This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
It is everywhere; in our homes, on our clothes, and even in our high school classrooms where companies exchange much needed media resources as televisions, computers, and media players for a young captive audience. Arthur Asa Berger (2000) claims that the $200 billion a year advertising industry exposes every American to nearly 15,000 images per day, yet advertising is so deeply embedded in our culture that it often goes unnoticed (p. 1, 81). The multitude of commercials that Americans are exposed to on a daily basis marginalizes minority groups by reinforcing traditional cultural standards through covert acts of heterosexism, racism, sexism, and classism. The purpose of this research project is to expose marginalizing advertising “behavior” through a content review and analysis of images in advertising in popular U.S. magazines. Methodology Marginalization in advertising, as a topic, is a broad area of research; therefore, the focus of this research project is on racism that occurs in the advertising of popular magazines with reference to African-American woman. The majority of the magazines included in this content analysis research are in the top twenty lists for magazine sales in America, including the two number one selling women’s and men’s magazines: Cosmopolitan and Maxim (Allyoucanread.com, 2004). The magazines reviewed are nearly all “individual” oriented (rather than niche magazines which feature cars, homes, or photography) and are geared toward “self promotion.” The process of gathering the data for this research includes indicating the title, date, and/or issue of each magazine, the number of pages, as well as counting each specific instance when a minority person is visible in any image in the magazine. In images containing more than
one person, a description of the image along with any racial indicators is recorded, as is the specific placement of the people in the images. It should be noted that in individual oriented magazines the default image is a Caucasian person: each page has at least one image of a Caucasian person. In the event that the magazine is a special interest or non individual oriented magazine, like Better Homes and Gardens, the same methodology is used, but every person appearing in the magazine is tallied to obtain proportional data. Table 1 indicates the statistical data gathered in this research; the eighty-two magazines reviewed for this project are all issues from the following magazines: Allure, American Baby, Baby Talk, Better Homes & Gardens, Cosmopolitan, Family Circle, Family Fun, Glamour, Good Housekeeping, Health, Ladies Home Journal, Marie Claire, Martha Stewart Living, Maxim, Mind Body Spirit Fitness, More, Parents, People, Runner’s World, Self, Shape, Stuff, Sunset, Teen Magazine, Teen People, Vibe, and Working Mother. This research is in its infancy and in the interest of saving time at this point the numbers in the table indicate the number of pages with any occurrences of African Americans versus the number of pages containing images of people of Caucasian ethnicity. At this time the data table does not reflect the total number of people per image, nor does the data indicate if there is more than one image per page (although in the future this is the preferred methodology). The quantitative data results from the content analysis are that African American women are only six percent of the more than fifteen thousand total pages reviewed; African American men are just 2% of all images reviewed for this project and African American children of both genders are 1% of all images reviewed. During the course of this research deliberate patterns in advertising became apparent. The ways in which African American women are marginalized in print media are numerous and
are analyzed according to the following categories: animalization, exoticism, literal marginalization (or tokenism), and stereotyping. Some other less apparent methods of marginalizing minority women include manipulation of skin color, the straightening of hair, and specifically placed marginalizing, hurtful, or stereotypical text. An Historical Overview of Racism and Advertising Racism is practiced in advertising today just as it was hundreds of years ago, though, the marginalization that occurs within the print ads of today is much more covert. Early advertising was more textually based and included racist remarks as “WHEN NATURE IS NIGGARDLY” within the headlines, like this 1922 rouge ad that appeared in the New York Times (Ad Access, 1999). Advertising today is image based, (See Figures B, B-2, C, and C-2 for a juxtaposition of a text based ad versus an image based ad). The racism within advertising is no longer textually based in its presentation—words like “niggardly” are a thing of the past—but it is still present in a more covert manner: through imagery. Advertising often goes unnoticed and is taken for granted because it is literally everywhere. Messages within the text and images of advertising are easily recognized and also go unnoted, though it was not always this way: the advertising literate consumer of today was created through a long process that began in conjunction with the rise of the capitalist culture. Nearly 600 years ago the idea that consumption is the path to happiness began tenure in some of the world's largest and most powerful nations, including in the United States (Robbins, p. ix). Evolving from this concept a new culture thriving on profit began to emerge: a capitalist culture. In the 1920s, the invention of mass production in America forever changed the labor market and with it the consumer culture (Ewen, 1999, p. 209). Prior to mass production, goods and services were usually offered solely to the upper and middle class—a relatively small portion
