The image above shows President Donald J. Trump dictating his political agenda and dismantling DEIBA+—which mirrors how things will likely go down at White advertising agencies.
That is, expect DEIBA+ heat shields and Human Heat Shields to be quickly erased as the ruling majority promotes pet projects, protects power structures, and perpetuates systemic racism.
Make Adland Grating Again.
Nielsen published Engaging Black audiences as part of its 2025 Diverse Intelligence Series.
For Nielsen and Adland, diverse intelligence sounds like an oxymoron—as cultural cluelessness is a primary condition of the industry’s ruling majority.
According to the report, Black audiences lead in engagement with TV, sports programming, and social media. Yet such information has never positively impacted the underrepresentation of Blacks at White advertising agencies or research firms. Hell, the data is questionable too.
All of which makes Engaging Black audiences feel like box-checking performative PR—just in time for Black History Month.
Today marks Chinese/Lunar New Year 2025, an event inspiring lots of advertising that appears to be well-funded extravaganzas—versus crumbs-funded performative productions.
Of course, it’s unclear what roles people of Chinese descent played in the creation of such campaigns—besides casting, consulting, and catering.
The adoration and intrigue for Chinese culture will be underscored in a few days, when Black History Month launches with a handful of contrived and clichéd heat shields featuring royalty-free stock images—including the hardest-working man in Black advertising.
In Adland, expect further DEIBA+ disregard, disrespect, and dismissal too.
Year of the Snake indeed.
Advertising Age published content titled: Introducing Ad Age Best Places To Work 2025.
The list is illustrated by an image (depicted above) which seems to imply DEIBA+ DEIDICATION as criteria for selection.
Advertising Age published yet another perspective on the imperative for redefining DEIBA+—this one presenting 5 directives for success.
The problem is all 5 suggestions are unoriginal—as well as proven failures. And each one is being further countered by the political agenda of President Donald J. Trump.
To underscore the contrived and clichéd characteristics, Ad Age illustrated the opinion piece with a stereotypical stock image (depicted above).
Redefining DEI—how to frame diversity as a business imperative
5 ways to align diversity goals with bottom-line success
By Mike Valdes-Fauli
One of the most prevalent trends from 2024 has escalated in the new year. In the face of a tidal wave of criticism of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, many companies have reversed established policies to avoid public scrutiny.
As the proud son of immigrant parents from Cuba and Mexico, I believe in championing diversity in all facets of society, including the business landscape. However, I also understand reasonable people can disagree on complex topics and that a new approach is direly needed.
A few social media activists are leading a pressure campaign against publicly traded companies that champion diversity programs, causing shifts from companies including Ford, Harley-Davidson, John Deere, Lowe’s, McDonald’s and Toyota. Perhaps the most significant retreat came from Walmart, America’s largest private employer, which recently announced a reversal of programs focused on LGBTQ, climate change and other societal issues.
The tipping point for this movement may have been Bud Light’s now infamous 2023 partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, which sparked a months-long boycott, dethroned America’s best-selling beer and caused a $1.4 billion drop in sales, according to the company.
These reversals are actually cyclical. It was only four years ago during the pandemic when DEI initiatives grew exponentially, ignited by racial justice protests and COVID-caused inequities. According to McKinsey & Co., large enterprises spent an estimated $7.5 billion on DEI-related efforts.
In this unpredictable see-saw, it’s natural to wonder what the right balance is and whether we’ll ever emerge from this quagmire. I’m reminded of the old joke about a pessimist who laments; “Things really can’t get any worse.” To which his optimist friend replies, “Oh, yes it can!”
Both sides of the debate are fixated on terms that spark rancor. Rather than fall prey to trigger words and acronyms, perhaps there’s a better way forward. Our path to collective success should be rooted in narrowing the discussion to areas of common ground.
Take “global warming,” another polarizing term that elicits venom from entrenched groups. In my hometown of Miami, there is disagreement about the cause of climate change (and whether it even exists), but our community found common ground by reframing the issue around undeniable facts.
Regardless of whether you believe in global warming, there is no question that we are enduring “sea level rise.” This newer term has brought together liberals, conservatives, scientists, business leaders and politicians whose common pursuit is reinforcing our diminished sea wall to prevent coastal flooding and ensure the future of waterfront real estate. The key component was narrowing this issue to a smaller, shared goal while focusing less on blame for how we got here in the first place.
