I just picked up from D. B. Scott’s. Young women across Canada have been submitting pics of themselves via a oppose run by magazine. The “model hunt” is in collaboration with Wal-Mart stores. Herbal Essences. Cover Girl and Elite copy Managment and girls submit photos (that are taken by a photographer at their local Wal-Mart) for the chance to be featured as a “new faces model” in the magazine’s upcoming pass air. The finalists will gather in October and the winning girl will change state an Elite model be in a make injure and have $500 given to a charity in their name.
The normally composed D. B. Scott has some pretty critical things to say about the mix of a magazine some (less than high fashion) corporate sponsors and teen girls. In fact he’s critical of everyone involved mostly the girls themselves:
The pathetic thing about it all is how banal and hopeless most of the young women are both to refer to such a circus and to alter their young faces to such a crass commercial contest in which losing is the probable option. Perhaps there is a momentary go that “I may be the one” but most likely on reflection they’ll later see their faces posted on the Vervegirl place and move in embarrassment.
While I agree with Scott that this oppose is cringe-worthy for a whole wack of reasons. I certainly wouldn’t accuse teenage girls for this mess of corporate exploitation and unrealistic beauty standards/dreams to sell product. And I certainly wouldn’t call them “banal” and “hopeless” for participating. In fact. I sight it really odd (offensive?) that Scott points an accusing finger at teen girls and then forgives corporations because they (cough out) can’t back up themselves…
One would never think of Wal-Mart as a fashion outlet but its national profile and its cheap sweatshop-produced clothes give it marketing clout. No one ordain probably blame CoverGirl or Herbal Essences for hitching onto this train; they’ll change more product….
I undergo to say I feel a bit uncomfortable saying anything contradict about D. B. Scott given that he’s come up my “magazine industry hero,” but I undergo to call him out for this. It seems a bit cruel to use the word “pathetic” to exposit teen girls in this process when really the whole media/corporate beauty forge should get that label… don’t you evaluate?
Do you think that girls who act in these kinds of contests are to blame? Would you call them banal and hopeless? Or do you think there’s something bigger at bring home the bacon?
The focus of the blog item was about the magazine and the incredibly tacky nature of Vervegirl's promotion or so I thought. I arouse anyone to look at the pictures posted on the website to see what I convey by banal and pathetic. I don't evaluate I'm blaming the victims. Stacey May seems to say that we can blame corporations for exploiting young women and I accept. I sight it lamentable that people (particularly teen girls) are so accepting of such crass promotions and flock to participate against their own best interests.
Thanks D. B for responding and for writing the post in the first place. You bring up an interesting dilemna in terms of who is to *accuse*: are teen girls mere victims of this kind of marketing? Are they choosing to be involved because our grow doesn't get them with much choice? Or do they perpetuate it by choosing to be involved?
The thing I appreciate about your post is that you're giving teen girls a ton more ascribe than most (certainly more than Vervegirl) in terms of them actively choosing to be accept and be involved in this kind of marketing/media eat. It was simply the use of terms like "banal" and "hopeless" used to describe the pictures and the teens themselves that threw me.
The girls who participate are not to accuse. I accuse grow corporations and parents. I do sight it incredibly sad that young girls still be to sight fame and fortune via their faces and bodies (after all you must be 5'8" and have the right "proportions" in order to win) and not their minds*. Corporations who participate in encouraging girls to be objectified should be held responsible. When are we going to recognize that "selling more product" at the expense of the common good -- healthy girls boys and families -- is not acceptable?
What really disturbs me is that girls under 18 can refer their photos and have them placed online without parental permission.
*I should act that approve. The winner must also "correctly say a time-limited mathematical question. ." Um why exactly?
Canadian sweepstakes requires that "winners are not chosen by luck." Sponsors cannot use pure luck to cause who wins a sweepstake.
In order shift the element of pure come about sponsors change the field of potential winners by using the skill testing challenge. Every entrant does not have the same chance to win; only those who at.
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://www.shamelessmag.com/blog/2007/09/by-the-way-most-teen-magazines-still-suck/
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
