Monthly Archives: November 2013

Ad Critique 7

Rachel Humphrey

Ad Critique 7

CMCL315

November 24, 2013

 

On the website AdBusters.com I cam across the ad “The More You Consume The Less You Live” for the Buy Nothing Day campaign. The whole campaign is about trying to stop the outrageous buying of items that people do not need. Every day shopping has become out of control. People all around the world have used shopping as an excuse to forget all of their problems. It is possible to buy things that we need but people take it to another level of buying what they want as well. The best real life example of over buying is on Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving. In America it has become another holiday because it gives people the opportunity to over shop and spend money that they do not have.

 

In the ad “The More You Consume The Less You Live” is the perfect example of how life has evolved over the years. Children and teenagers have become obsessed to buying items that “in”. We have iPhones now and it seems like everyone has to have the same phone now. We also have game systems and people are pre-ordering the PS4 and then selling it for double the market price because it is sold out right now. As consumers we have become a society that needs a certain item right now. If we can’t have it right now, then what is the point of existence? The teenager in the ad has fast food wrappers in her room, a plant in an aquarium, and a TV with a video game console hooked up to it. It looks as though she has been buying whatever she sees. She didn’t think about the items as something that she needed but since she saw it or came in contact with it, she had to have it and she had to consume it. She barely has her bed to sleep on because her room is full of junk.

 

As a culture and society of major consumerism, we need to take a stand. It is hard to imagine that our whole lives consist of what items we purchase. Is our life just the items in our room? She looks like she has all she needs but is she living? We need to start teaching our children that living is not a box on the TV, and living is definitely looking out the window from your bedroom.

Image

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

IO2 – Advertisement & Culture

Rachel Humphrey

 

CMCL315

 

Informed Opinion 2

 

November 15, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

ALTERING PHOTOS SHOULD BE DISCLAIMED

 

 

 

 

            I think that we all know when photos are altered, but it would be helpful to younger generations for ads and TV commercials to state that the photos have been digitally altered. I don’t think that it would stop advertisers from altering photos, but at least we as the viewer’s know can differentiate from what is real and what is altered. I don’t think banning altered photos will help anything, so my point of view is that we should have disclaimers indicating that the photos have been altered and we should have the right to view the original photo.

 

            In Britain and France have been trying to get advertisers to disclaim the alterations done in photos (PFanner, 2009). Women are looking at these ads and feeling bad about themselves because they want to be like the woman on the magazine. Little do they know that those photos are altered and the woman most likely does not look like anything like the photo. Valerie Boyer from France made a statement that said these photos can lead people to believe in a reality that does not exist (PFanner, 2009). It can really hurt a person’s self-esteem by thinking they can be like a person on the advertisement. The photos are Photoshopped and any women would not look like that in real life.  Robin Derrick of Vogue magazine says that he has spent the first 10 years of his live making women look smaller, now he has spent the last 10 years making women look bigger (PFanner, 2009). Consumers actually no longer want to see stick thin figures on their magazines. The more natural, the better.

 

            Photoshopping images are sometimes a good thing because a lot of people don’t want to look at blemishes or a horrible scar on your arm, but it is getting out of control. It’s not just used to cover up scars or blemishes, it is being used to change models sizes and to change the makeup usage on people. Faith Hill was photoshopped on a Redbook magazine (Brown, 2011). They made her arms look thinner than they actually are and probably her waist size as well. They made her look like she was still 22 years old. In the article they explain that they studied how much a magazine is rated determines how much retouching happens on the photo. If not a lot of people view the magazine, then it is more likely that the photo is not retouched (Brown, 2011). But like for example in Vogue, it is viewed by a lot of people so that means that the retouching on a photo would be a lot.

 

Image

 

Our perceptions of what our bodies should look like is changing drastically because of the images we see on a day to day basis. When we are in line at a store and then we see the magazine pictures and the women are smiling but then you notice that they have a perfect shape. You wonder how you can get to be that size. You start comparing your lifestyle and even your size to that person and then our minds start to make unrealistic goals for us to be that same size of the person on the magazine.

