How AI and voice are perpetuating gender stereotypes – and what you can do about it

Landor executive director of strategy warns marketers to be conscious about their brand choices on new technologies or risk impeding social progress on gender

Brands must take care not to perpetuate outdated and harmful gender stereotypes as they increasingly utilise humanised voice-activated devices and artificial intelligence (AI) in every part of our lives, Landor’s strategy chief warns.  

Speaking at this week’s Ad:Tech conference in Sydney, executive director of strategy for brand consultancy Landor, Daye Moffitt, told attendees the technology revolution is both electrifying and terrifying in terms of how it’s changing how we behave, interact and communicate.

“We know technology is colliding with and changing social norms. What was once reserved for sci-fi is now reality. We are hyper real, personalised and intelligent,” she said.

However, what’s equally clear is brands are further perpetuating gender stereotypes that have no place in our modern times through these technologies, Moffitt said.

“More and more, we’re tapping into this humanity and realism through these advanced technologies. Just look at the human faces, names and voices being used for robots to make it easier for us to trust them. We’re also letting children play with technology, inviting it into our homes to take control of things for us.

“This technology is playing a key role in social conditioning.”  

As examples of how these technologies support gender stereotypes, she noted voice-activated devices in the home, such as Alexa, overwhelmingly use female voices. “Whereas Watson is an alpha male on the executive team,” she pointed out. “Isn’t it disappointing that brands we love are using prescriptive gender types?

“If we continue to do this to technology, we not only reaffirm these stereotypes and sexualisation of women, we are perpetuating and amplifying this to the cost of social progress.”

According to Moffitt, there are five things that can help minimise such risk. The first is letting the data decide.

“In some interactions, a female voice makes sense. But the decision should be based on the data, rather than social conditioning,” she said. “For example, Nest was based on data that proved children are more responsive to the maternal voice.”

Moffitt also advised brands to choose to be gender-less, and to avoid sitting on the sidelines when it comes to building the skills required to use technology in a cultural acceptable way. She also suggested personifying your brand even as you use AI-powered customer-facing technologies such as chatbots or voice devices.

“And become a mentor – don’t underestimate the power of your own brand,” she said.  

Post-presentation, CMO had the opportunity to catch up with Moffitt to further explore how gender bias is still being perpetuated by brands, the pitfalls of data, and her advice on getting your brand ready for the voice era.

One of the challenges with data is that bias  is included in a lot of the data sets we used today. Do you have any thoughts on how we try to ensure our data isn’t gender biased?

One thing I’m always counselling clients on is that so much data is not understood outside one or two data scientists. The value of data is when everyone in the business knows exactly what the story is that it’s telling you. The more people understand the data and are less terrified of it, the more we can determine when the data has been skewed in a way that’s not necessarily right.

Daye Moffitt
Daye Moffitt


We’re still humans and we always say data is only as good as the person evaluating it. It doesn’t always spit out a right or wrong answer, it’s the grey interpretation that’s the magic. The same applies with this – data isn’t necessarily a blanket solution, it should be re-interpreted time and time again.

Are you seeing more democratisation and sophisticated of data use across your client base?

I’m a little surprised to be honest about how backwards clients still are on this. It’s a bit different globally when we check into our network. But what we find is a lot of clients come to us with reams and reams of data based on methodologies that aren’t as useful as others – for example, focus groups, online surveys. We have to wade through a lot of it as not much is consolidated into something meaningful. There is a greater opportunity for clients in this market to get smarter with the data they’re pulling – or at lease focusing attention on finding the nugget of gold.

My hypothesis is that as companies and individuals, we’re all expecting too much from the data. We read through, look at the data and expect five answers. If a piece of research or data set identifies one key problem, then I think that’s data being put to good use. Data is also expansive, so unless you can turn it into something you can utilise, then it’s not of great value.

With regards to the wider gender movement, are you finding brands you’re working with are more conscious of addressing stereotypes?

It’s front and centre in our minds but at the moment, it’s not on their radar. There is a lot of gender stereotyping that still exists from a branding perspective. We’ve always referred to boast and planes for example as female, and I can’t help but wonder why. I did ask that question recently when I was on a ferry, and someone said it’s because the ship nurtures us and gets us from A to B. That’s no longer relevant – the women aren’t just simply going to nurture you. Yet we’re still applying those age-old stereotypes on objects brands then put their branding on. If you start unpicking, the world becomes so gender biased.

