Post #3 Advertising

   Advertising in mass media is arguably the most powerful tool affecting our mental health today. In a competitive atmosphere like New York, where you are also bombarded with countless advertisements displaying unachievable standards, I often find myself preoccupied and consumed with fears of being less-than. For someone who is of an average weight, I find that a day doesn’t go by where I don’t think about my weight or general appearance in a negative way.

   With the pervasive nature and targeted advertising today, much of what young people learn about sexual dynamics and feminine standards is determined almost entirely by advertising. With the help of modern technology, advertisements for women have become more unattainable than ever. Between airbrushing of pores, slimming of body parts with Photoshop, and even the lightening of skin tones, beauty standards are artificially enhanced and therefore totally inhuman. In an article entitled “Beauty and the Beast of Advertising, Jean Kilbourne references frightening statistics of women and girls who are unsatisfied with their weight and appearance: “When Glamour magazine surveyed its readers in 1984, 75 percent felt too heavy and only 15 percent felt just right…There is evidence that this preoccupation with weight begins at ever-earlier ages for women…A study by a University of California professor showed that nearly 80% of fourth-grade girls in the Bay Area are watching their weight.” (124) What is most frightening about these statistics is that they are outdated by decades, and have almost certainly gone up on account of social media advertising and advancing technology.

   The very nature of advertising, especially when it is targeting young women, is to create insecurity and therefore a need to buy a product that solves this insecurity. Do women really need a dozen or so different skincare products and cosmetics at one time? According to statistics, 8 BILLION dollars is spent on cosmetics in the United States each year. To put that figure into perspective, we would only need to spend 6 Billion dollars (in addition to current spending) to provide basic education to all people in developing nations.

   We read beauty magazines touting the need for certain products to maintain the current standard of beauty, forgetting that almost all editorial content of such magazines is centered around the products of its advertisers. All mass media is created as an avenue for advertisers—television was created for the ads, not for the sake of creative content, and that stands true for all mass media outlets. The people who own these media conglomerates are all upperclass (usually conservative) white males, and therefore the content, as well as the advertisements, serve/cater to their interests as a group. It’s no wonder that women have been consistently portrayed in such problematic ways since the dawn of mass media.

2 Options for Women: Sex Object or Mother/Housewife

   As Jean Kilbourne delves deeper into the images targeted at women she comes to this conclusion: “Scientific studies and the most casual viewing yield the same conclusion: Women are shown almost exclusively as housewives or sex objects”, a point which is pretty evident in the above advertisement. Housewives whose singular concern is the cleanliness of their household and happiness/approval of their husband, while sexualized adds portray women as a mere shell, whose sole importance is their physical beauty and perfect physique. Women are not permitted to have wrinkles (or, according to today’s advertisements, age past 30), they cannot have any unwanted hair on their bodies, they must have a small Caucasian nose, pore-less skin, smooth, cellulite free bodies—just to name a few unachievable standards expected of us. Women spend billions of dollars on cosmetics, not to mention plastic surgery, to try and attain this ideal. Due to airbrushing, Photoshop, and professional hair/makeup and, not even the women who actually appear in these advertisements naturally achieve the beauty standards they're perpetuating. 

Women do dishes in the background while the men have fun

Both Sexualizing & Infantilizing 

     Gloria Steinem recalled a conversation with a journalist in her article “Sex, Lies & Advertising: “Oh women’s magazines, everybody knows they’re just catalogs—but who cares?” (1).  It's not always clear to us that we're viewing an advertisement—they appear through product placement, within editorial content, partnerships on Instagram, etc— pervading every aspect of media content. With the lack of sex education in the US, much of what we learn of sexual dynamics is taught through the media. Media portrayals have become even more pornographic and trivialized today. By showing the objectification of women, the media brings up the possibility of violence—they are not directly causing violence towards women, but they are certainly normalizing it. The above advertisement for Gucci appears in fashion magazines targeted toward women; and yet the woman in the advertisement is being both sexualized and infantilized (spanking pose). Why do we buy these fashion magazines and participate in the dissemination of such portrayals? We need to be discerning citizens first and consumers second in order to better this media environment.  

   I’ve taken the time to examine the ownership structures of some of the media I consume, in order to take a critical inventory of whose agenda is being carried out. After some internet research I’ve found that the ownership structure and agenda of certain publications isn’t made too easily accessible, and can take some effort to uncover. The visibility of advertisers can vary greatly depending on the media platform being consumed. New York Magazine, a publication I read bi-weekly, is owned by New York Media, and generally operates with liberal leaning tendencies. Flipping through their magazines, most of their advertisements are for Broadway productions or New York real estate developments, but they also have a subdivision called “The Strategist”, which lists/ranks the quality of certain consumer products 'impartially'. The strategist ensures editorial independence, but one must still be wary of recommendations for consumer products found in magazines. Another form of media I peruse is the fashion blog MANREPELLER. Their advertising content is less obvious than the content found in magazines (which is typical for instagram/blog accounts); it mostly consists of paid partnerships (which are disclosed within the respective editorial) and affiliate ad programs (where they earn fees for linking to certain websites such as Amazon). Another favorite platform of mine is the podcast, for example I enjoy listening to Armchair expert and other interview-based shows. In podcasts, the advertisements are announced separately from the actual listening content, so it is clear when an advertisement is taking place. Almost all podcasts are conducted independently, but “sponsored” by different advertisers such as Sleep Number or Zip Recruiter. With the introduction of product placement, it has become harder to discern advertisements from content in Television. I still remember watching '24' in middle school and constantly seeing wide camera shots of Jack Bauer driving his Ford Explorer, to the point where the vehicle was practically a character on the show. Lastly, a guilty pleasure of mine is the New York Post; even though I only (shamefully) consume the trashy celebrity gossip content of the publication online, I am always vigilant and hyper-aware of the fact that it is owned by News Corp/Rupert Murdoch, and therefore touts an extremely conservative agenda.

In this age we should all develop a shield of media literacy to remain vigilant and suspicious of any and all media content we consume, especially concerning advertising targeted toward our youth.