User:Stevenarntson/group spaces/analytical writing/group 3

Group Members:

Aaronmorris 19:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Adamslater 19:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Ehrenwill 19:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Davidsoiseth 08:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Overview
''' Before you read our post, please view these 3 ads. These are 3 examples of the extreme measures modern advertising has taken. This is the pinnacle of sexual advertising. Commercial 1, Commercial 2, and Commercial 3. They each highlight a different aspect of the issues within our topic. The 1st commercial highlights the "place of a woman" in society. And that women should defy their home-maker instincts, and become a sexual animal. The second commercial highlights how men in the commercials objectify women. The commercial speaks for itself. The 3rd commercial highlights the sexual preying upon men's sexual responses. '''
 * Our group originally wanted to discuss the problems of sexuality in food advertising, but decided to broaden the topic into all advertising in general. We did this because we found that sexuality has been spread throughout all media, and that food advertising is just the icing on the cake. We want to attack the problem, as it were, head on. We want to attack the head of advertising problems, and not just an obligatory limb.


 * Our group also decided to focus solely on heterosexual advertising. The reason for this is purely time and space constraints. Most advertising in today's modern world assumes that the viewer is a heterosexual male or female. There is a small percentage of ads that target other sexual identities, but we decided it best that we stick to the majority.


 * We also decided that we were not going to go into detail about every single type of advertising media. We focused mainly on television ads, and print ads. We did not go into detail about advertising in music, movies, billboards, radio, or other extraneous forms.

1. Summary
 * We are a group comprised of 4 males, which means that we do not have the insight or opinion of any women. Since these issues concern both parties, we are writing this paper strictly from an outside point of view, through the lenses of being men. We cannot speak for women, and their thoughts or feelings on these issues, we can only infer and insinuate on their position, from our own experiences.

We believe that issues within advertising started around the time that mass media was introduced. During the year of 1924, rules were set up to encourage advertisers to govern themselves with a code of "ethics". These codes left room for advertisers to push the limits of modern indecency. Ever since then, companies have been becoming more and more sexually driven in terms of their advertising. The breaking point was during the 60's and 70's, when perfume and clothing companies began to set the "standard" for print and television ads. Perfume companies began lacing their ads with sexual promises. Clothing companies began to show their clothing models with less and less clothing. This timeline has then set the stage for our modern performers. These companies put out sex heavy ads, and we the consumers, think nothing of it.

We believe that the problem is tri-fold. The first issue is "Gender Performance" based on physical features/actions. This refers to the portrayal of men or women in ads in such a way that the consumer either consciously or subconsciously believes the portrayal. The issue of true beauty often comes up when talking about this. Men and women are expected to look and act a certain way to attract the opposite sex. The second issue is "Gender Roles". Much like the first topic this issue deals with portrayals of how society thinks a gender should act or what roles they should play to be successful in our society. Often issues of women becoming home-makers, and men going into the work force. The third issue is that of "sexual response" and "sexual objectivity". Men's sexual responses are preyed upon; blatant sexual ads are shown, targeting heterosexual men. Women are objectified; They are used as objects, or prizes for a man's success.

We believe that the solution to these problems is also tri-fold. The first step that needs to be taken is of the people. Without pressure from the general population, no other parts of our solution can take effect. People need to make the consumer's choice, and "boycott" those products which take sexual advertising too far. Some people can even talk to a lobbyist and get involved with congress. That leads us to our second solution, the government. The government needs to regulate and encourage advertising agencies to uphold a code of ethics. The third leg of the solution is the advertising agencies themselves. Without pressure from the first two solutions, the advertising agencies will keep putting out what makes them money. But with the right people behind the wheels, agencies could find alternate ways to pay for products, other than sexual ads.