 

            There are few examples of photoshopped images on a couple of magazines. The first one is of Demi Lovato on the cover of Cosmo. The article that she is in talks about her struggle with bulimia and drugs and her struggle through life as a teenager. They decide to ignore that she is spilling her heart out about her struggles and put a gorgeous photoshopped photo of her. Her face looks like they slimmed that down and then her waist line is slimmed down almost double. Someone was nice enough to put a before and after picture together in the same time frame of when the photo was altered and when she was on the red carpet with no alterations made (Kite & Kite, 2011).

Image

 

Another example is Kate Winslet on a GQ magazine. She has been altered in a way that you can hardly recognize her. We all love and adore Kate Winslet the way she is. We know that she is curvy, but she is also, in my opinion, one of the most gorgeous women in Hollywood. There is no surprise that she is on the cover of GQ. The shock is that they thought men would like stick thin legs with no curves on her. I think that men actually like a few curves, no one anymore really wants a stick thin figured woman. They made Kate look really tall and made her look like she had lost 30 pounds. She even made a statement after the magazine had been released that she is 5’6 and it looks like they made her 6 feet tall (Kite & Kite, 2011). She said that she would never just go out and lose 30 pounds for a photo shoot. Below is the before and after of Kate Winslet (Kite & Kite, 2011).

 

 Image

 

Ann Taylor a woman’s fashion clothing store, has been caught by altering photos when they supposedly believe in natural beauty. The woman behind the feminist website Jezebel found a leaked photo of a before picture from Ann Taylor and a picture after the alterations. The founder of Jezebel called Ann Taylor out. The hip and thighs were slimmed way down to the point that it doesn’t even look natural (Kite & Kite, 2011). Ann Taylor fixed the photo back to what it looked like before the alterations and apologized and stated again that they believe in real beauty and they may have gotten carried away and will be more careful in the future. Below is the picture of the before and after alterations (Kite & Kite, 2011).

Image

 

After doing all of this research I still think that retouching and altering photos should not happen. These articles just backed up my point because looking at these before and after pictures really makes you realize. If you didn’t have these comparisons to look at it, you may think it’s normal. After doing the research I think that advertisers should post up the before and after or at the least state that they have been retouched. It will make for a healthier world. Especially with teenagers in this generation, it could get really dangerous if there isn’t something done about altering photos on magazines and even on TV, because I am sure that is next.

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

 

 

Brown, E. (2011, November 29). Digitally altered photos and body image: Look at the retouching . LA Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2011/nov/29/news/la-heb-photoshop-altered-photos-ratings-20111129

 

Kite , L., & Kite, L. (2011). Altering images and our minds. Beauty Refined . Retrieved from http://www.beautyredefined.net/photoshopping-altering-images-and-our-minds/

 

PFanner, E. (2009, September 27). A move to curb digitally altered photos in ads. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/28/business/media/28brush.html

 

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

IO1 – Advertising

Rachel Humphrey

 

IO1 – Advertising to Children

 

Advertising and Culture

 

11/9/2013

 

 

 

 

I do not think that advertising should be allowed. Advertising as Culture mentions that children’s brains are not developed enough yet to make up their own views (Wharton, 2013). Children’s brains are like a sponge and will soak up anything. Most of the toy or fast food commercials are during a Disney channel show or Nickelodeon. Even though children don’t exactly understand what they want, they know they want that McDonald’s toy that is being advertised on the commercial.  It’s not all about the fast food commercials but the ads are also supporting obesity by dangling sugary drinks in front of children’s eyes. Coca Cola has vowed to know target children under the age of 12 (Coca-cola vows to, 2013).

 

In response to the question, should media companies that make brand placement deals be required to disclose such partnerships to consumers/viewers? I do not think that is should be required to disclose that information to the consumers/viewers. If I were told every time a brand placement ad was put on television, I really would ignore it. I wouldn’t care about all that information. Right now, it is okay with me to not know who owns what with the brand placement. Some consumer groups are discussing that advertising and brand placement is a deceptive way of giving out information. They are also upset because they don’t realize that they are being advertised to.

