Download Picture - Critical Media Production

Group Eleven 1
Group 11: Natalie Herndon, Dean Hoyer, & Corinne Mooney
J320 – Gender, Media, & Diversity
B. Peake & S. Tucker
6/6/2013
CoveredGirl: A Look into how Advertisements are Detrimental to a Woman’s Diversity
Mass media has been influencing consumer behavior since its existence. From the
introduction of halitosis and body odor to corset use and plastic surgery, advertising tells its
consumers what they can and cannot do, what is expected of them, and how they are supposed to
perform. Media itself is an ideology that reaches broadly and holds strong so that people follow
its advice and act accordingly. “Because of this trend in negative messaging, which reaches back
decades, advertising impacts the emotional and physical health of women in America in
powerfully harmful ways and is designed to do just that, in service of selling more products”
(Stemm-Wade, 2006). However, the products essentialized in media are typically dangerous and
harmful to its users who have little to no disclosure about the long-term and short-term effects.
Modern mainstream media has generated an image of the ideal woman as airbrushed and
flawless, which is far from reality. Images in advertisements and media are refinished to remove
wrinkles, blemishes and freckles, teaching young women and media consumers to despise
imperfections (of their own and of others) rather than embrace them and see the uniqueness and
personal diversity in every person. Being original is diverse, and copying fads and images
reduces that diversity. We find this to be an issue because even “[f]emale role models such as
Hillary Clinton face explicitly gendered criticism: Secretary Clinton’s audacity to appear makeup
free in public was breaking news” (Berland, 2012). Women should be recognized for their
abilities and skills rather than forced to worry about their appearance and spending the time to
Group Eleven 2
apply makeup. Our “Listen to yourself” campaign is targeting women of all ages because they
are strongly targeted and controlled through media representations. Ads are pumped through all
media outlets to make money, but the sociocultural pressures that they emit impact self-image
and treatment of women's appearances by sectioning their bodies and exaggerating problems.
Women are vulnerable to the images that media portrays, and we should all have the right to
know the dangers involved with the products deemed essential.
Loving oneself and the body has become taboo in American culture. Women's
dissatisfaction with their bodies has become so prominent it’s been described as “normative
discontent” in American society (Halliwell & Dittmar, 2004). When women (or girls) are asked
if they could change one thing about themselves, most answer with something physically related,
and rarely would they say nothing (Clark & Clark, 2008). Self-esteem is a double-edged sword
in American media culture. If a woman is proud of her body and loves it, she is viewed as
pompous and her imperfections are brought to her attention by others. However, when a woman
puts herself down, she is better accepted, less intimidating, and not a threat to the beauty industry
complex because she is buying the products to cover what media has instilled in her as her
imperfections.
According to Jean Kilbourne, the average American sees on average 3,000 to 4,000
advertisements a day and more than seven hours on average are being spent in front of television
screens or on computers. “Watching even 30 minutes’ worth of television programming and
advertising can alter a woman's perception of the shape of her body” (Myers & Biocca, 1992).
Blemishes and visible pores have been labeled as unwanted and need to be covered up or erased,
and brands and advertising generate anxieties to sell products which claim to “cure” them.
Eyelashes are not satisfactory and need mascara to make them fuller and “sexier.” Even the
Group Eleven 3
language used to describe cosmetics instigate their necessity, such as “foundation,” “cover-up,”
“minimizers,” “erasers,” and “makeup.” Some women will even get their makeup tattooed onto
their eyelids or lips so they don't need to apply it every day.
The “benefits” of cosmetics are plastered over billboards, scattered through magazines,
and broadcasted through television commercials. “Beauty and youthfulness can be attained with
the right combination of products. The repetitious barrage of these themes complement the larger
discourse of beauty ideals and fantasies permeating daily life in a media-saturated society”
(Johnson, 2008). The constant penetration of these images hold true the idea that women need to
work on their appearances via makeup products to make them flawless and desired.
The global beauty industry raked in $160 billion in 2003, $18 billion being makeup alone
(Johnson, 2008). This industry is so vast and rich that it's capable of exploiting chemical
regulations and sneak dangerous chemicals into their products. Studies continue to come out
about the dangers of everyday makeup use. Allergy specialist Dr. Jean Munro, medical director
of the Breakspear Hospital in Hertfordshire, has treated 8,000 women who were found to have
sensitivity to beauty products. Dr. Munro said, “There is no question that people are being
damaged by their cosmetics. So many things are put into cosmetics now that are carcinogenic,
and it is allowed because cosmetics are not considered to be as serious as drugs or food” (Utton).
Dr. Munro also said that long-term usage of certain products can lead to allergies, discomfort,
permanent damage, birth defects, and even death. Regardless of these facts, women continue to
use harmful products to temporarily improve their everyday appearance.
