The Power of Media
In
the last decade, messages have been spreading more rapidly than ever through
one of the biggest outlets of our generation: social media. Sharing thoughts
and images on networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram has
allowed the public to have a voice and start powerful movements. It has also
become a means to challenge issues in society that have otherwise been ignored.
As a result, many people have taken to social media to express their concerns
about the representation of body image and how we should think about women’s’
bodies. You may have noticed when Lane Bryant made headlines for their
#ImNoAngel campaign, which not-so-subtly challenged another campaign by leading
lingerie brand Victoria’s Secret. In this post, I will talk about the
Victoria’s Secret campaign that landed them in hot water, Lane Bryant’s
indirect attack on this campaign, and how the public responded to #ImNoAngel.
Victoria's Secret's 'Sexy'
Victoria’s Secret is probably one of the
world’s most well-known lingerie brands, and subsequently it has millions and
millions of followers. Women of all sizes are exposed to the images of models
clad in lingerie as they pass by the Victoria’s Secret stores, flip through magazine
ads, or watch television commercials. With all of these models plastered
everywhere in the media, there lies one huge problem. All of these models look
almost exactly the same (body wise). Such advertisements are exclusive of women
of all shapes and sizes, and everyone knows that Victoria’s Secret is supposed
to encompass what is ‘sexy.’ After all, that’s what their brand is all about.
So, what makes a size 2 or size 4 model the definition of ‘sexy’ and what about
women who are size 6 and beyond?
When it comes to the public’s view of
the Victoria’s Secret image, many people have taken to social media to express
their opinions. In a study conducted by Joan Chrisler, Twitter users’ reactions
to the 2011 Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show were measured based on the social
comparison theory of body satisfaction. The study discovered that the fashion
show spurred a wide range of reactions. Some users called for more body
positivity, a number of users degraded themselves after seeing the likeness of
the models, and others bashed the models for their smaller figures (Chrisler,
2013). Looking at the way in which
Twitter users reacted, one would think that Victoria’s Secret would be more
welcoming of all body types on the runway and in catalog spreads. But seeing as
the models continue to look the same and the brand released an extremely
controversial campaign in 2014, not much as changed.
"The Perfect 'Body'"
In October 2014, Victoria’s Secret
announced their latest bra campaign with the tagline “The Perfect ‘Body,’”
which they intended to be a play on their popular ‘Body’ line of bras. Take a
look at their chosen photo for the campaign. What do you notice?
 |
| (Neon Tommy) |
Yes, a lineup of slim models
associated with the words ‘perfect body.’ Despite Victoria’s Secret’s attempt
to attract attention to their line of bras, all of the attention was only on
the models (Ciambriello, 2014). Since we are living in the digital age, this
did not stop people from reacting on social media. Portraying an unrealistic
body image in the media has become a hot topic in recent years, so people will
keep talking until their voices are heard. Judging by the success of a petition
on Change.org, their voices were definitely heard. In a U.K. petition, 33,001
supporters asked Victoria’s Secret to “Apologise for, and amend the
irresponsible marketing of your new bra range 'Body.'” Although Victoria’s
Secret did not issue a direct apology, they quietly changed the ad to read “A
Body for Every Body.” It looks like they may have gotten the message?
 |
| (ABC News) |
Is Victoria's Secret's 'Sexy' Different from Lane Bryant's?
Regardless
of the turnout of the Victoria’s Secret situation, the brand has always been
allowed to publicize their campaigns through various forms of media. Yes, they
are criticized for their unrealistic representations of body image, but they
still prevail and continue with the same models and sexy campaigns. If
Victoria’s Secret can flaunt their bodies on television, shouldn’t other brands
be allowed to as well? In April 2010, Lane Bryant released a memorandum from
ABC, which confirmed that the network rejected their Cacique ad from a number
of programs including Dancing With the Stars. A spokesperson for Lane Bryant
explained that the brand was not treated the same as brands who were
advertising the same product. Victoria’s Secret ads were played during Dancing
With the Stars before the Lane Bryant ads were rejected, so there is no reason
for Lane Bryant to be denied (Lane Bryant, 2010). The only difference between
these ads was the size of the models on screen, so ABC definitely had some
explaining to do. They eventually played the Lane Bryant commercial in the last
bit of the show, but there definitely should not have been any back-and-forth
in the first place.
If
Lane Bryant had to fight for their ad to be broadcast on television, what does
that say about Victoria’s Secret campaigns? That Victoria’s Secret ‘sexy’ is
more acceptable than Lane Bryant’s ‘sexy?’ Even though Victoria’s Secret came
under fire for a few of their campaigns, the lack of diversity when it comes to
the models’ bodies remains. In April 2015, Lane Bryant took a jab at the
Victoria’s Secret brand when they released their #ImNoAngel campaign. In the Youtube video below, famous ‘plus-size’ model Ashley Graham stands alongside other fuller
figured models as they redefine ‘sexy’ and emphasize they are not all the same.
