hot coffee girl

I really don't think it's fair to place the blame solely on the suits on Madison (and I'm not just saying this because my mom's a marketing exec) and it really can't just be magazines and tv, because tons of people watch/read/consume both of these avariciously and turn out relatively ok, so I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say that it really must start at home (because that's the only constant I can think of at this early hour.

And then from there its spreads to the peer groups of the children directly affected and voila, because I've always said that my friends have had just as much, if not more, of an impact than my parents have.

p.s. I hate dove ads with a burning passion (emotional blackmail, what?)

I have always said a persons physical beauty is all lighting and camera angles, and now computers. Just look at the people on places like Hot or Not?

I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of the Hots, have the benefit of technology. Very few people are truely, naturally beautiful on a model level. In real life is someone is that pretty in the face, they usually have the ass of elephant.

Who do I blame for this? The people that ad is geared to. They are buying the product based on the ad. If that advertizing didn't sell product, the suits wouldn't use it. You can't blame men, most men don't care about make-up hair nails...etc... we just want to get laid on a regular basis.

But she looks nothing like Elizabeth Hurley... how can she be the "ideal woman?" :-)

While I am loathe to admit it, I have to agree with Timmy.

Every culture has had their own idea of what makes someone beautiful. However, until the last several years there simply wasn't the means to show that ideal so visually.

Take the line from Marlowe: "Is this the face that launched a thousand ships?" Great line, by every standard. But it allows for each reader to envision his or her own ideal of such a face. Even such hallmarks of beauty such as the Venus de Milo and the Mona Lisa are, while visual, merely representations of physical beauty.

It's wasn't until photography came along that more 'true' representations of physical beauty were possible, allowing us to forget the difference between reality and representation. And then the technology advanced steadily, allowing those images to be manipulated to show something other than what the camera lens captured.

I don't think this is a bad thing altogether, but leave it to American marketing to turn such a wonderful art to nefarious means.

But I don't think that technology is entirely to blame. I think the fault lies in each of us who forgets that a picture is not reality but merely a representation of it, and that we have the right and responsibilty to question everything we see and everything we are asked to think.

This commercial is so disturbing.

Oi oi. I think I disagree. The point Dove are trying to make is that all the 'beautiful' images we see have been retouched/digitally enhanced to death. That models are subject to the attentions of a million stylists, hair and makeup artists, and great photographers. And that women (from early childhood) should be aware of this fact; should adjust their expectations of themselves; should be less hard on themselves; should not aspire to an image that isn't real.

What this is is bad advertising. Why do I think this? You all seem so angry. The point they are trying to make - don't have unreasonable expectations of yourself, because what you see in advertising and magazines every day is not real (and you too are beautiful, as a kind of back-hander) - is a good one. The execution of it is perhaps clumsy.

I genuinely don't see how it's disturbing. And that's why I think it's bad advertising: if you have a good idea, you have to communicate it well. In this instance, they haven't communicated it well.

The real question is whether or not it is cynical for a brand to campaign on this platform. There are a load of ways of looking at it:

1. That they are exploiting an insight about womens' insecurities, and selling products off the back of it.

2. That they have taken an insight about womens' insecurities and brought it to light in an attempt to be seen as a benevolent brand (same idea, but slightly differently expressed).

3. That they mean well.

I suspect it's a combination of (1) and (3). If you work in advertising or marketing, you can sometimes mean to do good, even though your view of the world is myopic.

In the UK, the campaign idea is similar but executed in a more celebratory way. It uses women of all shapes and sizes; they are all shown to be themselves; they are all beautiful in their own way. It is perhaps a bit more subtle. It cheers me up. It makes me smile. It doesn't make me buy Dove. And that, perhaps, is the point: we can rant and rave about advertising, and magazines, and the images we have projected at us all day and night, but ultimately most of us are sentient beings who can make a choice. And most importantly of all, we are all astonishingly marketing-literate.

Oh, and before anyone asks: 12 years in advertising, and 2 in marketing, and probably still in marketing if I get another job.

Timmy-

You know goddamn well that this photo is not touched up.

http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=RZBQR8&key=ABE

And that there is no elephant ass trailing along behind me.

-Hot Coffee

HCG, that's you?

I would have voted a 10, but you're wearing clothes.

And I have no problem with advertisers and the media making normal attractive women into impossible goddesses. Gives me something other than donkeys to masturbate to.

Yup. And that's the scary big cat.

My hair is shorter now, though, as you can see from the 'toon.

I guess if we were to see the actual models of a Picasso, his paintings wouldn't match reality either; D

I am always amazed when people realize that most people in the media look different in reallife. It's all smoke and mirrors.

Tell your daughter she is beautiful as she is growing up and these images have have little or no effect on her.

Ah now you see we got this one over here and thought it was a bit cheesy. I'll see if I can find some UK stuff.

Sigh.

My point wasn't about you, however, if you want to look at that picture. Let's take a hard look. You look beautiful in the picture. You are a beautiful girl. This picture though does not reveal you. It is an image of you the way you want to appear to the world. Thus the photographer used photographic tools to create this pose. You are sitting sideways, you head is tilted, you are holding a prop and you are wearing black.

I know you don't have an elephant ass, but can the average viewer discern that?

This picture may not be made up with a computer, however, was this picture not taken to put your best foot forward? Why wouldn't a make-up company want to do that, too?

WTF Timmy?

> I would have voted a 10, but you're wearing clothes.

Indeed, as would I. You look very nice with long hair HCG, and the cat adds a level of sophistication and pizzazz I could never hope to achieve.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, or not, Phil. Either way, you threw in a "WTF, Timmy" so you're okay.

And Avi-trust that I look better with my clothes on. That's a whole other commercial.

Hey HCG. I agree, You're beautiful.

Why don't we all get together and agree that ugly is OK? In fact, cool.

Jenn-Glad you're back. I missed you beautifully.