“Perpetually circulating visual and verbal images of ideal beauty tantalize the consumer
with cosmetic products for attaining these images, and lacing these images about both
youthfulness and sex” (Johnson, 2008). Ellen DeGenerous featured 13-year-old Talia Castellano
Group Eleven 4
who is diagnosed with cancer as an “Honorary CoverGirl,” even though makeup can contain
carcinogens that can cause cancer. “[M]any ingredients in makeup have been shown to cause
cancer in animals and should never be used as part of a beauty routine” (Utton). What makes
Castellano's made-up face better than her face before? DeGenerous features her 9-minute
makeup routine, which goes from full cover-up, to primer, to eye shadow, to blush, to mascara,
and finally to lipstick. Why would a 13-year old need all these products? Why is her (over)use
celebrated? With media's critiquing of powerful female role-models' appearances, girls are
growing up thinking that beauty is a necessity and their abilities are secondary to their identities.
“There's a lot of projects that we get assigned as young women that have to do with
perfecting our bodies. So if you want a perfect life is the message, you have to have a
perfect body and so you take on this body project and try to apply the wisdom that you're
getting from the elders by making yourself into this perfect visual person. You
completely ignore everything else that would be useful to know, that the elders ought to
be teaching, about how to have a good life” (Clark & Clark, 2008).
This is why our artifacts try to help women and girls to find other ways of imagining themselves
instead of comparing the self to media's unrealistic images of women.
Advertising tells women that with enough sacrifice and effort, they will be beautiful and
appreciated. Jean Kilbourne (1999) has written about the sectioning of bodies, with products
being solutions to purchase for each “trouble area.” Class and accessibility also plays into the
industrial beauty complex because makeup is expensive and time consuming. “According to a
new British survey, women spend 474 days – one year and three months – in their lifetime
putting on makeup and other cosmetics” (Lepore, 2013). That’s a lot of time spent putting on
makeup, not to mention the cost of it all. In a different study from the same article by Meredith
Group Eleven 5
Lepore, “found that women spend £100,000 (the equivalent of about $164,000) on makeup over
the course of their lifetimes. That works out to be $65 a week between the ages of 16 and 65.”
Clearly, the influence beauty product advertising has on young women in not only detrimental on
their aging process, but their wallets as well. In the United States alone, “women spend $7 billion
a year on cosmetics and beauty products: An average of about $100 a month each” (Stewart,
2008); making it hard to avoid any and all advertisements from this economic giant in consumer
products.
If one was to put all the negatives aside, including costs and time spent, makeup can alter
outside perspectives for women who wear it appropriately. This is because it “increases people’s
perceptions of a woman’s likability, her competence and (provided she does not overdo it) her
trustworthiness, according to a new study, which also confirmed what is obvious: that cosmetics
boost a woman’s attractiveness” (Saint Louis, 2011). But being likable and trustworthy isn’t
meaningful if the information being projected through advertising is essentially used as means to
further their economic status by objectifying what it means to be a woman. According to
Samantha Romo, advertising often sexually objectifies women by using them as tool of
productivity. “Women are the pot of gold that fund every commercial and are the center of any
noteworthy ad” (Romo. 2012). This is why our campaign is advocating for change, because
women are not commodities that can be sold and bought.
For some solutions, we look to Sut Jhally’s (1990) strategies for change. 1) Find ways to
adjust commodity-image system by using images; 2) Democratize the image system with more
diverse creators and ownership; 3) Teach children how to read images critically; 4) Teach
children and ourselves how to be producers of images. Jhally views advertising as economically
driven representations of society, and these strategies take on the industry from the inside and
Group Eleven 6
outside. From the inside, media would be more diversely representative if those creating it
represented more of who was consuming the media. From the outside, we can teach our children
that commercials and images on TV may be ideal, but are unrealistic, should not determine their
self-worth, and that we are all capable media producers.
According to Cohan (2001), Lancome launched a $35 million campaign of models not
heavily retouched, “leaving some of their freckles and other natural flaws visible.” Cohan states
that this campaign “may be the start of a paradigm shift that reestablishes images that encourage
you to 'find your own beauty,' rather than images of unattainable, idealized, perfection.”
However, in 2011 Lancome signed a $20 million contract with Julia Roberts who was later
banned from UK advertising for being over retouched. This company obviously forgot about
their campaign to reduce retouching, or the funding ran dry.
Our artifact resists “partipulation” which, according to Jhally, is the audience agreeing to
participate in its own manipulation (1990). Instead, the woman in our videos is reconsidering
performing as the ads tell her to, and instead she listens to herself. We’re attempting to raise
consciousness in women so they can choose for themselves and embrace their imperfections,
recognizing the diversity and individuality we all naturally have. If we can create and read
images critically then apply them realistically, we would see a decrease low self-esteem, blind
product use, and exploitation of women’s anxieties. After all, the only person you should listen
to when it comes to self-image is yourself.
