Real Beauty or Real Profit?

In a word devastated by zero-sized models, photoshop and unrealistic body standards there stands one hero who can bring salvation to women. And that hero’s name is Dove. Or so it appears…

In 2004 Dove began their Real Beauty campaign which featured pictures of women of different ethnicities, ages and body types. Untouched by airbrushes, these campaign photos were intended to change the way women viewed their bodies. The campaign gained major success with multiple viral videos, magazine spreads and television advertisements. However along with the praise this campaign received for breaking the mould, there were also a number of criticisms. While it certainly has positive results and messages in some aspects, I want to examine some of the issues with the campaign and how it might not be doing as much good as we think.

One of the criticisms of the campaign was the use of the word real, which I wrote about in one of my first blog posts way back in my first year. If you like it is available to read here, but I would like to touch more on Dove’s goal for this campaign. The clue here is the word “campaign” because essentially Dove’s aim is to sell their product. Certainly Dove, like any other company, can’t be blamed for trying sell their product but there is something hugely problematic in trying to use the idea of raw and untouched beauty to then sell a beauty product. Essentially Dove might as well be saying, “You’re perfect just the way you are (after you buy these 6 Dove products).” It is also important to note that the parent of Dove, Unilever, is also the owner of Fair & Lovely, which perpetuates a light-skinned beauty standard, and Axe Body Spray that is responsible for ads like the following: In this aspect, the Real Beauty campaign isn’t better than any other beauty advertisement, but it really isn’t particularly worse either. It is also important to note that the parent of Dove, Unilever, is also the owner of Fair & Lovely, which perpetuates a light-skinned beauty standard, and Axe Body Spray that is responsible for ads like the following:

Certain videos from the Real Beauty campaign, like the one below, have also sparked controversy.

Some argue that instead of supporting the women this video is targeting, it instead forces them to self-evaluate and judge their own beauty. Krashinsky, S (2009) explains the issue:

‘Is asking women to subject themselves to public physical evaluation really the best exercise for a brand built on promoting self-esteem?

“It puts it all on women: We should just shape up and increase our self-esteem, as if it were that easy,” said Jean Kilbourne, the creator of the documentary film series Killing Us Softly: Advertising’s Image of Women. “It so trivializes the extraordinary pressure there is on women to conform to a certain ideal – and the awful contempt that lies in wait for us when we fail.”’

While this campaign definitely has its limitations, I think its most positive result is the discussion that it has inspired. While its refreshing to see beauty advertisers stray from the monotonous use of one type of body, ultimately it is this discussion that will help us understand and (hopefully) improve the relationship between body image and the media.

Krashinsky, S 2009, ‘Dove’s beauty campaign “has turned on the women it claims to champion”‘,  Globe and Mail, 9 April, viewed 22 August 2015, <http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/marketing/doves-beauty-campaign-has-turned-on-the-women-it-claims-to-champion/article23869798/&gt;

Celebre, A & Waggoner Denton A 2014, ‘The good, the bad and the ugly of the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty’, The Inquisitive Mind, viewed 19 August 2015, <http://www.in-mind.org/article/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-of-the-dove-campaign-for-real-beauty&gt;

Doveunitedstates 2015, Dove Choose Beautiful: Women all over the world make a choice, (online video), April 7, Youtube, viewed 19 August 2015, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DdM-4siaQw&gt;

Challenging Racial Stereotypes with Blackface?

Is there ever a good time to use blackface? My initial reaction to that question would be an outright, “No. Never.” Which was why I was surprised when I found the work by Indigenous Australian Bindi Cole entitled Not Really Aboriginal (2008). In a series of photographs Cole depicts several Indigenous family members with faces painted in black minstrel paint and traditional headbands around their heads. Cole states her intentions with this collection in a blog post:

“The first being that when I identified as Aboriginal, people would often respond by saying, but you’re not really Aboriginal.  This was because I don’t fit the stereotype of what Aboriginal is ie. living in a remote community, very dark skinned and suffering from dysfunction.  However, my grandmother always taught me to identify as Aboriginal and to be proud of the heritage I shared with her.”

In her artwork she also comments on many people’s assumption that she, along with many other Indigenous Australians, only chose to identify as Aboriginal in order to reap the amazing so-called “benefits” that came along with the identity.

