Portrayal of Women in Advertisements

Turn on the TV, flip through any magazine, surf the net or just eye a billboard and what do you see? Images, images and images. You might never really think about it, but have you ever noticed how women are portrayed in advertisements? Just look at the following and see what you think.

Here are some outdoor ads:
Calvin Klein
Skechers

Here are some other ads:
Puma
Gucci [1]
Gucci [2]
Beer
Perfume
SKYY Vodka

What do all these advertisements have in common? Does it look like advertisers are even trying to focus on and sell the actual product?

Women in Advertising


“We often find no representational connections in contemporary advertising. One of the common registers of print advertising is of the naked or sexually-posed woman selling a product. -cf. Lazier-Smith 1989. Furham and Bitar 1993” [1]

Sexualization of Women in Media


Mediawatch, a non-profit organization that works to improve the portrayal of girls and women in the media, did some research and found that 74% of women “are sometimes or often offended by advertising portrayals of women.” [2]

Jean Kilbourne, a social theorist, has created a few award-winning documentary films: “Killing Us Softly,” “Still Killing Us Softly" and the newest version, “Killing Us Softly III” that focus on the image of women created by advertisers. She says "Women's bodies continue to be dismembered in advertising. Over and over again just one part of the body is used to sell products, which is, of course, the most dehumanizing thing you can do to someone." She also says, "Women are constantly turned into things, into objects. And of course this has very serious consequences. For one thing it creates a climate in which there is widespread violence against women. Now I'm not at all saying that an ad. . . directly causes violence. It's not that simple, but it is part of a cultural climate in which women are seen as things, as objects, and certainly turning a human being into a thing is almost always the first step toward justifying violence against that person." [3]

Kati Fosselius, a graduate student studying nutrition brings up another issue. She says “People are unconsciously affected by media images, but the images of models do not reflect real women.”

Jamonte Cox, a student majoring in sociology, says that “he believes women are portrayed in the media respectably, and physically attractive men are often presented in the media as well.” [4]

However, preliminary research shows that throughout all magazine genres from 2004, men were modestly dressed 83.5% of the time whereas women were modestly dressed only a third of the time. This indicates that women are portrayed as sexual objects much more often than men. [5] So this brings up another issue. Are men and women being portrayed in the media as equals? Do you think that the media might be catering to one gender more than the other?

Are portrayals of women in many advertisements sexist? How or how not? What effects might constantly seeing such portrayals of women in advertisements have on people, both females and males? Can something be changed? How could this realistically be done? Does there even need to be any change?

You can also check out:
Portrayals of Women in the Media

or take a look at my

References:
[1] YouTube. Exploitation of Women in Ads. 25 Dec. 2007. 13 Mar. 2008
http://youtube.com/watch?v=WgGiB-o84sk&feature=related.

[2] Loewen, Carla M. MediaWatch Announces Worst Media Portrayals of Women. 13 Mar.
2002. 13 Mar. 2008 http://www.themanitoban.com/2001-2002/0313/news_2.shtml>.

[3]Media Education Foundation. Video Summary. 2004. 13 Mar. 2008 http://www.mediaed.org/videos/MediaGenderAndDiversity/KillingUsSoftly3/studyguide/html#SYNOPSISOVERVIEW

[4]Yasue, Nami. Depictions of Women by the Media Criticized. 24 Mar. 2004. 13 Mar. 2008
http://media.www.thespartandaily.com/media/storage/paper852/news/2004/03/24/CampusNews/Depictions.Of.Women.By.The.Media.Criticized-1498556.shtml

[5]Carpenter, Courtney., and Aimee Edison. Taking It All off Again: The Portrayal of Women in
Advertising over the Past Forty Years. 24 Feb. 2008. 13 Mar. 2008 http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/1/4/1/6/p14163_index.html

“Hey! Hey! You! You!”

Not Again! Has another artist broken copyright law? In 2007, The Rubinoos, a rock band from the 1970's accused Avril Lavigne of ripping off their song "I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend" and using parts of it in her own hit song, "Girlfriend." The question is: Was it plagiarism or not?





