We throw around phrases like: “It’s what’s on the inside that counts,” and “beauty is only skin deep,” and yet advertisements in virtually all magazines, television, and billboards use “beauty” as the most defining tool to sell. Whether marketing clothing, perfume, makeup, or cell phones: advertisers use the culturally accepted “attractive” to interest consumers in products—women with thin physiques and sex appeal. Because mainstream advertising often uses extreme or even distorted images of beauty, girls today are facing the negative effects of trying to imitate an impossible appearance (Dove Campaign for Real Beauty).
Though attempts in the past have been made in order to “change the face of beauty” in advertising, none have been so far reaching with such high-set goals as the recent Dove Campaign for Real Beauty. Created by Ogilvy & Mather and Edelman Public Relations Worldwide, the campaign aims to celebrate the natural beauty of all females, hoping to help young girls and women in their struggle for higher self-esteem (Dove Campaign for Real Beauty). According to Dove’s website, the campaign “was developed to help free the next generation from self-limiting beauty stereotypes. Committed to reaching five million young women by the end of 2010, the Dove Self-Esteem Fund invites [people] to play a role in supporting and promoting a wider definition of beauty.” Dove focuses on three main audiences: “Moms and Mentors” and the young girls themselves (Dove Campaign for Real Beauty). The campaign hopes to reach girls through many forms of media, including: television commercials, websites, and billboards.
Most the hype so far has been for the videos circulating on the internet—the most prominent depict the attack of beauty-related advertising on young girls today and the corresponding negative effects on girls. The video entitled “Onslaught” begins with a charmingly innocent redhead of about seven years of age, smiling into the camera. The background music with lyrics: “here it comes,” foreshadows, in an almost frightening manner, what is to come in the video. Suddenly, a rapid bombardment of advertisements revealing scandalously clad, skinny women rocket toward the camera, causing audiences to feel the pressure advertisements place on girls today. Included in the images, themes of weight loss, plastic surgery, and various beauty products stand out along with the spoken words: “younger, smaller, lighter, fuller, tighter, thinner, softer.” The video clip ends with a call to mothers: “Talk to your daughter before the beauty industry does.”
“Onslaught” is successful in showing the stereotypical portrayal of women in advertising today; however, the video is no real catalyst for change. Exposing the negative messages in the advertising industry is only a small part in the battle against girls’ low self-esteem. Understanding the extreme nature of beauty advertisements is unfortunately not enough to truly “free girls from self-limiting stereotypes” (Dove Campaign for Real Beauty), especially when the girls receive conflicting information from the very company that vows to help.
Though a plug for the campaign’s website directs mothers toward information describing ways to prevent girls from being overwhelmed by the high demands of the beauty industry, the information provided is not enough to truly work towards solving the problem. Even after a girl gains an understanding of the tools used by advertisements, she can potentially still be influenced by the beauty stereotypes portrayed elsewhere, a fact ignored by the video. According to Susie Orbach, one of the “experts” cited on the campaign’s website, girls can grow up feeling inadequate if they don't fit in with the images of beauty projected in advertising (Interactive Self-Esteem Builders). “They can feel they need to change themselves, to diet away their natural shape, exercise compulsively and have cosmetic surgery to feel acceptable…Often they do not see themselves as attractive because their uniqueness has not been reflected back to them. What they see in their mirror is someone who is unlike the models” (Interactive Self-Esteem Builders). As the campaign focuses on “the models” and advertising’s portrayal of specific criteria for beauty—revealing only such causes for low self-esteem of girls in “Onslaught”—it neglects to admit the other sources of a girl’s sense of beauty.
The world’s interpretation of “beauty” has been ingrained in people’s minds since before advertising was even an industry. Scientific research suggests certain physical qualities of women are biologically more attractive based on an indication of good genes (“What Makes You Fancy Someone?”). Symmetry of a woman’s face is an example: “Numerous studies in humans have shown that men in particular go for women with symmetrical faces.” Because wide hips are seen as an indication of a woman’s reproductive health, a strong waist-to-hip ratio is attractive to most men as well (“What Makes You Fancy Someone?”).