“Wathaurung Mob” – Not Really Aboriginal by Bindi Cole 2008

This artwork was hugely important in creating discussion about what it means to be Aboriginal and addressing stereotypes. In 1981 a ‘Report on a Review of the Administration of the Working Definition of Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islanders’ proposed that the definition of an Aboriginal or Torres Straight Islander is a person :

• “Of Aboriginal or Torres Straight Islander descent
• who identifies as an Aboriginal or Torres Straight Islander AND
• is accepted as such by the community in which he/she lives.”

In no way does this definition mention skin colour, living arrangements or financial situations and yet still these ideas of the “poor, country Aboriginal” is constantly perpetuated in our media. Which is why artworks like Not Really Aboriginal are important, if not imperative.

Which brings me back to my question on blackface, and whether it was appropriate in its use by Cole. When it comes down to it, I don’t think this could be classified as blackface. Yes, these people are painted with minstrel paint, but the intention is not to mock or make a fool of. Instead it is subverting and reclaiming what once was (and arguably still is) a prominent tool of oppression in order to make a statement about othering in Australia. Not only this but the added confrontation of what in normal circumstances would be considered heinous causes the viewer to reflect further into the issue.

References:

Khan, J, Harvey, J L & Cole, B 2008, Not Really Aboriginal, Centre for Contemporary Photography, viewed 12 August 2015, http://www.ccp.org.au/docs/catalogues/BindiCole.pdf

Cole, B 2011, Not Really Aboriginal…, Bindi Cole Chocka, weblog, October 26, viewed 12 August 2015, http://bindicole.blogspot.com.au/2011/10/not-really-aboriginal.html

Watson, B 2013, ‘Facing up to the Stereotypes’, The Australian, November 16, viewed 12 August 2015, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/review/facing-up-to-the-stereotypes/story-fn9n8gph-1226759272154

Creative Spirits 2015, Aboriginal Identity: Who is ‘Aboriginal’?, Creative Spirits, viewed 12 August 2015, http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/people/aboriginal-identity-who-is-aboriginal#top

Cole, B 2008, Wathaurung Mob, photograph, Centre of Contemporary Photography, viewed 12 August 2015, http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-z0krpZUZ5j8/Tqc8DEPeKVI/AAAAAAAAAM4/pXEykNMCakk/s1600/Wathaurung+Mob.jpg

Sex Work and Networks

Above is a video on my thoughts on this week’s topic of the Network Society Paradigm in DIGC202. I’ve tried to stay away from my opinion on whether sex work should or shouldn’t be illegal in real life or online. I’m focussing more on the issues of creating virtual law for centralised and decentralised systems. I wish I could have gone into more depth but I’m limited with the word count. Let me know your thoughts down in the comments so we can look further into this topic!

Fears of the Telegraph: Then and Now

In the case that you’re a rookie and can’t read morse code, the above meme translates to: “Telegraph news too fast you say? Tell me more.” This meme is in response to The New York Times’ comment on the effect the telegraph had on news quality. The excerpt from an 1858 article, which was seen in this week’s lecture, claimed that the capability of the telegraph to share information instantaneously was in some ways causing news to become trivial and of lesser quality. It stated that perhaps it was becoming

“too fast for the truth.”

It was these ideas and fears of instant communication that inspired this meme, as looking back in retrospect these fears could be seen as almost silly. With the sheer amount of instant communication that exists today it is clear to say that the “idea of now” was nothing to fear. However, after reflecting further on the New York Times’ fears of 1858, I came to the realisation that perhaps we still have similar fears, and that perhaps we haven’t advanced as much as we thought. Thinking about it, I often see the criticisms of breaking news and commenting on how the need for instant coverage can often lead to compromising accurate information. So before we follow Willy Wonka’s condescending lead, perhaps we should acknowledge that the New York Times’ comments could have some merit. The alternative is to admit that we are just as silly as they were back in 1858.

The Evil Side to Superfoods

I’ll be honest, I’ve bought into the idea of fad diets and miracle superfoods. How could I not jump at the chance to change my life with a simple diet change? The notion that perhaps enough lettuce and spinach leaves could tip the scales of life in my favour is addictive. All I need is that one superfood to turn my life around. So as soon as I’ve finished that health documentary, I’m writing a leafy shopping list with a side of lentils.