History Of the Problem
As we look into the causes and effects of modern day sexuality woven into our advertising, we must also evaluate the history of this issue. There are many problems that pertain to this subject facing our world today, many of which have deep rooted causes found throughout the history of advertising. Mass media has been the key to advertising as early as there were consumers to influence. The term “mass media” rose from the early 1920’s, with the advent of national radios, widespread newspapers, mass-circulation magazines, and even early television. Although books and prints had been advertising to the masses for thousands of years before this, the term “mass media” was coined and exploited during the early 20th century. During the year of 1924 the AAAA (American Association of Advertising Agencies) devised a code of ethics that were to be followed by all American advertisements. These codes stated that the following were unethical:


 * false or misleading statements or exaggerations, visual or verbal
 * testimonials which did not reflect the real choice of a competent witness
 * price claims which were misleading
 * comparisons which unfairly disparaged a competitive product or service
 * unsupported claims, or claims that distorted the true meaning of statements made by professional or scientific authorities statements, suggestions or pictures offensive to public decency

These set of rules, however upright they may seem, are very vague in nature. They leave a lot up to the imagination, and leave room for advertisers to push the limits of “ethics”.

One would expect companies that promote products of perfume or clothing to portray messages of human sexuality. The sexual themes within these brand types go hand in hand with the product they are advertising. But even companies like coca cola have been subtly tapping into this motto of “sex sells” with the shapes of their bottles. As early as 1915, bottles from Coca-Cola have been becoming increasingly shapely. Some have even likened them to the curves of a woman's body. Examples can be seen here. Another prime example being the Bremen brewer with the "St. Pauli Girl" mascot. She has gotten more voluptuous and revealing as time has passed since her introduction in the mid 80s. Even their latest campaign shows how closely the American population has linked beer and Women together. In some of their advertising the women are made out of beer.

But advertisers have not always pushed the idea that sex sells. During the second world war, after the United States entered the war in 1941, a new type of advertising reined. Political advertisements. These ads were aimed at certain demographics for a purpose. One very prominent example was Rosie the Riveter. American women answered the call of advertisers to enter the work force. Men were on short supply, and America needed a way to persuade women into joining the war effort. They focused their advertising on making women look strong, giving them masculine traits, and accrediting them to much of the wartime efforts. This is an example of positive sexual advertising. (You can read more about the effects this may have in the solutions section.)

As soon as the war was over, however, advertising hit a key turning point in its evolution. Women were no longer needed in the factories, and were therefore encouraged to return into their roles of the home-maker. This brought the United States into the era of the Pinup Girl. Women were portrayed as glorified home-makers, usually posed in locations and settings where they were waiting at home for the men to return. (Examples can be seen here, here, and here). This time period, we believe, was the turning point for sexual themed advertisements. It started to clearly define the roles of men and women within those sexual advertisements. (See the contemporary issues for examples of both sides). This was also a time period when advertising pushed the limits of the "code of ethics". The general population was becoming more and more open to risque women and lewd behavior.

Just about a decade later during the late 60's and early 70's, perfume and cologne companies took the stage for sexual advertising. A company named "Aviance" started printing magazine ads, and airing television ads that specifically targeted women. (Two examples can be seen here, and here). As you can see, there was a transition of roles. The women were encouraged to step out of their former home-maker status, and become a sexy woman at night. The commercial tells the viewer "I've been sweet and I've been good, I've had a whole full day of motherhood, but I'm gonna have an Aviance night."

Other cologne ads took a much more direct approach towards men. Some companies even had outright promises, or pledges, about the sexual outcomes and encounters one would have while using the products. One company, Jovan, was very brash and to the point when it came to advertising towards men. Their advertisements contained very little imagery, but the scenes they depected were subconsciously sexual. The magazine ad seen here shows a married man touching a woman's leg (presumably not his wife). This encounter was no doubt brought on by the sexually enhancing perfume. Tag lines such as "Get Your Share", and "Sex appeal for sale. Come in and get yours", were commonly used blatant themes to set the mood.

Another company that has set the modern wallpaper for advertising has been Calvin Klein. The clothing company figured out that sexual advertising sells an incredible amount of clothing or perfume. (Of which the company sells both). Ever since its introduction in 1968, the company has been putting out high volumes of risque ads. These ads get the company press. Even “In 1980 he featured a 15 year old Brooke Shields purring ‘Nothing comes between me and my Calvin’s.’”