of the United States—but mass production created with it a demand to “increase potential consumers of its goods” (Ewen, 1999, p. 208). Advertising became the mechanism used to draw consumers to products, which increased consumption, thereby generating more profit for businesses. Stuart Ewen (1999) argues, “Modern advertising must be seen as a direct response to the needs of mass industrial capitalism” (p. 209). In the early industrial era of the United States, consuming was parallel to “civilizing”; Ewen (1999) argues consumption was equated with freedom and “’civilization’ was the expanded cultural world which flowed from capitalism” (Ewen, 1999, p. 209). Being a civilized society was now equated with mass production, argues Ewen (1999), and advertising reflected this new standard by promoting products that would inevitably transform “any” person into a success through any one of the many products available on the new mass market (p. 214). Although, the industrial revolution and the rise of capitalism carried with it a sense of hope and newfound beginnings for many, the gap between those with purchasing power and those without only grew wider. Ewen (1999) indicates the financial growth of corporations from 1922-1929 increased by 286 percent, while the average manufacturer wage increase was only around fourteen percent (p. 209). Therefore, the socio-economic gap that existed before the advent of mass production remained and in some cases grew wider. Consumption, however, was still thought to be the key to advancement and the purpose of advertising was to convince consumers of the inevitability of social advancement through products (and to develop brand recognition). Advertising needed to both create and control consumers to keep the cycle of supply and demand running forward in a healthy state of progress. Ewen (1999) claims advertising became homogenous in that it developed “universal notions of what makes people respond” while
simultaneously appealing to “human instinct”; Walter Dill Scott, a 1911 psychologist, argued there is a strong human instinct for “social prestige,” “beauty,” “acquisition,” “self adornment,” and “play,” and advertising nurtured these desires, calling for progress, which ultimately bolstered the effectiveness of mass production (1999, pgs. 210, 211). Therefore, the twentieth century brought with it a rise in consumerism and a new "philosophy of life" that has "emphasized the 'standard of living' above all other values" (Robbins quotes Strauss, p. 4). Once the advertising industry figured out how to tap into “human instinct” it began to capitalize on those ideals Advertising offered solutions to any of the many ills of society and represented the ideal way of life: happy, healthy, wealthy, and better off if only one purchased product X to fix problem Y. In this era advertising did not use real people to sell products, it used “representations of ‘real’ people . . . who [stood for] reigning social values such as family structure, status differentiation, and hierarchical authority” (Jhally, 1996, p. 224). According to Jhally (1996), the early advertising industry had to train consumers to “read” commercial messages by providing text with images; after WWII the images became more cryptic in that text appeared as a “’key’ to the visual puzzle;” in the twenty-first century, Jhally claims, advertising is ubiquitous (p. 224). Figure A is an example of an early textually based beauty ad from 1922, which appeared in the New York Times (Ad Access, 1999). Figures B and C also exemplify early textual ads. For comparison, and to illustrate the culture change within advertising, the text based ads have been juxtaposed with modern day imagery based ads marked Figures B-2 and C2.
FIGURE A The purpose of advertising, according to Jhally (1996), is to promote economic growth: the goal of “economic growth (on which the commodity vision is based) is an unquestioned and sacred proposition of the political [and capitalistic] culture” (p. 226). Advertising promises happiness—or rather it sells happiness—thus, according to Jhally (1996), to successfully analyze advertising, happiness must be defined (p. 225). In advertising, happiness is mostly associated
with feelings of well being, a happy family life, and good friends. Jhally (1999) argues, these are all desires that are “weakly related” to commodities (original emphasis p. 225). The ad industry of the past had to find a way to guide satisfaction toward the marketplace, just as it does today, so it “draws upon” and “rechannels concerns that the target audience (and the culture) already shares” (Jhally, 1996, p. 225). Advertising, therefore, conveys images of what “the good life” is and offers products in connection with those feelings. In advertising the good life is defined by what is culturally expected and easily recognizable. For example, men and women are displayed in images as they would ideally behave and not how they actually behave. These displays have become easily recognizable and are now defined as what is “right.” Gender displays are prominent in this image based capitalistic system because they are easily recognizable; for example, women—captives of the domestic sphere—take care of the household and men—pioneers of the public sphere—work1. Jhally (1996) argues these images are aimed at the “center” of who we are through our understanding of ourselves as gendered people, either male or female, and there is no better way to sell commodities than to appeal to the “core of individual identity” (p. 227). Figure B (see next page) is an example of a gendered advertisement from 1945, which appeared in Good Housekeeping Magazine (Ad Access, 1999). By this time consumers needed less text to explain the products sold in the ads. The ad in Figure B uses the enlarged tagline “I won’t let housework tie me down!” to draw the female consumer’s attention and to promote the new Greyhound bus system, which made “Quickie Vacations” a possibility for “millions of
The author acknowledges that ideals are constantly changing and the gender lines of today are blurred: this argument is to be applied to the early nineteenth century where gender roles were strictly enforced by written and unwritten law.
women.” Millions of women are consolidated into one image represented by a wealthy looking, healthy, Caucasian woman.