Group Eleven 7
Bibliography:
Berland, A. (2012, May 31). Challenging media misrepresentation. Retrieved from
http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2012/challenging-media-misrepresentation
Clark, N., & Clark, J. (Producers), & Clark, N. (Director). (2008). Cover Girl Culture:
Awakening the Media Generation [Motion Picture]. United States: Zen Pen Films.
Cohan, J. A. (2001, Oct). Towards a New Paradigm in the Ethics of Women's Advertising.
Journal of Business Ethics, 33(4), 323-337. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/25074613.pdf?acceptTC=true
Halliwell, E., & Dittmar, H. (2004). Does Size Matter? The Impact of Model’s Body Size on
Women’s Body-focused Anxiety and Advertising Effectiveness. Journal of Social &
Clinical Psychology, 23(1), 104-122. Retrieved from
http://www.nedic.ca/pledge/articles/Does_size_matter._The_impact_of_models_body_si
ze_on_womens_body-focussed_anxiety_and_advertising_effectiveness.pdf
Jhally, S. (1990). Image-Based Culture. Advertising and Identities, 249-257. Retrieved from
https://blackboard.uoregon.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-7096620-dt-content-rid10888502_1/courses/201203.37776/Jhally%2C%20Sut.pdf
Johnson, F. (2008). Imaging in Advertising: Verbal and Visual Codes of Commerce. New York:
Routledge.
Kilbourne, J. (1999). The More You Subtract, The More You Add: Cutting Girls Down To Size.
Advertising Educational Foundation, 1-15. Retrieved from
http://www.aef.com/industry/news/data/hot_issues/1361
Group Eleven 8
Lepore, M. (2013, Feb 22). Women Spend 474 Days Putting On Their Makeup. The Jane
Dough: Head Scratchers. Rertieved from http://www.thejanedough.com/women-spend474-days-putting-on-their-makeup/
Myers, P., & Biocca, F. (1992). The Elastic Body Image: The Effect of Television Advertising
and Programming on Body Image Distortions in Young Women. Journal of
Communication, 42(3), 108-133. Retrieved from
http://www.mindlab.org/images/d/DOC828.pdf
Romo, S. (2012, Mar 7). As body image issues grow in society, be aware of media’s influence.
The Crimson White. Retrieved from http://cw.ua.edu/2012/03/07/negative-effects-ofadvertising/
Saint Louis, C. (2011, Oct 12). Up the Career Ladder, Lipstick In Hand. The New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/13/fashion/makeup-makes-womenappear-more-competent-study.html?_r=1&
Stemm-Wade, M. (2006). The Flawed Consumer: Advertising to Women. Retrieved from
http://snl.depaul.edu/writing/FlawedConsumer.html
Stewart, D. (2008, Aug 19), American Women Have Deep Pockets For Superficial Spending.
Jezebel. Retrieved from http://jezebel.com/5038816/american-women-have-deeppockets-for-superficial-spending
Utton, T. (n.d.). Danger That Hides in Make-Up. Retreived from
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-108549/Danger-hides-make-up.html
Group Eleven 9
Supplemental Bibliography:
Dickinson, S., & Gill, D. (2009). Are women offended by the way they are portrayed in
advertising?. International Journal of Advertising, 28(1), 175-178. Retrieved from
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=5&sid=d0cf2f93-289f-4957-b93050dadf5cc8d7%40sessionmgr104&hid=122&bdata=JmxvZ2luLmFzcCZzaXRlPWVob3
N0LWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=ufh&AN=36451910
FECYT - Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology. (2011, July 22). Do we buy
cosmetics because they are useful or because they make us feel good?. ScienceDaily.
Retrieved from http://www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2011/07/110721095846.htm
Heller, J. L. (2010, Jan 1). Deodorant Poisoning. The New York Times: Health. Retrieved from
http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/poison/deodorant-poisoning/
McLaren, C., & Torchinsky, J. (2009). Ad Nauseam: A Survivor’s Guide to American Consumer
Culture. New York: Faber and Faber, Inc.
Paul, P. (2010, Dec 10). Flattery Will Get an Ad Nowhere. The New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/fashion/12Studied.html?_r=0
Stampler, L. (2013, Apr 22). Why People Hate Dove’s ‘Real Beauty’ Sketches’ Video. Business
Insider. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/why-people-hate-doves-realbeauty-ad-2013-4
Group Eleven 10
Vaughter, S. (n.d.). Deodorants and antiperspirants side effects. Retrieved from http://sideeffects.owndoc.com/deodorants-and-antiperspirants-side-effects.php