the causes it has been miscast as representing. Is he collateral damage? Is disingenuity in this case okay because of the higher purpose of Fearless Girl? I don’t think so.
ReplyHave your say