FIGURE B, Good Housekeeping, 1947 (a text based ad)
FIGURE B-2, Baby Talk, November 2004 (an image based ad)
FIGURE C, Life Magazine, 1921 (a text based ad).
FIGURE C-2, American Baby, Nov. 2004 (an image based ad).
Jhally (1999) argued that advertising images appeal to the “core” of individualism, and claims that gendered images are an easy way for advertisers to draw on that core identity (p. 227). Figure C, an image from a 1921 Life Magazine, is exemplary of an easily recognizable gendered accessory for men: a shaver blade (Ad Access, 1999). The text accompanying the image of the Colgate shaver indicates shaving is the “waking thought of a million men,” whom are represented in the imagery of “millions” of Caucasoid men. The ads represented by figures A, B, and C all exemplify what Jhally claims is the “illusory world of appearances [where] surface has triumphed over substance” (p. 229). Interestingly, the ads in Figures A, B, and C are meant to represent all races and all of the millions of people of the U.S. (as indicated within the text of the ads), but is this really the case? Print advertising began in the late 1800s with representations of cultural ideals; products were paired with humanoid figures that reflected the social norm and promised acceptance. In this way advertising also set the stage for what would become socially acceptable and desirable in mass quantities: wealth, beauty, and light skin. Certainly advertising has a large impact on consumers—in that it promotes a certain homogeneous standard—however, advertising also has massive marginalizing effects on the culture at large, because “minorities” are virtually nonexistent in mainstream print ads throughout the ages. The culture of capitalism and the rise of advertising occurred in conjunction with slavery and racial segregation. In the late 1800s and early 1900s—when mass production was making its debut—African Americans were not yet allowed in labor unions and were being lynched by the hundreds each year (The Library of Congress, 1998). With the advent of mass production and the rise of the capitalist culture, people of the U.S. were separated into a three tiered system; they become the capitalist, the consumer, or the laborer. Paradoxically, the three components of
capitalism depend upon each other for survival, though they are often pitted against each other— due to poor working conditions, insufficient pay, or by repression of rights—which in turn causes friction and an even wider socio-economic gap between the three components. African Americans were still enslaved during the early rise of mass production and capitalism; even after the 1866 Civil Rights Act was ratified—which abolished slavery and ensured blacks the same rights as whites—lynching was practiced regularly and segregation was in effect (Becker, 1999). Race riots occurred with more frequency and became more violent during the early nineteenth century; newspapers of 1919 regularly boasted headlines reading, “13 SUSPECTS ARRESTED IN NEGRO HUNT; POSSES KEEP UP HUNT FOR NEGRO; HUNT COLORED ASSAILANT; [or] NEGRO FIEND SOUGHT ANEW” (Becker, 1999). Ethnic minorities were not used as models in early advertising, because they did not represent “the good life,” rather they represented secondary citizens who were not (and could never be) civilized. “Negroes” in America were seen as second class citizens because they were a separate race of lower and less developed people who were literally meant for servitude, not equality. Race, however, is a social construct, which, according to Dr. Kathleen Perkins (2005), stems from “the eighteenth century Enlightenment period,” where social stratification was based on “biological” differences between people. Social stratification—which also determines the hierarchy of power—was based on specific physical attributes, such as white skin. Perkins (2005) writes, Those at the top, European whites, were deemed to be beautiful, intellectual, honorable, and superior while blacks were considered ugly, animal-like, passionate, gluttonous, capricious, cowardly, weak-reasoned, and dishonorable belonging at the bottom of the human scale. This stratification was designed for the sole purpose of the subjugation of dark skinned people by using the concept of racial superiority and inferiority. The deeper motive was to establish this hierarchy for economic gain.
