So back on topic, I would safely bet that BMW is not buying spots for Mini in country music stations in Montana either or putting up billboards in a trailer park. Yes, it is a gray line between stereotyping and targeted marketing, but in this case, I think it genuinely the latter. To be a racist act, the motivation needs to be race (as in BMW not wanting blacks to drive mini, the way a certain clothing brand didn't want non-whites to buy their clothing line), not financial consideration (as in are we going to get enough return on advertising budget).
Any marketing is usually interested in particular lifestylers with high-enough income so they can afford - so to target them they need a perfect chanel (eg. mass media) to deliver a message to them. And media agency has the data (from media themselves, or the media research agencies) showing which media can reach the targeted population, and which media can't. And based on that fact proper media are chosen.
As said before: you can either use exclusion or inclusion method - which is easier in particular case. If there is more media to exclude then inclusion method is used, when more to include then the exclusion method is used - when making a list of media.
*****
We also don't have enough info to know what exactly was the targeted population for that certain advertising campaign. Since at least in MINI case they have quite some campaigns targeting very specific different population segments with very specific messages: very tailored campaign. And we don't know beside urban format what other formats were excluded as well!!!!
And whatever media / format / targeted population was excluded or included it WAS NOT done on race base!!!! I'm 2000% certain.
Sure there is a catch 22 there for MINI: to explain their true intents they would have to present all the marketing strategy for this campaign - which usually is a non-disclosure matter ... since otherwise if going public with the strategy you can give your rival insight in your work. Which is not a good thing - to be disclosed to the rivals so easily.
******
I'm sure those activists who go public & making issue out of that thing have no idea about basic marketing, or are so corrupted already to see evil (eg. racism) everywhere.
What's next? Being called a racist in the case you don't like rap / hip-hop / R&B - since this music is STILL associated very much with African - Americans?
Just like that UK campaign where they wanted to teach toddlers (!!!) it was inappropriate to say "Yuck!" when served a forign food they didn't like (eg. spicy curry etc) since that could offend certain people, and be seen as an act of racism / xenophobia. Geez! Sure ... toddlers are "definitely" thinking about racism when declining some food they don't like.
Over-sensitivity is not good. Since otherwise you can "detect" evil everywhere. And in the end that can leed to special rules & protocols how to behave in public not to offend anyone: meaning everybody acting like a robot. No smiling, no gesticulating, no staring, no talking, no sudden movements etc ... Since by saying something, or showing your emotion / character you can easily offend at least one person who will generalize / project that offend to the whole community of his / hers.
Is that the solution? I think it isn't. Mutual respect, ability of self-criticism, ability of accepting criticism from others without being offended so quickly, not being too sensitive, and tolerant & constructive DIALOGUE. I believe these are much better solutions.