I think we just need to be conscious of it in every decision we make as brands and individuals, to try not to perpetuate those sorts of stereotypes. I think Nest is a great example here – the company made a conscious decision to use a female voice via data and not because it was just a nice-sounding voice; it had been proven as a more effective piece of technology that way. It’s about the conscious decisions we make and a decision informed not by convention, but because it’s right.

How much interest are you seeing in voice and AI and its role in brand strategy and engagement?

It depends on the category. Finance categories are more heavily focused on those sorts of things form my experience. In times it does come up, our only counsel is to look at what the purpose is for this AI. One thing Landor is dead against is AI for AI’s sake. Unless it has a function for helping the consumer then don’t do it. It has to add value to the customer’s experience.

What advice do you have for brands who are going down that voice-activated path?

Tone of voice is everything for a brand, beyond voice-activated branded experiences. Unless you have a clear, different and interesting tone of voice, you won’t stand out. It’s as important as a visual presence, particularly as the latter starts to erode. That just makes the tone of voice, messages and way you say them become so important.

I’ve always said brand strategy is everything, but it becomes so fundamental as we have to be then very clear on what exactly the purpose of that non-visual brand identity is, the personality. It has to be there in every conversation.

Given so much control around brand is now in the consumer’s hands through digital and social, do the same rules of brand strategy still apply?

The brand strategy is the one thing that doesn’t change – it’s the DNA of a brand. The way we execute that and the various technologies we use has changed and will continue to change. The only shift I’ve seen in brand strategy is the importance of having a purposeful idea that inspires what the brand does.

Once upon a time, the brand was inspired by things like reliability. Today, it’s not enough. Brands need a fundamental reason for being and something to strive towards. The best brands in the world have leading policies like this, like Tesla, Patagonia. They will continue to succeed. It’s less about being inspired by making money or ticket-of-entry ideas like reliability, integrity or authenticity, it’s what your brand stands for above and beyond the ordinary things a consumer can see right through.

We’re all becoming hyper aware of the damage we’re doing to this earth. The easiest thing for us as consumers to do is consume our way out of the problem. Choose to buy a better brand and you’re giving back to the world.  

Follow CMO on Twitter: @CMOAustralia, take part in the CMO conversation on LinkedIn: CMO ANZ, join us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CMOAustralia, or check us out on Google+:google.com/+CmoAu 

 

Join the newsletter!

Or

Sign up to gain exclusive access to email subscriptions, event invitations, competitions, giveaways, and much more.

Membership is free, and your security and privacy remain protected. View our privacy policy before signing up.

Error: Please check your email address.
Show Comments

Blog Posts

3 marketing mistakes to overcome when courting prospective customers

Marketing that urges respondents to ‘buy now’ is a little like asking someone to marry you on your first date. At any time, only 3 per cent of the market is looking for what you’re selling, so the chances of your date randomly being ‘The One’ is pretty slim.

Sabri Suby

Founder, King Kong

Why are we dubious about deep learning?

The prospect of deep learning gives those of us in the industry something to get really excited about, and something to be nervous about, at the same time.

Katja Forbes

Founder and chief, sfyte

Why you can’t afford to fail at CX in 2019

In 1976 Apple launched. The business would go on to change the game, setting the bar for customer experience (CX). Seamless customer experience and intuitive designs gave customers exactly what they wanted, making other service experiences pale in comparison.

Damian Kernahan

Founder and CEO, Proto Partners

Red Agency YouGov Galaxy Report, February 2019 Predictors Study. https://redagency.com.au/re...

Vanessa Skye Mitchell

DNA-based marketing: The next big thing?

Read more

RIP holden

Max Polding

Marketing professor: For Holden, brand nostalgia ain’t what it used to be

Read more

Where does the claim that 2 million Australians have tested come from ? Anecdotal information suggests that this is way off the mark.

David Andersen

DNA-based marketing: The next big thing?

Read more

Thank you for the info , being part of a digital marketing agency in kerala , this proved handy and get to know with upcoming trends. htt...

Dotz Web Technologies

Predictions: 9 digital marketing trends for 2019

Read more

So who then is correct? The Research or The skilled Digital people.

Anene

Report reveals Australia faces digital skills shortage

Read more

Latest Podcast

More podcasts

Sign in