Therefore, framing the subjugation of the ethnic population with biological proof of race differences helped to maintain social stratification. Nineteenth century anthropologists often supported this hierarchical view of humanity and claimed cultural evolution was progressive. Lewis Henry Morgan supported this unilineal evolutionary model of humanity and in his 1877 work entitled Ancient Society, wrote “mankind commenced their career at the bottom of a scale and worked their way up from savagery to civilization through slow accumulations of experimental knowledge” (McGee, et al., 2000, p. 41). African Americans were at the low, or savage, end of the scale because they were considered less intelligent; they did not use the language of the upper class, nor did their brain size measure up to those of white Americans. Dr. Samuel G. Morton—an early medical doctor practicing phrenology—compared the capacity of skulls cross culturally and “claimed that whites had bigger brains than any other group, [and were therefore considered] . . . intellectually and morally superior to those other groups” (McGee, et al., 2000, p. 51). Each of these efforts at subjugating people according to skin color, brain size, or intellect—indeed by giving these differences a biological basis and calling it race—were all in place to protect the hierarchy of power: race is a social construct. Figures A, B, and C, all have inferences to this social hierarchy through their textual references to race. Figure A (page 5), a 1922 Pepsodent ad which appeared in the New York Times, boasts that “beauties of all races” enjoy the product, however, the accompanying four photos representing “all races”—Japanese, Indian, English, and Spanish—are Caucasoid in appearance (Ad Access, 1999). Figure B (page 7), a 1945 ad from Good Housekeeping, textually refers to the “millions of American women” Greyhound will benefit, however, uses an
affluent looking Caucasian woman to represent those millions of diverse women in America (Ad Access, 1999). A 1921 ad in Life Magazine, Figure C, (page 8) speaks for the “millions of American men” who think first of Colgate upon waking; the corresponding image representing the millions of men, however, are all versions of the same Caucasian looking man (Ad Access, 1999). Content Review of Popular U.S. Magazines Ethnic minorities are not represented in the early advertising of the 1920s, because the ranks of minorities in America were likely serving as the struggling laborers of the capitalist triad, not the consumers; therefore, the advertising industry would not have even attempted to appeal to the ranks of individuals who would not be purchasing its wares. Today the United States, is the leading spender of advertising dollars, and is spending more money each year on advertising alone than every other country in the world combined (Berger, 2000, p. 81). According to my data, at least ninety-one percent of that marketing is still geared toward one ethnic group: Caucasians. The quantitative data gathered from the content analysis supports the claim that little has changed in advertising. The method of transmitting messages has certainly moved from textually based advertisements toward image only based marketing, however, the messages within image based ads still rely on age old social viewpoints regarding racial minorities. African Americans are animalized, stereotyped, tokenized, exoticized, and made the “other” through the ad industry, just as they are in wider society. There are very real connections between the social history of African Americans in the U.S.A. and their representations in advertising.
Sociologist Michael Schwalbe (2000) writes, “in a society like ours we are forced to rely on what we can see and interpret quickly,” and advertising is the capitalist’s vehicle in which to transmit those visual messages (p. 137). Every visual commercial Americans are exposed to is entirely contrived by the advertising industry; every ad is clearly thought out, plotted, planned, and specifically placed where it will have the most–or the least–effect on the consumer. After reviewing thousands of pages, recording every activity within the images, and comparing each magazine and its contents to other magazines and their contents, deliberate patterns within the advertisements are apparent. Traditional cultural standards of race hierarchy are still very much in place and occur within current ads through the comparison of African Americans to animals; using stereotypes to disenfranchise African Americans; exoticizing—or othering—minority group status through the representation of African Americans as “islanders”; and through the use of token images that are believed to suffice for inclusion despite the near absence of minorities in advertising. These marginalizing images reign although they are harmful. Sut Jhally (1996) argues that American culture is “image based” and full of “powerful and pleasurable images” that are “difficult to reject, even if they are harmful” (p. 224). Advertising is harmful in that it represents Caucasians over ninety percent of the time—and misrepresents minority groups in the small percentage of images in which they do occur—but it is so deeply embedded that this marginalization goes unnoted: it has become covert. For example, at first glance Image 1a (see next page) appears agreeable; there is nothing particularly notable about the ad as the woman is beautiful and likely a good model for contact lenses. Ads like this one are problematic, though. Consumers glance over these images, often without a second thought to the actual contents, structure, or text of the ad: advertisements—and the
messages contained within them—are taken for granted. In the case of Image 1, readers witness an African American woman selling contact lenses, but the underlying message is one of subversion and homogenization, which is evidenced through analysis.