That feeling when you start a new diet

Jump to the end of the week and my fridge is overflowing with opened, half-eaten and decaying bags of greenery that will inevitably end up the victims of this week’s garbage collection. Meanwhile I’m on the couch, halfway through a packet of biscuits wondering why the scales haven’t changed this week. While I know that weight loss is the result of burning more energy than I consume, I still can’t kick that desire to find an easy way out. Of course it’s this laziness that food shows and health bloggers use to sell “the next big thing.”

While this whole world of fad diets and superfood may seem harmless to me, I’m unaware of the effects it’s having on developing countries. With the Western World’s huge demand of superfoods from remote  corners of the planet, fair trade has been thrown out of the window. An article on Small Footprint Family states,

“American entrepreneurs have been making a killing for the past decade selling luxury foods at a premium to people who don’t need them, by paying undernourished peasants in developing countries a miserably low “fair wage” to “carefully” exploit their natural resources.”

Take quinoa for example. For those of you new to the quinoa world here’s a little video on its health benefits and history:

What this video doesn’t mention is that due to high demand of the seed in Western countries, local Bolivians cannot afford to buy quinoa themselves. This is problematic because superfoods are essential for surviving in developing countries. For people living in poverty, simple and cheap foods high in nutrients are a staple. Without these types of foods, locals will begin to become malnourished.

The media is selling us a health ideal that we don’t need, and by doing so is hurting the communities from which these superfoods originate. Our laziness when it comes to health and weightloss may appear innocent, but by buying into the media’s portrayal of miracle foods we are in fact exacerbating the situation. So put down that plate of kale and go eat a regular salad like a normal person!

References:

Flores, P 2015, Quinoa Boom Puts Stress on Bolivian Economics, Environment, Huffington Post, viewed 7 August 2015, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/20/quinoa-boom-bolivian_n_2724251.html

Small Footprint Family 2015, The Environmental Cost of Superfoods, Small Footprint Family, viewed 7 August 2015, http://www.smallfootprintfamily.com/the-environmental-impact-of-imported-superfoods

watchsuperfoods 2012, Quinoa History and Nutrition – Superfoods, online video, 20 October, YouTube, viewed 7 August 2015, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeN48GCvnvw

Ideal Bite 2012, Salad Dress, image, Ideal Bite, viewed 7 August 2015, http://idealbite.com/why-should-i-eat-kale/

Boats! Boats! Boats!

If you have seen any media coverage of the so-called “refugee crisis” that is supposedly happening in Australia, you no-doubtedly would have seen an image like this:

Photo credit: http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/03/29/theyre-heeeeeeeere/?wpmp_switcher=mobile

 

Oh, the image of a rickety boat holding hoards of unfamiliar foreign faces ready to take our jobs and resources, that is ever so favoured by today’s media. It’s no wonder why 60% of Australians want the government to increase the severity of treatment of asylum seekers who arrive by boat, when images like this one circulate through the media. Fear-mongering front page articles and news reports like this start to affect how we think about migration. They hide away individual’s stories that help us empathise and instead create panic with images of invading boats.

Don’t worry, there is hope for us. While the front pages and current affair programs battle it out to see who has the best boat picture, other forms of media are telling a whole different story. According the the 2001 and 2006 censuses,

“more than 200 nationalities were recorded as living in Sydney. In Fairfield…55 percent of the total population is overseas born, 37 percent are under 25 years of age, and 71 percent of people speak a language other than English at home.”

So it only seems fitting that we start to hear the stories of those who actually have experiences of migration or diaspora. Shopfront Theatre, a youth theatre that I spoke about a few weeks ago, has created many projects with this aim. One of the most recent is Travel Songs of Land and Sea, which was created by 100 young people aged 12-25 from Menai High School, Fairfield High School, Fairfield Intensive English Centre and St George Community Mental Health Service. The theatre describes it as:

“A diverse mix of young people – refugees and new migrants, young people with and without disability, and those who have grown up in suburban Sydney – have created music and visuals for this cinematic series that come together in 30 minute film. Beautiful cinema-songs reflect recent personal, physical and emotional journeys.”

You can watch the trailer here if you like

Although a large number of mainstream media may have a close-minded view of migration, it’s fantastic to see that local media such as youth theatres are attempting to change this through digital storytelling of individuals who have experienced being connected to multiple nations and cultures due to migration. Salazar states that:

“Digital stories allow people to make their own stories (and histories) important.”

These stories are important and hopefully one day we will see them on the front page.

References:

Salazar, Juan Francisco. (2012). ‘Digital Stories and emerging citizens’ media practices by migrant youth in Western Sydney’. 3CMedia: Journal of Community, Citizen’s and Third Sector Media and Communication, Issue 7.

I’ve Got the Eurovision

Let’s talk about Eurovision. Oh yes, you heard me. Eurovision.

Eurovision Song Contest

For those who’ve been living under a rock, let me explain to you the magical phenomenon that is the Eurovision Song Contest. Eurovision is an annual live television contest in which the members of the European Broadcasting Union each write and perform a song. It all began way back in 1959; Europe was looking for ways to bring countries together after a devastating war and Marcel Bezençon decided that an international song contest was the way to go. Thus Eurovision was born! Even at it’s conception, the show was intended for a wide audience of numerous nations.

Fast forward to this year, where Eurovision is celebrating it’s 55th year and is still going strong. It is estimated that 125 million viewers from around the globe tune in each year. Not only this but almost 5.5 million tweets were sent around the contest. This broadcast has clearly spread from Europe to the entire globe; worldwide people are watching and talking about Eurovision at the same time. Still don’t believe me? Check out this map of how these tweets played out during the contest.

Let’s cut to the chase. Why is this relevant? Well this is all representative of how technology has sped up globalisation. (Ah globalisation, we meet again.) Eurovision was always intended for a larger audience outside of one room, but with the help of technology and media, it has spread globally. Initially, the song contest was broadcasted on the radio, with some lucky people watching it on the tele. Now, it is accessible to almost anyone and is creating international conversations.

Eurovision

Eurovision may seem like a tacky, hilarious spectacle of strangely dressed singing Europeans (which it is), but it is also is a vessel to bring people together and to create a truly global event. And that, my friends, is why Eurovision is pretty awesome.

http://www.villagevoice.com/2000-05-09/music/the-olympics-of-cheese/

https://blog.twitter.com/en-gb/2014/five-million-tweets-for-eurovision-2014

http://www.eurovision.tv/page/history/facts-figures%20

 

Hey Hey It’s Not Okay

In 2009 Channel Nine’s show Hey Hey It’s Saturday televised a skit that involved 4 men in blackface and 1 man in whiteface portraying a goofy version of the Jackson 5. Some didn’t understand the controversy; the Herald Sun writing,

“What’s racist about it?… We got men who dress as women. Women who dress as men… What’s wrong with white people made up as black people?… I don’t see the problem?“

Hey Hey It’s Saturday’s Jackson Jive

Here’s the problem: blackface throughout history has been used to depict people of colour in a comic and demeaning stereotype. America, in particular, has a dark history of this tradition. Going back to when Africans were enslaved by white Americans in the 19th Century, blackface was a form of entertainment in theatres. White men would blacken their face with shoe polish and then perform grotesque portrayals of (apparently hilarious) stereotypes of African people. John Strausbaugh describes it as the portrayal of

“Blackness for the enjoyment and edification of white viewers”

So you can imagine why blackface might be a little offensive, especially in the U.S. What surprises me is the Australian reaction to this skit. While they were understanding of America’s Harry Connick Jr.’s outrage, they were apathetic to the skit itself. People dismissed it as being just a bit of fun, and that it wasn’t as offensive here as it is in the U.S., where blackface is taboo.

To me, this seems highly ignorant, especially when we live in a country that also has a history of blackface in theatre, television and movies to depict poor portrayals of Indigenous Australians. It seems that the reaction was, “Yea that’s offensive in the American context, but that’s their problem because we don’t live there.” The reality is that whether in the U.S or Australia, blackface is still highly offensive because racism is not nation specific. If we tolerate these kinds of dated racial stereotypes in a simple comedy skit, when do we draw the line?  Australia is already guilty of having “white-washed” casting in television, with little to no diversity in key characters. So when incidents like this happen, I often ask myself, “Are we moving forward, or backward?”