I say that Avril Lavigne's song "Girlfriend" is definitely not 100% her own. She may have been right when she said that she “had never heard this song in my [her] life” when talking about the Rubinoos' "I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend" because it came out 5 years before she was even born. However, whether it be consciously or subconsciously and whether it be from The Rubinoos' song "I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend," Lush's "I Wanna Be Your Girlfriend” (a remake of The Rubinoos song) or any other song out there that's very similar to these (because people keep finding songs that are), Avril Lavigne and/or Luke (Avril's songwriting partner) had to have gotten inspiration from somewhere. Why? Well, Avril Lavigne's "Girlfriend " and The Rubinoos' "I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend" are way too similar; too similar to be considered a coincidence. Alright, maybe the lyrics, "Hey! Hey! You! You!" can't be considered to have been plagiarized because not only are they "common and widely used lyrics," but those words aren't more than 30 sec. of the song either (30 sec. is less than 10% of the song). The tempo is also a little different; Avril's song is faster. However, the clapping sound in the background and the instruments are quite similar. Most of all, the rhythm through more than 30 sec. of both songs is identical! Entertainment lawyer Dave Steinberg says that "copyright infringement is really about the melody and or the lyrics." That means that Avril's song breaks copyright law. Take a listen.



Despite all the negativity on Avril's side, if The Rubinoos thought that they had a strong enough case against Avril and really felt strongly about their song being copied, they would not have ended up exonerating her. At first Dunbar said that "the lyrics, the meter, the rhythm they're identical." Later, Dunbar and Gangwer stated, "We are satisfied that any similarities between the two songs resulted from Avril and Luke's use of certain common and widely used lyrics." In the 2nd statement, The Rubinoos don't even mention the fact that the rhythm is still the same! So it seems that The Rubinoos' goal wasn't to get Avril to pay for plagiarizing, but something else. Maybe they thought that this was a great way to get some publicity. However, even if The Rubinoos have exonerated Avril, the case was settled out of court, so this doesn't mean that Avril didn't really plagiarize.

Even if she is, this won't be the first time an artist has plagiarized, but denied it. In 1976, former Beatle, George Harrison, was accused of breaking copyright law on his song 'My Sweet Lord.' It was said that he plagirized 'He's So Fine' performed by the Chiffons. However, he denied it. Later, he was charged with subappropraiation (unconsciously infringing copyright law). So, just because someone says that they didn't break copyright law, but their song sounds like they did, we shouldn't automatically think that they're lying. For all we know, Avril Lavign's case could also be one of supappropriation.

If Avril was to have used the material knowingly, she would've had to ask permission and pay a certain amount to the owner's of the song in order to avoid copyright infringement.

Basically, I think that Avril Lavigne is guilty of plagiarism, but I have a feeling that The Rubinoos' intentions of accusing Avril of plagiarizing weren't so right either. In the end, I don't think that this plagiarism claim will affect Avril Lavigne's career much. However, people continue to listen to her music and she's still a big popstar. Despite that, allegations of Avril's plagiarism may affect peoples' opinion about her personally because it doesn't really matter whether she is guilty or not; since the rumour about Avril plagiarism is out, many people are going to look at her now as someone who plagiarizes.

Sympatico MSN. Songwriters Who Accused Lavigne of Ripping off Song Now Say She's
'exonerated'. 15 Jan. 2008. <http://music.sympatico.msn.ca/Bell.Sympatico.CMS/Print.aspx? type=feed&lang....>.

CTV.ca. Lavigne Lawsuit Has Limited Chances: Lawyer. 5 July 2007.

CTV.ca. Avril Lavigne Hit with Lawsuit over 'Girlfriend'. 4 July 2007.

ABC News. Avril Lavigne Denies Plagiarism Claim.

BBC News. Madonna in Plagiarism Case Defeat. 18 Nov. 2005. 8 Mar. 2008. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/4449580.stm.

Unknown artist. “Avril Lavigne's Song Girlfriend.” No date. Online image. Avril Lavigne-Girlfriend Worldwide Single. 15 June 2008.

Unknown artist. “The Rubinoos' Back to the Drawing Board.” No date. Online image. vox. 15 June 2008.