The layout of the advertisement is comparable to any beauty makeover feature commonly found in women’s magazines. Image 1—considered a “before” shot—has been extracted from the lower left box of Image 1a and is blown up for the reader’s benefit; the actual size of the inset box measures one inch by 1 inch and is located in the lower left margin of this advertisement from Cosmopolitan Magazine, February 2001. The structure of this ad implies a beauty makeover, but it is not discussed textually (this is, after all, only a contact lens commercial). In the “before” image (Image 1) the model appears nearly nude with no makeup, her hair is very short, dark, and knotted and her eyes are a very dark. The “after” image (Image 1a) is significantly larger in proportion, which makes noticing the “before” shot in the outer margin unlikely when flipping through a magazine. The inset box is also positioned where consumers
often hold magazines, therefore, one’s hand or fingers may cover the “before” shot rendering it invisible. The invisibility of African Americans in popular print media is glaringly apparent after a thorough content analysis, and in addition to selling contact lenses this ad has systematically erased the ethnicity from the model as a part of her beauty overhaul. Many of the woman’s features have been changed: her hair has been lengthened, lightened, and straightened, she has been dressed in a green sweater—covering from her chin down—that matches her new eye color, and her makeup is perfect. The text reads “Make your eyes speak for themselves, even if they are perfect,” and implies that there was nothing wrong with the woman’s vision at all, but without the accompanying beauty overhaul she had no voice. The woman in the image has undergone cultural revision; the beauty overhaul has ultimately removed the woman’s ethnicity—making her more Caucasian and passable—so that she may gain a voice to be heard. Covert marginalization is taking place within this advertisement with its allusions to homogenization. According to Ewen (1999), any person can be transformed into a success through advertising (p. 209). The message within Image 1a clearly demonstrates this trend; a person can be “civilized” even if she or he has the wrong eye color, hair color, or skin color. Although these messages are inherently limiting and can be painful for those who cannot afford contact lenses (or a total beauty makeover), the implicit message of homogenization and marginalization is powerful and pervasive. Marginalization and Tokenism Another very common example of the marginalization of African American women in popular print magazines is the literal placement of ethnic women in the margin of the ad, as illustrated in Images 2, 3 and 4 (see next page). Image 2 is a cigarette ad containing four very happy people, however, upon closer examination the message through imagery is ultimately of segregation.
The African-American woman in the background of Image 2 is almost an afterthought: her face is partially blocked by the woman in the foreground, and she has been excluded from the inner circle of “pleasure” with the body language of the three Caucasians. The man has marked the inner circle—of whites—by placing his right hand on the chair in front of the African American woman. The woman on the left has placed her hand next to the man’s which has closed that inner circle (thus excluding the African American women). The blond woman in pink—the center of the ad and the holder of the cigarette—is on the inner circle and is included. The African American woman—segregated by body language—is not included in the main “Newport Pleasure” group.
Image 3—an ad without text—is a one page Gap Body underwear advertisement. The marginalization that occurs within this imagery is literal: the African American woman is cut in half by the margin of the magazine. One may observe that the woman on the right side of the image is also partially removed, but she is not literally in the margin of the magazine. Further, the two Caucasian women seem to be angled away from the African American woman as if they
are disengaging or pulling away. This same type of literal separation of Caucasians from the token African American occurs in Image 4. The marginalization behavior in these types of images is by far one of the most common representations of African American women in popular print media. The cultural connections to the multiple meanings of Images one through four to the social history of African Americans in the U.S.A. is undeniable, and is rife with the disenfranchisement of this minority group. Segregation and marginalization are no longer mandated, although they exist in practice every day. David Jones (2004), President of the Community Service Society of New York, claims that only 51.8 percent of black men ages 16 to 64 were employed in 2003, and 1.4 million (or thirteen percent of) African American men can no longer vote due to felony convictions. If advertising reflects “civilization” and “the good life,” then perhaps the absence of African Americans from popular print media makes sense in light of advertising’s connection the culture and to reality. Segregation, a facet of the racism, is not the only way in which African Americans are marginalized in advertising. Animalization In much the same way that Native Americans were historically considered savages, African Americans were judged animalistic—like monkeys. An early anthropologist, Sir Edward Tylor (1881), wrote an entire book dedicated to delineating the differences of “mankind,” and in the text describes the racial differences of the “Negro” face; he writes “the upper and lower parts of the profile combine to give the faces of these less-civilized people a somewhat ape-like slope, as distinguished from the more nearly upright European face” (p. 62). Tyler’s discussion of African Americans was widely accepted in academia and was exemplified in advertising less than fifty years later (see next page, an image from a 1934 Collier’s
Magazine) (Ad Access, 1999). The imagery in this Collier’s ad perpetuates the cultural standard that African Americans are ape-like and the textual account of the low language used by the servant indicates he is less civilized. Images in today’s popular magazines still often literally animalize African Americans through their association with animals in advertisements. Image 5 (see next page) from the October 2002 issue of Cosmopolitan, consists of a woman posing with three wolves. The ad conveys a sense of wildness and abandon—that wearing Arden B. clothing will give the consumer—yet the image also implies that the woman herself is wild, ready to abandon (packed bag) her life, and maybe even dangerous: an uncivilized savage? Another observation about the imagery is that the wolves are menacing and appear ready to attack the Arden B. model.