The use of sexual advertisements from fragrance and "hip" clothing companies has paved the way for our modern era. One can draw clear cut lines from the early days of Jovan, chanel, and Calvin Klein to the modern days of Axe and Tag bodyspray, Abercrombie and Fitch clothing, and Victoria's Secret lingerie. For each one of these companies, you can find numerous critics that say the companies are displaying too much. Abercrombie and Fitch for example was accused of issueing soft-core porn in their quarterly brochures. (They were pulled in 2003, but may be making a comeback within the next few years). Axe and Tag body spray are accused of "objectifying women" and "preying upon the sexual impulses of men".

The history of advertising reaches far and wide, and seems to be getting more blatantly sexual as time passes. A great example of this is the Coppertone Girl then and now. Where are we headed with advertising in the United States? How can we find a solution to this contemporary issue?

The Contemporary Situation
1. Sexual Advertising Issues Concerning Men 

Sexual exploitation in advertisement is a multi-faceted problem, one that is not limited to demeaning and undermining the intelligence of women and minorities. Men are also frequently targeted in advertisements through insecurities, gender-role stereotypes, and even fantasies.

A large category of tv commercials using sexual themes are in no way meant to arouse the audience, but to use insecurities relating to perceived gender roles to convince the audience that they need a certain product. One approach uses gender performance as the focal point, whereas the other focuses on the concept of "manliness". The latter is clearly visible in this Hungry Man tv dinner advertisement which you can view via the link initially shows several construction men sitting down for what you can only assume is their lunch break at a work site. They're all drinking smoothies with relatively feminine colors: pink and light orange. An authoritative figure, probably their boss, walks up to them and tells them to ditch their smoothies and grab a Hungry Man tv dinner, a meal for "real men". This advertisement essentially states that for one to be a real man, they have to eat Hungry Man, or at least a meal with similar components. It also infers that smoothies are unmanly.

In terms of gender performance, an example of what you might see is a commercial in which its characters are doing culturally typical, gender specific activities, where the male character might be sitting on a couch, drinking a beer and watching a football game, while the female character is in the background cleaning something. Often times, the male character will ask his wife to grab him another beer, and she'll complain about how he never helps with the chores. A commercial like this might be used to advertise a cleaning product, or even in some cases the brand of beer that the male character is drinking. The problem is that through inferring that this situation is typical, the people making the advertisement psychologically re-enforce the very stereotype of a normal household that they're making fun of.

It's important to distinguish this "machismo" aspect from the use of attractive characters to lure the interest of a captive audience. The Hungry Man commercial discussed above uses common male insecurities to create the impression that if you don't eat their tv dinners, you aren't manly enough. Another common approach in advertisement is one where the advertisement creates the image that because a person used a certain product, they are sexier in the eyes of others, particularly people of the opposite sex. In this Axe Body Spray commercial, a man rides a bike through a suburban neighborhood and delivers newspapers. As he does this, all the women on the block stop what they are doing and stare at him longingly as he continues to ride by. At the end of the commercial, he walks into a house full of women who are sitting around looking aroused. When he comes through the door, he opens up a bible and pulls a bottle of Axe Body Spray out of it. Suddenly the viewer makes the correlation between the body spray and the horny women, and if the commercial was successful, comes to the conclusion that using Axe Body Spray will make them look sexy in the eyes of women. This is one of the more common techniques in television advertisement, and though obvious when in use, seems to work fairly well.

2. Sexual Advertising Issues Concerning Women

The sexual exploitation of women in advertising is abundantly apparent and is used in basically every aspect of advertising today. Women are used to sell anything from men's cologne to food products. Sex sells, everyone seems to know it, and women seem to be the best way of going about. This presents a problem with gender performance for women. They see these women in television ads wearing next to nothing and of course they are stunningly beautiful and often times seductive. This is what has been presented as the copybook woman. When commercials like this Lynx Deodorant video are viewed, they describe this picture that every woman needs to look like. To take it even further, watch the scanty dressed women tear into an apartment of a girl who is depicted as a "goody-goody" type girl and is worried about ironing her clothes and her mother. The dancing women convince her to succumb to the scent of the deodorant and she vanishes into a red mist. Only to reappear transformed into another beautiful half-naked woman. It then cuts back to a bus where the same girl starts to sing and the seduce this man, all the while obnoxiously smelling him which is obviously the scent of the deodorant.

