Active sexism as part of a marketing strategy, Lord Sugar?

We're used to seeing sex being used to sell products. We're used to seeing ads built on an unhealthy foundation of sexism. Remember that really irritating washing up liquid ad from the Olympics which suggested that mums were just there to wash dishes while their sons became athletes?

All this stuff is quite subtle and when confronted, the companies shrink back in horror from accusations of sexism.

However, I wonder if Lord Sugar has branched out today with a new strategy of using sexist comments to get attention for his products.

Remember that nice inventor Tom who won the Apprentice last year? Well, he's developed a  new range of nail files with Lord Sugar as his business partner.

So far so good. Now we get to the sexist bit. Part of the marketing strategy is aimed at persuading employers to buy this for their "lady staff". I kid you not.

Lord Sugar himself is enthusiastically tweeting every couple of hours or so inviting "girls" to ask their boss to get them these nail files for Christmas to show their appreciation of their hard work.

Well, frankly, I'd prefer a bonus, or even a commitment from my employer to close the gender pay gap, or to get more women on their board or whatever. That aside, though. Lord Sugar is being patronising and sexist. That's not particularly new from him, but he's also not daft. He knows full well that nobody goes and asks their boss for a specific Christmas present. I can just imagine what he would say if any of his employees did that and it probably involves a couple of expletives and the word P45.

I think he knows that by saying such a blatantly sexist thing on Twitter, he'll provoke some controversy. Serena FitzGerald replied to him, calling him out, very politely for his sexism. For her trouble she got a three word reply. Simply, "Shut up, idiot." The photographic evidence is here:

It's out of order, really. Blocking her for a polite tweet was way over the top, too. But it's a provocative act which might well get some publicity for his product. Alan Sugar is many things, but stupid is not one of them. I think this is a deliberate attempt to up sales by creating a Twitter storm and Serena has found herself in the middle of it.

I only found out about all this after I'd sent Alan Sugar a reply when I saw a similar tweet about the product from him today. He hasn't blocked me yet, but I'm sure it's only a matter of time. 

It may be a deliberate marketing strategy, but I think it's one which should be doomed to fail. What Sugar has done, of course, is insulted someone who should be part of his target market. What he really should do is apologise to her and unblock her. I won't be holding my breath for that. Misogyny shouldn't sell.

At least Lord Sugar was shown some support by a Labour Party colleague in Scotland. Ian Smart is known for his sharp and occasionally reckless wit and tweeted me that:

I'd just bought a job lot as a peace offering to @womenforindy. Do you think I should cancel?

I wish he had, and that I could be there when they opened them so I could help them thank him appropriately.

.

I shall leave the last word to @crazycolours whose crown jewel in a succession of very funny tweets to Lord Sugar was:

If you buy Margaret that, she'll slot you in the throat.

Can't you just imagine her hard stare which is enough to reduce most grown-ups to gloop?

Stella to win The #Apprentice

Last night's Apprentice semi-final was compulsive viewing. For ten weeks, we have veered between annoyance, horror and disbelief at the antics of 21 year old Isle Of Man contestant Stuart Baggs, who styled himself "The Brand". Lord Sugar seemed to have gone soft and was completely taken in by scatology more related to bovine creatures than to the "field of ponies" Baggs famously swore he could deliver for him.

I had been particularly furious when Lord Sugar fired the highly competent Liz last week. The only saving grace from that is that he knew what was coming to Stuart - an encounter with Margaret Mountford, who has become pretty scary in her absence. Her replacement, Karren Brady, is lovely and fair, but totally lacks that wonderful brand of acid Margaret brought to the show and which has become much more concentrated.

Stuart walked into the office, saw Margaret there, and greeted her as if she was a long lost aunt. Margaret cast him a look that would have reduced anyone else to sherbert like powder and suggested that his friendly greeting was inappropriate. Stuart found that his patter didn't wash with her at all. He tried the "but I just feel like I've known you for ages" but that was brutally cast aside with a "but you don't". She could have let it go there but she actually dragged a "Ms Mountford" out of him. Absolutely brilliant.