In addition to feeling pressure to conform to the universally recognized traits of attraction, some girls will meet low self-esteem and body image from even other sources, including being more genetically prone to eating disorders (an extreme effect of low body image) and the influence of siblings or peers who diet excessively (“Causes of Eating Disorders”). Because the sense of beauty and attractiveness reaches girls from many aspects of life, and is not simply placed there by the beauty industry, a simple video is not likely to create major change, no matter how positive the message is. The pressure to be beautiful simply reaches too deep.
Failing to recognize alternative sources of low self-esteem in girls is not the only unsuccessful area in the campaign. Though the campaign seems to be working from a sincere desire to help young girls, hypocrisy is extremely evident. Critics of the campaign have pointed out a serious contradiction: the executive ties between Dove and companies like Axe and Slim-Fast (Group Accuses Unilever of Ad Hypocrisy). All owned by Unilever, the companies exhibit shockingly contrasting ideals. While Dove works to promote a broader image of beauty in advertising, Axe commercials exhibit some of the most extreme uses of sexuality and stereotypical beauty in advertising. "The campaign says they're going to help girls to resist a toxic marketing environment but they're creating that environment as well," says Susan Linn, a director and an instructor in psychiatry at Harvard Medical School (Group Accuses Unilever of Ad Hypocrisy). Though Unilever spokeswoman Anita Larson said the Axe ads were “clearly spoofs,” the imagery portrayed is still responsible for shaping the views of young girls (Group Accuses Unilever of Ad Hypocrisy). And Slim-Fast, promoting the necessity of staying thin, can reinforce the need for girls to have skinny figures in order to be happy and attractive—not exactly a broad definition of beauty. Take one look at the homepage of the Slim-Fast website, and a clear target audience stands out: of the nine smiling adults presented as happy users of the product, only two are male. The advertisements of Axe or Slim-Fast could have easily been slipped in among the extreme examples presented in “Onslaught,” a fact that leaves the potential success of the campaign highly questionable.
Hypocrisy is even evident within the company Dove itself. While the campaign is working to show women beauty outside of the stereotypes, Dove is clearly using beauty to sell products. “Change your hair and change the way you feel about it, too. With Dove shampoos, conditioners and treatments…you are five days from beautiful hair,” states an advertisement on the Dove website (“Dove”). Advertising the ability or even need for girls to “change” the way they look is completely contradictory to the ideals of Dove’s campaign. And while the video “Onslaught” attacks the use of such words as “softer” and “smoother” in advertising, both words are used to market Dove Ultimate Clear deodorant (“Dove”). Dove also sells contradicting products including self-tanners and anti-age creams. If Dove truly believed in a broader image of beauty, products making women look younger and tanner would not be necessary. Because of the evident contradictions within the campaign and Dove as a whole, the message of “Onslaught” is undermined to the point of uselessness.
Despite what seem like sincere attempts, the campaign propelled by videos like “Onslaught,” will not succeed in freeing the next generation of girls from the current extreme beauty stereotypes. Armed only with bits of unclear advice like: “Talk to your children about self-esteem, body image, and what it means to be beautiful (Interactive Self-Esteem Builders),” mothers will still have trouble raising self-esteem in struggling daughters. And as this is a problem that will continue to hurt young girls into the future, something more needs to be done.
Works Cited
Campaign for Real Beauty. 2007. Dove. 20 Oct. 2007
<http://www.campaignforrealbeauty.com/ inside_campaign.asp>.
"Causes of Eating Disorders." Eating Disorders. 2006. 24 Oct. 2007 <http://www.eatingdisorders helpguide.com/causes.html>.
Dove. 2007. Unilever. 22 Oct. 2007 <www.dove.us>.
"Interactive Self-Esteem Builders." Campaign for Real Beauty. 2007. Dove. 20 Oct. 2007 <http://www.campaignforrealbeauty.com/home.asp>.
Semuels, Alana. "Group Accuses Unilever of Ad Hypocrisy." Las Angeles Times 10 Oct. 2007. 20 Oct. 2007 <http://www.latimes.com/business/custom/admark/la-fi-unilever10oct10, 1,373981.story?coll=la-headlines-business-advert>.
"What Makes You Fancy Someone?" Science and Nature: Hot Topics. 18 Nov. 2004. BBC. 14 Oct. 2007 <http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopics/love/attraction.shtml>.