1947, Collier’s Magazine Animalization in early advertising.
IMAGE 6 Animalization in today’s advertising.
Image 6 (see previous page) is taken from a 2001 issue of Elle Magazine, wherein a woman poses sexually with two horses. The ad for Chloe clothing company is a practice in allegory, and contains many covert sexual and animalistic innuendos. Firstly, the woman is wearing a fruit over her genitals, which implies that her vagina is “ripe” for the picking or sweet to the taste. Secondly, the woman’s nails are three inches long representing deviancy. The horse’s head that she holds is phallic in shape and held in a sexualized manner as if she is guiding the horse to her genitalia. Further, the sand between her legs is pushed upward as if she is “riding” it. Pairing African Americans with animals in a sexual manner is a way of insinuating that African Americans are somehow closer to nature, and perhaps uncivilized. Asserting that minorities are uncivilized is a method used in the advertising industry to exoticize or “other” African Americans, placing them outside the norm. Abdellatif Khayati (2000), argues using this approach ultimately achieves the “social construction of race”; he claims Textual strategies such as stereotyping, displacement, condensation, fetishization, and allegory overdetermine, reify, and subject the racial identity of African Americans to a process of dismissive "othering," . . . Americans of European descent are seen as "nonraced," while, on the other hand, African peoples are "raced" and thus bounded in identity to the associative meanings of their darker skin (p. 1). Advertising can no longer use text to set African Americans apart from “civilized” society, like it did historically (refer to headlines and images from pages 2, 10, and 17 herein); however, juxtapositioning animals with humans (of dark skin color) certainly emphasizes and reifies the
cultural construct of race. Animalism, therefore, is a technique used in advertising to practice racism covertly. (Sexual) Exoticism Exoticism, like animalism, is another covert method of marginalization of African Americans and is exemplified in Images 7, 8, and 9 (see next page). This form of racial discrimination in advertising uses women, and sometimes men, of dark skin color to sell products while associating them with a tropical scene (usually claiming within the text of the ad that the models are Caribbean). The message of this campaign is ultimately that African Americans are found on tropical islands, anxiously awaiting your arrival, not that they exist in the U.S. as productive members of society.
For example, Image 7 is paired with text that reads “Let the alluring charm of CARIBBEAN CHILL take you on a cruise to the islands,” which implies that sexy tropical women—who are black—wait there for your arrival. Image 8—which pairs a dark skinned
woman with a tropical setting—reads “Discover smoothness that makes every woman feel divine.” The underlying message of the text paired with the imagery within this ad insinuates that the island inhabitants (African American women) wait to be discovered by you, the visitor. This patterning called exoticism is another allegorical way of “othering” African Americans; associating African Americans with an island or another more exotic place makes it somehow
“safer” for the majority to identify with and relate to African Americans (Jerofke, 2005). Instead of having to assimilate with and welcome African Americans to participate wholly in American culture, minorities are placed in lesser position and are often represented very stereotypically. Stereotyping Image 10, from a June 2002 issue of Cosmopolitan, is a photo of an African American woman’s rear end, which is used to sell Jergen’s firming moisturizer. The text reads “Bet your bottom” (but could easily be mistaken to read “better” your bottom), and is associating African American women with a (large?) rear end: an incredibly common and pervasive stereotype. Culturally African American women are thought to have unusually large rear ends, as compared to the norm: small Caucasian women. America’s consumer culture values small women and their small “asses,” therefore, who better to demonstrate a rear that needs improvement but an African American woman?