Even after that encounter, though, Stuart still tried to pull the wool over the eyes, and try to run rings round Viglen's CEO Borden Tkapchuk who had discovered that he didn't quite have the licence his CV suggested. The man's sheer nerve was unbelievable.

The quote of the day came from another of the interviewers, Claude Littner, who told him in response to a Baggs boast that he was a big fish in a small pond, that "you're not a big fish, you aren't even a fish".

Margaret was on fine form when she tackled property developer Jamie Lestor, taking him apart for a "puerile" joke he'd made on his application form about having a third nipple.

I was a little sad to see Jamie and Leicester cleaning business owner Joanna Riley go. Joanna had annoyed me intensely at times but she had shown originality and leadership ability and competence through the process - more than Chris Bates, who did go through.

The final will be between two from the world of banking - there's an irony there - Stella English and Chris Bates. Now, every time there's been a man/woman final in Apprentice history, the man has won, even though he has been in my opinion anyway, the poorer candidate. Tim v Saira, Simon v Kristina, Lee v Claire - each time the guy had demonstrated less competence and flair than the woman. The only times a woman has won has been when there's been two women in the final.

I'm not going to hold my breath for Stella, but, for me, she's shown much more personality, adaptability and ability throughout the 10 weeks and I want her to win.

Are the Apprentice candidates always such a bunch of egotistical buckwits?

I'm sure we all think the same thing every year when we watch the first episode of the Apprentice, which started its new run last night on BBC1 - namely that the new group of candidates is the worst, most egotistical shower of prats we have ever seen in our lives. Then we kind of get used to them. And there's a rare few we even get to like. Or maybe not. As Keris Stainton said on Twitter last night:

"...there may be one or two I don't want dead by the end"

The Apprentice has given us many moments of comedy gold over the years. The Kosher chicken episode is probably my favourite.  Maybe we should just have a gratuitous reminder:

 

Then there was Pants Man:



Last night's episode started well with the teams (Apollo for the girls and Synergy for the boys) being sent at midnight to buy meat and produce 3 types of sausages for sale the next day.  It was quite strange to see Dan leading a team called Synergy. He should have been leading a team called "Ignorant Neanderthal Management Style". As far as I can remember, he did no work himself, just stood about barking out his orders to his hapless team mates. He's apparently a sales director, but his half of the team managed to raise a whole £14 out of a total of around £600. I have to say that if someone in a suit knocked on my door and asked if I wanted to buy some sausages, I'd wonder where they'd been, how they'd been made and whether I was going to get food poisoning if I ate them.

The pantomime villain was 21 year old Stuart Baggs. If his chat up lines are anything like his sales lines, I expect a life of celibacy awaits him. "Excuse me, Sir, you look like a sausage coinnosseur" really didn't cut it. Not only is he utterly cheesy and insincere, but he really hasn't the slightest bit of self awareness and doesn't know when to shut up. Lord Sugar nearly fired him as well, we're supposed to believe. We know that those who have their cards marked in such a way at the beginning are usually around for quite a while. He may well make the final, you never know.

As for the girls, their villain was Melissa Cohen. She turned down the chance to be project manager and then proceeded to bitch all day. She needs to learn that having a row in front of a customer really is not an impressive sight.

I really, really missed Margaret, though. I have no problem at all with Karren Brady, who is perceptive and pleasant, but nobody can raise an eyebrow quite like her predecessor.

There was another new face on the You're Fired companion show on BBC2 now that Adrian Chiles has gone off to less classy climes. Dara O'Briain is an excellent replacement, not afraid to poke fun at the evictee.

However obnoxious the candidates are, bitching about them for an hour on Wednesday night will keep us all happy until Christmas.

The resignation that upsets me the most

Of all the departures we've had to witness over the past few days, the one which has upset me the most is undoubtedly this one.

The Apprentice won't be the same without Margaret......

LibDig This!