Burberry features Emma Watson, an actress best known for her role in the Harry Potter series of films. Ms. Watson turns 20 this year. I think of Burberry as an older brand, vaguely matronly. This campaign changes my mind.
Dior‘s Eau Sauvage cologne for men features a handsome young man in its campaign. The handsome man happens to be Alain Delon, a French actor who turns 75 this year. I like this campaign because it makes me think of Eau Sauvage, like Alain Delon, as a living legend. It turns out that the photo of Delon dates from 1966, the year that Eau Sauvage was launched. If you’re under 30, chances are that you haven’t a clue who the man in the campaign is.
How do French people generally view young people, age 15 to 25?
For many in France, there is no better way to answer that question than a survey. And a French organization, AFEV, has done just that, with help from a pollster and interpretation by a panel of experts; The survey results show:
About half of those surveyed have a negative perception of youth (persons age 15-25). Last year, the percentage with negative views was 51%; this year, it’s 49%.
A health majority –59%– think that they do not have the same views as youth.
Most of those surveyed –51%– feel a generational difference with youth.
Nearly four in ten –39%– state that they do not not understand youth well.
France is among the most vibrant countries in Europe, demographically. French society is baby-friendly. But here’s the paradox: when the babies grow to become adolescents, then young adults, social attitudes change dramatically. I didn’t need a survey to tell me that French society doesn’t particularly value its younger citizens, or treat them particularly well.
In French political or social discourse, les jeunes (youth, young people), are seen and discussed as a separate tribe or ethnicity. They are not valued: for all the merit of AFEV’s poll, it’s telling that the organization chose not to ask youth about their attitudes towards society at large.
From my vantage point in Paris, I see a chasm between the French and Anglo-American worlds on two points:
Higher education. Most French people I talk with refuse to believe the cost of a private college education in the United States, or the concept of needs-blind admissions. Likewise, discussions with Americans run aground when I mention grueling examinations young people go through in France in order to have a chance –not a certainty, a chance– to land a spot at a school with selective admissions, but comparatively low tuition. In the same way, many French people have trouble imagining the material comfort to which many American students are accustomed; just as many Americans cannot imagine the poverty conditions in which many French students live.
Employment. A recent college graduate in the United States can, without stigma, work in a bookstore or a bar; teach English in Taiwan; or undertake some other pursuit unrelated to what she will do five years hence. By comparison, French people tend to regard first jobs (following higher education) with considerable seriousness and as a strong predictor of occupational future. Some of the difference probably has to do with how labor markets are structured and lower search (for candidates) or error for employer) costs in the Anglo-American world. But to generalize to an extreme: French people at 25 act as though they were on probation, whereas Americans at 25 act as though tomorrow held an infinity of options from which to choose.
Another real difference might be an attitude towards private initiative and government assistance: whereas the AFEV survey points to greater state aid to assist youth, I would expect most Anglo-Americans to express offense if youth were broadly described as needing government assistance.
How you answer this question depends on when you born, as I learned from reading a recent report by the Pew Research Center.
Pew’s study shows that 6% of those of 65 have a tattoo. The percentage climbs to 15% for Baby Boomers, those now age 46 to 64. The percentage grows to 32% for those now age 30 to 45 (termed Generation X). And among Milliennials –young adults age 18 to 29– 38% have a tattoo; and half of tattooed Millennials have more than one tattoo.
Do you have a piercing somewhere other than your ear lobe?
Again, Pew’s study shows that when you were born predicts how you are likely to answer the question. Only 1% of those age 46-64 have a piercing elsewhere than their ear lobe. Among those age 30-45, the percentage rises to 9%. And among those age 18-29, the percentage climbs to 23%.
A final twist from Pew’s study: men and women are equally likely to have a tattoo, but women are about three times more likely than men to have a piercing elsewhere than their ear lobe.
Granted, most of those surveyed do not have either a tattoo or a body piercing. But these forms of adornment or body art have become much more prevalent.
Pew questioned Americans in its study, but I’ll hypothesize that it would reach comparable results in the European Union.