Another common misrepresentation of African American women in popular print media is their association with “soulfulness”—as apparently only African Americans have the ability to make “soul” music. Image 11 is a Coca-Cola ad which pairs an African American woman who is choosing a juke box song with text that reads “Nu. Classic. Soul.” The model, who is leaning over the jukebox, is wearing the stereotypical social markers of an urbanite: “bling-bling” (large jewelry). The text is meant to refer to the product Coca-Cola and its new packaging—which is a
throwback to the original Coke packaging—however, the imagery and the text combined insinuates the age old cultural standard that blacks are soulful. Marlene Nourbese Philip (1989) argues that in images such as these There are certain historical and sociological, not to mention etymological, reasons why when we hear certain words and phrases, such as [“soulful,” “big ass,”] ‘thick lips[,]’ or ‘kinky hair,’ the accompanying images are predominantly negative; such expressions connote far more than they denote. From whose perspective are the lips of the African thick or her hair kinky [or her butt big]? Certainly not from the African’s perspective (p. 20). African Americans are almost always viewed from a Caucasian perspective. This act perpetuates stereotypes, aids in the emphasis of race as a differentiation between people in stead of a social construct, and ultimately offers inadequate representations of African Americans. All of these qualities of advertising combine to construct and reinforce the social hierarchy which exists between Caucasians and minority populations. Covert racism in advertising, though, is only one way in which minority women are pigeonholed through their representations in popular print media. Another marginalizing factor for African American women is the impossible standard of beauty that is set for all women through the marketing industry. Jean Kilbourne (1995) claims ninety-five percent of American women do not fit the ideal standard of beauty that is reflected in advertising (Jhally: videotape). So, only five percent of American women are the tall, thin, broad shouldered, flat chested (or very large breasted), narrow hipped, ideal, and although this image of women is nearly impossible to emanate it is by far the most commonly viewed image. Not included in Kilbourne’s list of beauty markers, though, is white (light) skin. My content analysis of the best selling American magazines indicates that light skin is highly desirable and equally as frequent in this five percent of “perfect” women in America. This is
certainly a cultural standard of beauty that African American women will never fulfill. Although, magazines manipulate skin color to make women of color passable, so that they can align more closely with that narrow ideal (see Images 12 and 13 on next page). This September 2003 issue of Glamour magazine is positioned next to the August 2001 issue of Teen magazine to demonstrate the clear manipulation of skin color by popular U.S. magazines. Clearly, Beyonce—who is on the cover of both magazines—is an African American woman, however, the Teen magazine representation of Beyonce deemphasizes her ethnicity— another form of cultural revision.
IMAGE 12 (Beyonce of Destiny’s Child) standing)
IMAGE 13 (Destiny’s Child, Beyonce
Conclusion African Americans represent only a small nine percent of the images within the more than 15,735 pages reviewed in this research project. African American women appear in advertising more often and represent six percent of the total images, African American men totaling two percent, and African American children are a small one percent of the total imagery in popular U. S. magazines. Minority woman are presented in very derogatory sexual or stereotypical methods which underscores the social hierarchy that has been in place for hundreds of years; ultimately, advertising has not much changed from its racist foundation. While the purveyors of advertising could chose to represent African Americans in powerful and equitable situations, they do not. African Americans remain “the other.” African-American women—and any people with dark skin color in general—are considered to be the “minority” in the United States, and this phenomenon is emphasized and perpetuated through the media. Advertising is embedded in this image based culture covertly reflecting yet shaping popular cultural standards based on a social hierarchy. The consumer culture is molded by a multibillion dollar industry that sets impossible standards for anyone, especially minority populations, to fulfill. Disenfranchisement of the African American population occurs through culturally acceptable racism in the form of deliberate exclusion from and marginalization in popular print media. References Cited Ad Access. (1999). Duke University. Image Database. Accessed via the World Wide Web on February 20, 2005: http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/adaccess/. Allyoucanread.com (2004). Top 20 Women’s Magazines. Retrieved October 14, 2004 from the World Wide Web: http://www.allyoucanread.com/top20/index.asp?idCat=20&n=10
Becker, Eddy. (1999). Chronology on the History of Slavery. Accessed online on the World Wide Web on February 20, 2005 at: http://innercity.org/holt/slavechron.html. Berger, A. A. (2000). Ads, Fad, and Consumer Culture: Advertising’s Impact on American Culture. Cumnor Hill, Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Ewen, Stuart. (1976). Captains of Consciousness: Advertising and the Social Roots of the Consumer Culture. In Hanson, J., & Maxcy, D. J. (Eds.). (1999). Sources: Notable Selections in Mass Media. (pp. 206-216). Guilford, CT: McGraw Hill. Jerofke, Linda (2005). Anthropology 401 personal discussions. Jhally, S. (Producer). (1995). Slim Hopes: Advertising and the Obsession with Thinness, with Jean Kilbourne [Videotape]. Media Education Foundation. Jhally, Sut. (1996). Image-Based Culture: Advertising and Popular Culture. In Hanson, Jarice and David J. Maxcy (Eds.), Sources. Notable Selections in Mass Media (pp. 223-230). Guilford, Connecticut: Dushkin Pub. Group. Jones, David R. (2004). Urban Agenda from Community Service Society of New York. Accessed via the world wide web on March 14, 2005 at: http://www.cssny.org/pubs/urbanagenda/2004_03_18.html Khayati, Abdellatif. (2000). Representation, race, and the "language" of the ineffable in Toni Morrison's narrative. African American Review, Summer 1999. Gale Group. Accessed online on the World Wide Web March 9, 2005 at http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2838/is_2_33/ai_55577122/pg_1. Morgan, Lewis Henry (1877). Ancient Society. In McGee, R. J. and Warms, R. L. (2000) (Eds.), Anthropological Theory: An Introductory History (pp. 41-52). Mountainview, CA: Mayfield Publishing Co. Myers, Greg. (1999). Ad Worlds” Brands, Media, Audiences. New York, NY; Oxford University Press. Perkins, Dr. Kathleen. (2005). “OWHE.” Email to the author. 