Blog #3: The Pitfalls of Advertisement for Women and other Marginalized Groups

            For an advertisement to be deemed successful, it has to reach the mass public, and sway their opinion in favor of a product or service. Thus, in the short amount of time that is typically given, advertisements and ad agencies have to find a potent way to spawn desire and need within the consumers, for the product. Such a task may seem nearly impossible for, let’s say, a door-to-door salesman, or a telemarketer. But the politics of advertisements have changed, and so has the way society consumes. Ad agencies are now smart and strategic to draw from popular images (e.g. celebrity sponsorship), and the institutionalized social ideals of sexuality, race and gender to reach out and cajole consumers more easily. While corporations and agencies may be reaping from all the benefits of successful advertisements, society suffers.

            That’s a bold statement, isn’t it? To say that society as a whole suffers while smaller groups benefit? I mean, who’s even keeping tallies on this to begin with? Yes, that statement is general and does not focus on any specifics. And while we like to see ourselves as educated consumers, simply rejecting the desire for a handful of products does not quite cut it anymore. If we begin to narrow it down, what is it that advertisements are ultimately perpetuating to the mass, if not you? And it is also important to bear in mind that you may possess the knowledge and awareness to really critique these images in advertisements, but there are people who do not. How are they affected, and why should that even concern us?

            Arguably the most debated and critiqued of images in advertisements today are those of women, and their assumed sexuality. Undoubtedly, these images operate under the implications of the male gaze, which were examined by John Berger. What it all boils down to is this fabricated ideal of perfection and beauty. And, not surprisingly, the models chosen for the ads all fit into this one ideal. The advertisements below are only a few sampled from past cosmetics ads, and the already increasing number of ads to be published in 2015. The females portrayed have similar features: white, lean, and slender. If it isn’t the beauty of these girls being flaunted, it is their sexuality—or even both (like what is apparent with the Tom Ford ad for glasses). Yet these images are planned and assembled—perhaps even digitally altered with the help of Photoshop. That is to say, they are unrealistic, and they poorly represent the female population. Advertisers utilize hyper sexualized and feminized images, as well as celebrities (i.e. Emma Watson for Lancome) to advocate for their products and draw consumers in with the desire for materialism, need for beauty, and recognition with popular culture. In one of her articles, Naomi Wolf talks about this beauty myth, and how the origins of these popular images of females in advertisements were revolutionary in its time. However, with the dominating topics of interest we find today “in diet, skin care, and surgery features, it sells women the deadliest version of the beauty myth money can buy” (Wolf, 69). Deadly, because so many body image issues and health concerns spawn from this particular myth. These images and topics are so popular in advertisements, yet so limited and superficial, it directly reflects not only the value that mass society holds to women, but also strongly suggests to females the value they should hold in themselves. Through the lens set by advertisements, perfection and beauty is paramount. “Advertising gives us a constant stream of representations of perfect—and, of course, unattainable—female beauty...the failure to attain such an unrealistic look has been more of a nightmare than a dream for girls…” (Cortese, 57).

   

            Men are also consumers with purchasing power—yet another target for ad agencies. The way men are placed and depicted in the advertising industry (especially when juxtaposed with females), create images with messages that distort the realities of gender and sexuality. These implied messages can seem subtle, but are still strongly influential. According to Jean Kilbourne, “Young people also learn a great deal about sexual attitudes from the media and from advertising in particular… it reduces people to objects and de-emphasizes human contact and individuality” (Kilbourne, 124). Starting from younger ages, people learn gender and sexuality through the fixed images in advertisements. Just as women are hyper-feminized, men are also hyper-masculinized because “advertising images provide culturally sanctioned ideal types of masculinity and femininity” (Cortese, 52). Under the same article, Anthony Cortese discusses how advertisements inadvertently says a lot about gender identity. They display gender and illustrate gender roles; and they are able to do so because “traditional gender roles are so easily recognized by consumers, they figure conspicuously in the imagery of mass media” (Cortese, 52). Take the Relish magazine advertisement below for example. While this is taken from 2009, the images of sex, gender and race are still common in advertising today. We have the idolization of light-skinned (white) females who are submissive, and aggressive men who appear to be  taller and in good shape. Images like the ones portrayed in the Relish ad are also troublesome because they might indirectly promote violence against women and other marginalized groups in society who do not fit into conventional ideals and are “weaker” in these depicted power dynamics.

            The representations in advertisements are fatal to society. Since they are given a short amount of time to deliberate their message, they target superficial norms and leave little to no space for critique. Because the job is to increase popularity and sales, the focus is on the hype which is intensified with popular images that are instantly relatable to any extent. More and more, these images have been fleshed out and critiqued—especially on television and in music. Unfortunately, it seems as though much of our critique is about shaming individuals who fall for these messages without understanding the context of our society and its institutions (which is ironic because mediums such as television and music are probably most successful at sustaining these images). While critiquing is necessary in deconstructing the ails of media and advertisements, we should be more critical on how we critique. When we see something being advertised, how is it presented? Why is it presented in the manner that it is? Who is presenting it, and why might individuals be drawn to it? And as for the higher ups who have a say as to what gets put into advertisements, I think realistically, the best way to combat these pervasive images is to incorporate more realistic representations. It is definitely hard to live up to the things and people we see if they are not completely true. Furthermore, the money that goes into advertisements are astounding. I would argue that more often than not, the more money that goes into the creation of an ad, the more powerful and influential they are. Perhaps there could be limits as to the money spent and/or content in ads. Legally, there would be issues there. However, in retrospect to the fairness doctrine we had when radio was popular—which required shows to cover all sides of a polemic—consumers exposed to the massive amounts of ads need also be aware of all other [realistic] sides of the story. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BR4yQFZK9YM
In 2006, music artist P!nk released a hit song called "Stupid Girls". Her lyrics critique, rather harshly, both the standard of beauty in society, and the females who attempt to actually achieve them. In resonance with the lyrics, her video also provides images that counter popular ones in an attempt to critique the dogma of beauty.

WORKS CITED

Cortese, Anthony. "Constructed Bodies, Deconstructing Ads: Sexism in Advertising"
Kellner, Douglas. "Reading Images Critically"
Kilbourne, Jean. "Beauty and the Beast of Advertising"
Wolf, Naomi. "Culture from the Beauty Myth"
Wykes, Maggie/Gunter, Barrie. "Conclusion" (from the Media and Body Image)