Exposing Anti-White Harassment + Discrimination in US Media Companies
FAQs
MullenLowe U.S.
FAIL
us.mullenlowe.com
TYPE: Global Marketing Communications Network
INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS: Vanguard Group Inc, BlackRock Inc., and State Street Corp. are the largest. Other significant institutional shareholders include Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and First Trust Advisors Lp, (via parent company IPG)
OWNER: IPG
SUBSIDIARIES: MullenLowe U.S., MullenLowe Profero (its global digital transformation network), MullenLowe Comms, MullenLowe Mediahub.
REVENUE: $195 million
HEADCOUNT: 624
386 Park Ave S 12th Floor, New York, NY 10016
+1 617 226 9000 agencycomms@mullenlowe.com
MullenLowe's DEI* programs, led by Erica Samadani (Executive Director of PR) and Kelly Fredrickson (Chief Culture Officer) with support from Frank Cartagena (U.S. CEO), Alex Leikikh (Global CEO), Philippe Krakowsky (IPG CEO), and Heide Gardner (Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer), may face scrutiny from the EEOC, federal law, and the NYSHRL (§ 296) regarding potential discrimination against White employees. The agency’s programs, including the Open Dialogue series emphasizing BIPOC storytellers, use terms like BIPOC and POC,** which may implicitly prioritize non-White groups in hiring, training, or resource allocation. MullenLowe U.S. has publicly identified as an "Anti-Racist Organization," referring to anti-White racist Ibram Kendi’s discredited and simplistic framework around being Racist or Antiracist.*** The focus on non-White voices and diversity pledges like the Diversity Action Alliance (influencing recruitment, interviewing, hiring, training, and retention practices to prioritize diverse/non-White PR talent) could foster a workplace environment that disadvantages White employees, risking violations of Title VII (federal law) or NYSHRL if perceived as creating a hostile work environment. The EEOC and NYSHRL prohibit practices that implicitly target any racial group, and DEI training could be seen as harassment if it frames Whites as inherently privileged or complicit in systemic inequality. The lack of transparency around specific DEI policies, training content, or ERGs/BRGs for non-White groups leaves open the possibility of practices that could be challenged as discriminatory under federal or New York law. The user’s concern about DEI harassing White employees is plausible given the agency’s public emphasis on BIPOC inclusion, which may signal preferential treatment and warrants scrutiny to ensure compliance with anti-discrimination laws.
*DEI "equity" involves prioritizing certain racial, gender, or identity groups with targeted resources or opportunities to ensure equal outcomes at the cost of fairness and individual merit. DEI’s equity focus shares some similarities with communism and socialism in its group-based, redistributive approach, and with totalitarianism in ideological coercion.
**MullenLowe U.S.’s practice of segregating employees into two adversarial racial categories, BIPOC vs White, can be seen as problematic under the NYSHRL and may raise concerns under federal law and with the EEOC, as it creates distinctions based on race that could foster division, disparate treatment, and a hostile work environment, potentially violating prohibitions against discriminatory employment practices.
***Kendi, who has said that White people “are aliens,” states “the only remedy to racist discrimination is Antiracist discrimination.” He views Whiteness as a made-up race, historically used to justify oppression. He believes that holding Black people responsible for their actions is a classic American con job. Another Kendi banger: “If discrimination is creating equity, then it is Antiracist…The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.”
Institutional investors like Vanguard Group Inc, BlackRock Inc., and State Street Corp. increasingly emphasize Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) factors, including diversity and inclusion metrics, in their investment stewardship and proxy voting guidelines. This external pressure from major parent company shareholders likely serves as a significant driver for MullenLowe U.S.'s public commitments and strategic focus on ESG and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). Consequently, accountability for the design and impact of DEI initiatives rests primarily with the company's leadership and board, who must navigate these influential investor expectations.
This information is based on publicly available information, including websites, case studies, and news articles from a recent period. To ensure you have the most accurate and current information, please refer to the company's official announcements. The information provided on this website is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice; consult a licensed attorney for specific legal guidance.
DieDEI.co may or may not have internal documents from MullenLowe US’s DEI program, which we may post. Follow us on social and subscribe to our newsletter for updates.
NOTE: Client lists are subject to change. This information is based on publicly available information, including websites, case studies, and news articles from a recent period. To ensure you have the most accurate and current information, please refer to the company's official announcements.