3, February, 2005. Philip, Marlene Nourbese. (1989). She Tries Her Tongue: Her Silence Softly Breaks. Charlottetown, P.E.I., Canada: Ragweed Press. Robbins, R. H. (1999). Global Problems and the Culture of Capitalism. Needham Heights, MA; Allyn & Bacon. Schwalbe, M. (1998/2001). The Sociologically Examined Life: Pieces of Conversation. Second Edition. Mountain View, California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
The Library of Congress. (1998, October 19) African American Perspectives, Pamphlets from the Daniel A.P. Murray Collection 1818-1907. Time Line of African American History, 1881-1900. Retrieved October 22, 2004 from the World Wide Web http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/aap/timelin2.html Tyler, Sir Edward. (1881). Anthropology: An Introduction to the Study of Man and Civilization. New York: D. Appleton and Company. Beauty Culture & Advertising African-American women, and people of dark skin color in general, are considered to be the “minority” in the United States, and this phenomenon is created and perpetuated through the media. Arthur Asa Berger (2000) claims that the $200 billion a year advertising industry exposes every American to nearly 15,000 images per day (p. 1, 81); the multitude of commercials that humans are exposed to on a daily basis only serve to bolster and reinforce the marginalization of African-Americans through a mass exclusion of “ethnic” looking AfricanAmericans from mainstream media. This advertising “behavior” began as early as the 1890s in print media; ads featured highly derogatory remarks about “colored” people, paired with products that invariably promised to fix any one of their multitudinous hair or skin problems. Advertising does not appear as prejudicial today as it was in the past, nevertheless, I will argue that advertising has not changed much in the last century. Further, I will argue that advertising does not merely reflect cultural values, interests, and demands, but that it also shapes those belief systems in America. For the purposes of this essay I conducted original research having to do with the representation of African-American women in popular print media. Sociologist Michael Schwalbe (2000) writes, “in a society like ours we are forced to rely on what we can see and interpret quickly,” and I would argue that advertising is the capitalist’s vehicle in which to convey those visual messages (p. 137). I will argue that every visual commercial Americans are exposed to is entirely contrived by the advertising industry; every ad is clearly thought out, plotted and planned, and specifically placed where it will have the most–or the least–effect on the consumer. In order to understand the control that the advertising industry has on its consumers, it is important to realize that the “consumer culture” has a rich history filled with the hopes and dreams–and the fears–of every American.
The Rise of the Consumer Culture - “Hope in a Jar”
In a riveting speech, Kathy L. Peiss (1998 a) argued that the rise of advertising occurred in conjunction with the rise of the industrial revolution. After 1890, consumption was linked with the idea that purchasing products could make life better for the consumer, and women were the ultimate money making target for the new advertising industry (Peiss, 1998 a: 2). Peiss (1998 a) argues “[o]ne of the cultural products of this new infrastructure was an explicit conception of consumer identity, an identity that was simultaneously bound up in notions of the feminine” (p. 2). Based upon my research, I would argue that “notions of the feminine” in advertising invariably means notions of “being white.” Since the 1890s–with the advent of new hair care and skin bleaching products by early African entrepreneurs like Madam C.J. Walkereni–African-American women have been trying to fit into that narrow definition of femininity and beauty: the notion that to be beautiful and feminine is to be white (Peiss, 1998 a: 8). A journal from 1928 credited the beautification of the “colored race” to new and improved hair care products; a headline from the Oklahoma Eagle reads “Amazing Progress of Colored Race– Improved Appearance Responsible” (Peiss, 1998 b: 204). In print media, African-American woman were depicted as having very “unruly hair, oily skin, and apelike features,” (see cover ad) but, as Peiss argues, inevitably there were products, such as skin bleach and hair straightening balm, that “promised relief from such stereotypes” (1998 b:205). By the mid 1920s, African-American women were buying into the promise of beauty–the notion of being white–offered by any one of the hundreds of products on the market; the preference for Caucasian looking African-Americans, and the consumer culture to back it up, was now thriving in the mainstream. (Maybe say more about how African-American women were accepted or not according to their new look.)
i. Madame C. J. Walker was an African-American woman who, in the late 1800s, invented skin bleach, and the
first hair straightening balm for the African-American public. She was an entrepreneur who began the first African-American owned and operated cosmetics enterprise (Peiss, 1998 b).
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.