I think that these cultural changes matter. I’m over 30. I grew up with a rotary-dial telephone and had a clunky portable phone, with an antenna. Today, I have a mobile phone smaller and more useful than the one I saw on “Star Trek” as a boy. People under 30 may have more familiarity with a mobile phone: maybe they use their phone as a replacement for a watch whereas I use mine as a supplement to the watch on my wrist. But, overall, I’m inclined to think that mobile phone use among Millenials, Gen X-ers, and Baby Boomers is comparable or convergent.
Tattoos and piercings are different. I don’t have either. Few people my age do. I can see that they are more common among people under 30 because I teach people under 30 and go the beach in the Summer. I don’t think, however, that my seeing others with tattoos or body piercings makes it more likely that I will get one. And I know that I notice others –particularly students– who have tattoos or piercings precisely because they stand out to my eyes and surprise me.
What if all European Union member states were aggregated into a single block?
At first glance, the EU would have dominated the winter Olympic games, with: 31 gold, 38 silver, and 42 bronze medals; 111 medals in all.
Of course, if the EU sent a single delegation, fewer athletes would have been in competition; arguably, a single delegation would have won fewer medals.
Taking only medalists into account, the European Union turns out to be a powerhouse when compared to total population: with 111 medals (gold, silver, and bronze combined) and a total population of 500 million, the EU “produced” 0.22 medals per million inhabitants (mpM).
How does 0.22 mpM compare with other countries?
It surpasses Japan (5 medals/128 million population= 0.04 mpM), Russia (15 medal/142 million population= 0.11 mpM), or the USA (37 medals/304 million population= 0.12 mpM).
By this metric, the EU trails behind Korea (14 medals/48 million population= 0.29 mpM) or Canada (26 medals/33 million population= 0.79 mpM). Norway towers above all: 23 medals with a population of 4.7 million, or 7 medals per million inhabitants.
France long enjoyed a close relationship with tobacco and, for many years, treated smoking liberally.
Attitudes and behaviors have changed. European integration, a hygienic mindset, tax policies, and demographic shifts all contributed to the changes. Today, France counts about 15 million smokers. Arguably, this is a lot for a country with 60 million inhabitants.
Public health authorities concentrate on smoking among youth. Smokers are in the minority among every age bracket, but the proportion of smokers is highest in the 20-25 age bracket, followed by those age 15-19. In order to reach this population, authorities and advertising agency have created several campaigns. Many are banal, ineffective, or insulting. But some are clever.
My favorite is a spot by French director Yvan Attal, which aired shortly before smoking was prohibited in restaurants, bars, and nightclubs. The spot –aired on public television in prime time– grabs your attention by depicting a couple having sex in a storeroom. A voiceover warns: “Caroline’s playing with her life. She doesn’t know that she’s contracting a fatal disease.” Then comes the surprise: the disease has nothing to do with sex. Instead, every day Caroline “absorbs toxic substances”, that stay in the air “hours after their emission”, because she works in the nightclub, cleaning up. The spot ends with the tagline: “let’s not take any more risks”.
I like the spot because Attal managed to put a positive spin on the smoking ban by borrowing a page from safe sex campaigns and by directing concern to others.
Attal has just put out another anti-smoking spot. It’s equally creative. Set in a management meeting, it presents a problem: how to dispose of 60 tons of toxic waste? One manager suggests waste treatment, rejected as too expensive. Another suggests burying the wastes in a vacant lot, rejected as outdated and sure to incur political wrath. Another suggests dumping the waste abroad, rejected out of hand by the boss, now irritated, who asks whether anyone has an idea that’s “simple, economical, and efficient”. Then another manager speaks up: dispose of the waste by having people swallow it. The boss expresses skepticism. But the manager explains that marketing people can persuade youth that this is a great idea. The clincher: this won’t cost the company a cent, because young people will pay for this scheme.
I like the spot because Attal plays on the cynicism teens harbor towards the adult world, shown here to be worse than they had feared. Just as the earlier spot drew on safe sex themes, the new spot draws on strongly negative attitudes towards toxic waste.