Two decades ago, celebrated Harvard Business School Professors Michael E. Porter and Mark Kramer coined the term “creating shared value.” The premise was that corporate social responsibility should deliver mutual benefit for a company as well as society. The more a business combines altruism with profitable strategies, the less criticism it might receive.
As it pertains to diversity, such mutual interests could include unlocking greater economic value for companies, employees and shareholders. Like it or not, DEI initiatives have statistically proven to reduce employee attrition and increase employee motivation and innovation, according to Boston Consulting Group, which surveyed more than 27,000 employees in 16 countries.
To strike the right balance, brands and their consultants would be wise to heed five guiding principles:
Reframe as a business imperative
Rather than a charitable box to check, companies should frame the issue as a competitive advantage and a critical piece of a winning strategy.
Embrace demographic change
Capitulating to external threats is tempting but will ultimately prove shortsighted. There is no question the future demographics of America are changing and growing more diverse. Gen Z is 51% non-white and 25% Hispanic. Shareholders ignore these trends at their peril.
Focus on results
Rather than extolling a company’s virtue with sweeping public announcements, organizations should operate in stealth mode and do the work of diversifying their customer base, employee makeup and future-proofing their brand.
Be authentic
Not all diversity initiatives are created equal. Although the fundamental goals are similar, every company should adhere to its values, unique selling proposition and brand identity. Irrespective of where you sit on LGBTQ issues, does anyone think the Bud Light campaign was consistent with four decades of its marketing? Which one of these things doesn’t belong: Clydesdales, talking frogs, the Super Bowl and … transgender influencers?
My point is that companies can and should lean into societal issues, but not by pivoting quickly toward inauthentic directions and forgetting what they worked hard to represent for millions of customers.
Nuanced delivery
Having to choose between a consistent brand and a diverse organization is a false choice.
Companies should preserve one cohesive set of values but amplify them with nuanced internal and external campaigns that resonate culturally for distinct target audiences.
In the words of the iconic “Mad Men” character Don Draper, “If you don’t like what’s being said, change the conversation.” It’s time we realize that words matter and begin reframing DEI around common goals that benefit society as well as the bottom line. 
This actual LinkedIn job listing is seeking a Founder & Creative Director. Founder?!
Not only will the lucky winner create the brand and identity—they’ll also be charged with designing the fashion collections and product line.
Sounds like somebody’s gonna lose their shirt on this deal.
This Panda Express video posted at Ads of the World serves as a DEIBA+ doubleheader, presenting Chinese American culture/casting and Chinese/Lunar New Year.
Taking lead credit is White advertising agency Opinionated, who won AOR status for Panda Express in July 2024 by tapping TDW + Co.—a multicrumbtual shop—for cultural competence.
It would be interesting to learn how much compensation TDW + Co. received for its creative contributions. Based on the Prime Redlining typically experienced by non-White firms “partnering” with White ad agencies, the fee was likely not a fortune, but rather, fortune cookie crumbs.
Honesty is the best policy indeed.
President Donald J. Trump’s return to supremacy continues to mirror Adland.
His leadership team is being assembled via cronyism and hiring practices from the Old Boys’ Network, aka the Old White Guys’ Club. And candidates’ true qualifications—contrary to vehement declarations—do not reflect meritocracy.
Positioning oneself as a disruptor is hardly a noble title to assume, especially when the disruption is bereft of vision for progressive change. Having concepts of a plan is very different than planning that leads to concepts—and ultimately, to boldly decisive execution.
Trump mandated exclusivity and bias by proclaiming, “As of today, it will henceforth be the official policy of the United States government that there are only two genders, male and female”—echoing sentiments expressed by InBev and Bud Light.
The dismissal of DEIBA+ disturbingly mirrors Adland too. Arguing heat shields and human heat shields constitute wasted money is silly, as diversity budgets are typically dwarfed by funds allocated for other suspicious activities (ie, pet projects). Comparing Caucasian cash to colored crumbs exposes systemic racism.
DEIBA+ does not pose threats to societal standards, but rather, societal power structures—in America and Adland.