 

I believe that advertisements to children need to be approved by certain companies before they become official and allowed on television. FTC (Federal Trade Commission), CDCP (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), FDA (Food and Drug Association), and DA (Department of Agriculture) are all on that list of companies that should be contacted before the advertisements go on television.

 

Obesity is something that is surrounding America even now more than ever. 17 percent of kinds in the United States are obese. Our genetic code has encouraged us to consume as many calories as possible, nowhere in our DNA is it written that we need to eat Big Macs, drink soda, or eat candy. These habits are taught and engraved in our brains as children. That is why advertising to children is not a good idea because they will inherit bad habits.

 

As a student of an advertising class I have recognized the different types of brand placement on a lot of different shows and television ads. I just saw a McDonald’s (Sifferlin, 2013) commercial on television just now and they were trying to advertise the kid’s meals now have apples as their side instead of French fry’s. The children have books in their hands, does that mean that children who eat fries are not as smart as children eating apples? I just thought that as interesting because they do not want to advertise to children to promote obesity, but they want to promote regardless if it is a bad message or good.

 

            Brand placement is when media companies make deals with brands to show in films, TV shows, and other forms of media. A lot of the time consumers watch a certain TV show or movie and there is a brand in the media content without even realizing that it is there. Brand placement is very clever and sneaky, but a lot of people are not huge fans of it because of that very reason. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has not made any rules that require disclosure of any product placements n films or television. I guess there are some rules that require disclosure of companies that they are partners with in blogs and social media. Because of people’s personal lives on blogs and social media it is almost necessary for they’re to be information disclosing who is involved. Like I mentioned before, I do not think it is necessary for there to be disclosures to be made to consumer/viewers about certain products being put in films and TV shows.

 

            Brand placement is everywhere you go, there is no getting away from it. It almost seems like it would take away from the message if at the end of the commercials it gives you all the details of the media company that it is partnered with. It doesn’t make sense to have all that information being disclosed, I mean what is the point? Brand placement is to help intrigue different audiences while they watch a show or movie. The placement of these brands is to connect to the viewers and reach a variety of consumers. It does cost a lot of money to do this, but in the long run they are reaching millions of people all at once and the US is the number one in the world with product placement.

 

            I guess the reason why consumers are concerned with this issue is because they feel like the placement of these brands are pushing at their subconscious because they don’t realize that they are being advertised to because of where and when it happens. For example at the grocery store or even when you buy a bag of candy there is brand placement. It is tricky how many times you will buy something because a character is on the package or the store is in support of a certain company and that is why you shop there because you saw a famous person where it on a TV show or a movie. They believe it not truthful, basically unethical because it attracts a consumer/viewer without knowing.

 

            I believe in the 21st century brand placement is probably the best idea to promote your product. There is not much else you can do now these days because people don’t read magazines or newspapers like they used to. The content they watch to get their information is all on the Internet or the television. I think it is a very good idea and if I ever have a company I will be looking for a media company to help sell my product doing whatever they can to get my product out there. The brand placement will keep growing as long as there are outlets to get product placements out there.

 

 

 

 

 

Work Cited

 

Coca-cola vows to reduce advertising to kids. (2013, May 8). Advertising age. Retrieved from http://adage.com/article/news/coca-cola-vows-reduce-advertising-kids/241359/

 

Petrecca, L. (2006, September 10). Product placement you can’t escape it. USA Today. Retrieved from http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/advertising/2006-10-10-ad-nauseum-usat_x.htm

 

Semuels, A (2008, July 30). Tracking product placement on TV. Chicago Tribune. Retrieve from http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2008-07-30/features/0807280334_1_product-placement-pq-media-advertisers

 

Sifferlin, A. (2013, August 9). Forget the food: Fast food ads aimed at kids feature lots of giveaways. Time. Retrieved from Coca-cola vows to reduce advertising to kids. (2013, May 8). Advertising age. Retrieved from http://healthland.time.com/2013/08/29/forget-the-food-fast-food-ads-aimed-at-kids-feature-lots-of-giveaways/

 

Wharton, C. (2013). Advertising as Culture. Chicago: Intellect.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized