Glossed Over: Where we take a closer look at what beauty advertisements are really selling.
Oh, I just can’t make up my mind about Dove.
On the one hand, I completely get Bitch Blog’s “but they sell beauty products!” response over here. It is awfully pot-calling-the-kettle-black (or in this case, freckled and full-figured?) for a beauty company to decry our society’s unrealistic standards of beauty, especially when they’re dumb enough to do it via heavy retouching.
But at the same time, I guess I’m happy that any girl channel surfing tonight between the starving artists of Gossip Girl and Desperate Housewives might glimpse a few normal-looking ladies in the mix. It seems a little like Wal-Mart branding itself as green. Sure, it makes Michael Pollan grouchy, but when ginormous corporations do something a little bit good, it’s better than when ginormous corporations do everything bad.
What do you think? Is Dove part of the problem or the solution?
5 Comments
I am thinking it’s better than nothing because while it would be better if they were actually authentic in their efforts (sans retouching), getting a few more “normal” female bodies out in the advertising world is a good thing.
While I agree it’s better than nothing, it’s still at base only a beauty company trying to capture a larger share of the beauty market. If data was released that somehow showed this campaign decreased sales, they’d stop it in a heartbeat. And also, these are still not-unattractive people they’re featuring. If they included some truly non-traditional looking people, not just slightly older/larger, I’d be more convinced.
When the Dove Campaign first came out, they had some of the models on Oprah in just their underwear, so there was no chance of re-touching there.
The possibility of there been re-touching done on the photos in the ad campaign would definitely make me think twice about this campaign.
I do give them credit for offering materials for groups to teach girls about self-esteem on their website though….even though they are selling beauty products.
Also, I’m not entirely sure that just because a company sells beauty products, they can’t decry the problem of unrealistic beauty standards or images. Some days I wear mascara and eyeliner, other days I don’t. But I don’t think that by occasionally giving my thin lashes a boost, I’m participating in the problem. (Or am I?)
That said, I agree with Dan: If the campaign messed with the bottom line ($$$) — it would be done with.
I see both sides, but I do think something’s better than nothing. And those “this is how retouching works” ads are really compelling/effective, and the first ones to make it out there in a big way to show girls how it really goes behind the camera. I’m for that.
4 Trackbacks
[...] they release their first Real Beauty ad targeted at men during the Superbowl this Sunday. (I remain on the fence about whether these ads are part of the problem or the [...]
[...] India this year. And major props to Feministing for figuring out that Unilever, parent company of Dove of “Real Beauty” fame is also the manufacturer of Fair & Lovely, one of the best selling skin whitening creams out [...]
[...] is why this Stand Up For Beauty campaign (and, I fear, the whole Dove Real Beauty/Britney sans airbrushing advertising trend) is not any kind of step in the right [...]
[...] percent: How much Dove sales jumped after that whole “Real Beauty” campaign first launched. Which is old news… but now, new research confirms that women [...]