As the ad comes to a close, the models say “I’m no angel” in unison to illustrate
that Victoria’s Secret models are not the only ones who define ‘sexy.’
#ImNoAngel
#ImNoAngel
garnered much attention all over Twitter, and users felt that they could relate
to these models better than Victoria’s Secret models. As the ad illustrates,
sexiness is not limited to a specific body type. In the same fashion as
Victoria’s Secret ads, #ImNoAngel can be found on your television screens,
magazine spreads, billboards, and even public transportation. Consumers can now
find t-shirts with the tagline on Lane Bryant’s website. When women see these
examples of body positivity, they feel more confident in their skin and
celebrate their size by posting pictures of themselves along with the
hashtag.
Now, with all of the support that
#ImNoAngel received, there are still critics who believe that the Lane Bryant
campaign is practicing exclusivity much like Victoria’s Secret. On the website
xoJane, a woman named Amanda Richards published a piece that explained her take
on the Lane Bryan campaign. She states, “I don't think it's particularly
healthy or progressive to pit fat bodies against thin bodies.” Richards
acknowledges that Lane Bryant is trying to show that women with fuller figures
are just as sexy as women with slimmer figures, but she feels as if the
campaign is also attacking the thinner models by saying that being a Victoria’s
Secret ‘Angel’ is a bad thing. She also illustrates that the models in the
ImNoAngel campaign are not necessarily representative of all ‘plus-size’
models. Even though Lane Bryant’s products are made for a wide range of
plus-sizes, most of the models in the campaign appear to be a size 12 or 14. As
Richards would argue, there is not very much diversity after all. As a way to show her vision of diversity, Richards posted a few photos of her own.
 |
| (Amanda Richards via xoJane) |
Whether or not bashing thinner models
was Lane Bryant’s intent, people have taken to social media to decide for
themselves. It seems as though the majority of people are embracing the
campaign as a chance to show how women of all sizes are beautiful, contrary to
the ideas perpetuated through ads from brands such as Victoria’s Secret.
Personally, I love to see that women with fuller figures are receiving more
attention and reshaping how the public views ‘sexy.’ At the end of the day, all
women (thinner or curvier) are beautiful in their own way.
References
Brown, G. (n.d.).
Victoria's Secret Changes Controversial 'Perfect Body' Slogan. Retrieved May 6, 2015, from http://abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/victorias-secret-controversial-perfect-body-slogan/story?id=26735138
Chrisler, J., Fung,
K., Lopez, A., & Gorman, J. (2013). Suffering by comparison: Twitter users’ reactions to the Victoria’s Secret
Fashion Show. Body Image, 10(4).
Retrieved May 3, 2015, from http://ac.els-cdn.com.libproxy.usc.edu/S1740144513000594/1-s2.0- 00000aacb361&acdnat=1430888481_904813e8449a1ae8181a21b09d7ac3ec
Ciambriello, R.
(2014, October 30). Real Beauty? Nah, Victoria's Secret Would Rather Celebrate the 'Perfect Body' Retrieved May 6,
2015, from http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/real-beauty-nah-victorias-secret-would-rather-celebrate-perfect-body-161114
#ImNoAngel - Cacique.
(n.d.). Retrieved May 6, 2015, from http://www.lanebryant.com/content.jsp?pageName=redefine-sexy
Lane Bryant: ABC Memo
Confirms ABC Rejected Lane Bryant Ad. (2010). Leisure
and Travel Week. Retrieved May 4, 2015, from http://zb5lh7ed7a.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.882004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF- 8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi /fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Lane
Bryant: ABC Memo Confirms ABC
Reje
Richards, A. (2015,
April 9). #ImNoAngel, And I'm Not A Model Either, But I Did Strip Down and Take Pictures of Myself. Retrieved May
6, 2015, from
http://www.xojane.com/issues/imnoangel-lane-bryant
Victoria's Secret
'Perfect Body' Ad Not So Perfect? (n.d.). Retrieved May 6, 2015, from http://www.neontommy.com/news/2014/11/victorias-secret-perfect-body-ad-not-so-perfect
Victorias Secret:
Apologise for your damaging Perfect Body campaign #iamperfect. (n.d.). Retrieved May 6, 2015, from https://www.change.org/p/victoriassecret-apologise-for-your-damaging-perfect-body-campaign-iamperfect
No comments:
Post a Comment