To sum this all up (if you hadn’t got the gist already), blackface is not acceptable in any form, in any country. It’s not funny, even if it is “well intended”. It is our responsibility to stand up against these offensive portrayals of stereotypes which were created during times of slavery and oppression, and say that it is not okay.

References

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/diversity-still-out-of-the-picture-20120229-1u1jg.html

http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/08/crikey-clarifier-whats-all-the-fuss-about-blackface/

http://overland.org.au/previous-issues/issue-199/feature-maxine-clarke/

Where All My Ladies At?

There’s no avoiding it; the gender equality in media is abysmal. We’re talking in film, television, print and online media. We’re talking on-screen portrayals and careers in the media. Essentially, women aren’t being given a fair go. Okay, here’s the part where I would rattle off a whole list of numbers and statistics about women in the media. However the New York Film Academy has just done such a grand job at it already, any attempts by me would just be inadequate.

Photo credit: http://www.nyfa.edu/film-school-blog/gender-inequality-in-film/

I don’t know about you but numbers just seem to have a better impact on me when displayed in a visual format. And NYFA have done just that. If you want to see the entire post about women in the media you can see it here. Overall it’s staggering how much women are not being represented in film, and even when they are it’s usually playing a role of a mother or lover. So why is this inequality occurring? (Apart from the centuries of gender inequality being the social norm)

Perhaps it’s due to the lack of gender balance in the media industry. Again, I look to NYFA’s post for an illustration of this.

Photo credit: http://www.nyfa.edu/film-school-blog/gender-inequality-in-film/

And this unbalance is occurring in newsrooms, television and newspapers, as well as film. How do we expect women to be properly represented when the people who are presenting them are predominantly male? Maybe that’s something to consider.

It’s not all bad news though, there are shows that are challenging this deep-rooted sexism. Some of my favourites include New Girl, 30 Rock and Orange is the New Black. The latter is one that is really rich in ways that it challenges stereotypes. First of all, the majority of the cast is female which is a win for us ladies. But what interests me the most is not the white upper-middle-class female main character, but the rich diversity of women who are portrayed in the show. Homosexual and bisexual women, older women, women of colour and transgender women all play a central part in this show, which is another win for us ladies considering most women in the media are ones who are young and caucasian.

Photo credit: http://thefeministpremise.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/o-orange-is-the-new-black-facebook.jpg

We’ve got a long way to go, but at least we’re starting to see some change.

References: http://www.nyfa.edu/film-school-blog/gender-inequality-in-film/

http://annenberg.usc.edu/News%20and%20Events/News/~/media/PDFs/Smith_GenderInequality500Films.ashx

David Carr and all things Future

A few weeks ago I wrote about how, despite some moral panics, journalism wasn’t in fact dead. It seems to be thriving in fact. So this week when we were asked to watch this video, I’m not gunna lie, I felt pretty validated. If you’re not keen on watching a whole 30 minutes of three white guys having a pow-wow, I’ll give you  quick little run down. During the half-hour David Carr, Andy Lack and Tom Fiedler discussed the current changes occurring in the media and journalism and how this affects journalism education. Obviously, I don’t want to write the same post twice, so instead of focussing how journalism is changing I want to look a bit closer at the teaching of journalism and media studies.

David Carr mentioned that the old model of employment in journalism has completely changed. Prior to the huge online industry boom (aka the Dark Ages), students would have to work their way up the newspaper chain. Now, there is so much more variety in job prospects, more platforms to get a story out and more potential to go viral. David Carr talks about how media production will be a big focus in journalism education so that graduates will have the tools to create their own content, because now more than ever journalists have the capacity to become successful while still working independently. He also talks about learning less about ‘the good old days’ but rather a focus on looking at the present and the near future. (Cue Kool and the Gang’s rendition of Celebration)

As a media student, this is music to my ears. If I have to hear about the invention of the printing press one more time… I swear…I will blog about it…

It’s amazing that we’re living in a time where such big changes are happening in the media which throws so many old models out the window. It creates more opportunity for innovation and creativity. And hopefully it means that some of us won’t have to go into the middle of nowhere for our first job (fingers crossed!)