The Lynx Deodorant ad also brings up the issue of "sexual response". The woman are undoubtedly set in the position that they are a sort of prize for the man who uses this deodorant. The entire ad consists of these women resisting the scent of the man on the bus, until finally they give in, and the man who smells the best gets the girl. Women are not ignorant of this either. From personal experience, whether a man or woman, it's most rightly true to say that women know that they can be used to sell a product.

It's also important to mention the gender roles of women in this commercial. It puts this image in your head that this women doesn't need to stay at home and take care of anything. She needs to disregard what she's supposed to do and become this sexual animal. This is interesting to look at looking in the past. It was considered normal for women to stay at home, basically playing the stereotypical stay-at-home mom. Now it's definitely clear that times has changed, and advertising companies know it. They know it because it works.

The people
Awareness could be a turning point in the fight against sex in advertising. The people must become aware of the issues if they are ever going to be addressed and solved. Sex in advertising will never be toned down if more people do not take direct action. People need to band together and really fight against sex in advertisement. There are various ways everyday people can help.

Spreading awareness is the first step. People who are unaware of the issues in sex in advertisements should become informed; if they do not believe it is an issue at least they are aware of what is happening. If a huge number of people boycott products that use people as sexual attention grabbers it will make a difference. A nation-wide boycott could get immediate results, if, it was supported by enough people. Everyone can make a difference on an individual basis as well: talk to a lobbyist, write letters to your senator, or work with your local governor. The government is one of the best tools we can use to fix problems in our country. Why don’t we use it?

The government
The government alone could prevent any form of sexual exploitation in advertising. The first set of rules American advertisers had to follow was not made by the government but by the advertisers themselves. If the government made laws to regulate the advertising world the rules would not have been twisted and turned to create the corruption we have today. The AAAA decided in 1924 that they would protect public decency. This “rule” has not only been broken but also completely ignored. One might ask, “What can the government actually do?” Subsidies, laws, and political advertisements. The greatest influences on advertising, was a political ad that empowered women to be stronger, get into the workforce and help the country, the Rosie the Riveter. This ad was the turning point in American culture. Rosie the Riveter was one possible way for the government to make a difference.

The Government could pass laws making it illegal to display indecency in advertisements. This will only happen if the people join together and influence the government to take action as well. The government would have to set a standard of decency and make it enforceable over many years. Also the decency standard must be able to adapt to the changing culture of America. The next thing the government can do is a system of subsidies. They could give subsidies to production companies who don’t use sex in there advertisements. Rewarding decency with money is slightly countered intuitive but it is a step in the right direction. It’s not a perfect system but its better then what we have now.

The advertising agencies
Advertising agencies are on the front lines of change. If the people change the ad agencies will change if the government makes a change then the ad agencies will make a change. And if the ad agencies actually do change it will progress the culture of the whole country. Companies like Calvin Klein and Victoria Secret are responsible for the indecency of advertisements. They bent the rules, and decided what is moral, what is decent, and what society will tolerate. These companies will not stop making sexually exploiting ads on their own. The simple fact that sex sells will continue to drive the advertisement industry. What we need is an advertising company that is run by people with morals; who believe in decency and a better society. Wilson and West was an advertising company in the 1980s: they were mindful of the viewers, they did not want children to see anything bad, they did not want to exploit anyone to sell a product. Wilson and West ran a company that followed a few simple guidelines.


 * Identify target audiences and appropriate media more carefully in order to minimize antagonizing non-users of the products.


 * Educate employees about the relevant rules, and ascertain that agencies and media know and apply them, too.


 * Pretest ads in terms of sex-and-decency reactions, and check them in advance with the media, self-regulatory bodies and other relevant advisers.


 * Consider "demarketing" particular products and services as well as abandoning advertising approaches based on sex and other objectionable appeals - after all, some industries and companies prosper with little advertising or rely on more socially acceptable themes.

If more ad agencies followed these guidelines the nation would be a better place. But because this is never going to happen by itself the people must act. Spread the word, get involved, write to your local government leaders, and if its possible support, sponsor, or startup a small advertising agency that follows a decent standard, for the peoples sake.

*EXTRA*
Suffice to say that as long at people desire to be attractive to others, and as long as people desire romance, intimacy, and love, advertisers can show how their products help meet those needs and desires. Whether we like it or not, products play a role in society’s intimacy equation.