Parker Thomas Final Paper

         J (Shift + J): The New Formation of “Beauty”

In a day and age where technology is king, advertising companies and campaigns now utilize photo altering programs such as Photoshop in order to create a standard of beauty that is unattainable without digital construction. The lack of rules governing Photoshop’s usage in order to drastically alter a photo creates a U.S. society under the impression that real beauty is not acceptable. Mass media consumption contributes to a young generation that is plagued by the notion that Photoshop can create the only form of beauty that is worthy of praise, and this dreary outlook on beauty is taking a toll on the perception and appreciation that society has of “true beauty”. The usage of photo altering programs in today’s 21st century U.S. beauty campaigns  has a negative affect on society and distort our perception of what is attainable. What is most shocking is the percentage of society that is media illiterate succumbing to these fake representations of women and believing them as truth.  

Caption: 

This photograph is meant to represent how the United States is falling victim to Photoshop and becoming a nation bombarded with images that are digitally altered.

Before understanding the current situation that Photoshop has created, it is essential to comprehend where the program started. Two brothers, John and Thomas Knoll were the masterminds behind the creation of Adobe Photoshop. As with all new technological advancements, the formation of this powerhouse program came with an onset of positive and negative ramifications. Similar to other new creations, the early years are often clouded in praise and appreciation for the development of such a remarkable advance in technology, too busy admiring the creation to stop and think about the possible consequences of such an invention. Take a step back for a moment and try to imagine mass media advertisements before Photoshop’s 1990 conception. Since the invention of photography in the early 1800s, photo altering has existed and been prevalent amongst many photographers. These more traditional ways of transforming photos prior to the digital media age seem almost tame in comparison to the large scale editing that is rampant in the twenty-first century; however, it is important to note that the roots of any epidemic most likely dictate what is to come in the future. Many citizens perceived photographs as the truth which may lend itself to explaining why when we are deceived by photographs, we feel like our reality is crumbling down in a giant spiral of deception. There is no point refuting the fact that photo alteration has existed for centuries, but as Carstarphen explains, “Digital manipulation,” as Carstarphen (1999: 70) calls it, can stretch bones, or clone bones on a body” (Secara, 7). With the ability to use digital technology to alter photographs, boundaries are pushed to the extreme. It was rather impossible before Photoshop to “stretch bones” in a convincing way, and without this ability was a society who viewed “un-stretched bones” as the social norm, the way they should. But with Photoshop's emergence came the arrival of a dystopian view on women, conveniently disguised as a utopian ideal. 

Caption: This is a photo of one of the co-creators of Photoshop, John Knoll. On one side of his shoulder is a beautiful painting of an angel, which is meant to represent that Photoshop can be used to create beautiful and captivating works of art. However, on his other should is a Victoria’s Secret model dressed in a devil outfit.

The major question to be asked in our twenty-first century world is broad, daunting, and perhaps unanswerable. In simple terms, why does our society feel as though we must use Photoshop to alter our advertisements?  Specifically, what is the untold story behind the reason for photoshopping advertisements? In a master thesis by two students, J.Wieger Prins and Annelieke Y.M. Zwaans, the two comment on how "A study by Kilbourne (1990) revealed that there is indeed a relationship between the way women are portrayed in advertising and people’s ideas about how women are supposed to behave and the roles they are supposed to fulfill within society. Obviously advertisements are a powerful product. They unconsciously influence the social norm in a society and thereby the attitude en behavior of people” (Prins and Zwaans, 2009). If we take a look at practically any beauty ad, there is a subconscious commentary embedded within every pixel of the frame. Why does our society value a woman with no pores when pores are a very essential part of our bodily functions? These questions may perhaps be unanswerable given the fact that there is not a definitive point at which our society condemned the visibility of pores within an advertisement, but while understanding why this standard came to be is important, it is essential to understand what this means for our current society. Women, considerably those still in critical developmental years, take this silent condemnation of natural physical attributes to mean that their natural self is not enough. With this, comes a host of new problems emerging in the United States along with the upsurge of digital media. 

 Caption: This photo is of a “plus size” model mean to show how the beauty of the past and now practically unheard of in today’s society.

It is easy to say that Photoshop is nothing more than a program that runs via a binary code of one’s and zero’s, but it is important to recognize that there are greater implications  ingrained within this small desktop icon.  One of the best ways to create a wake up call is to cite blunt facts. The National Association of Anorexia Nervosa and Associated Disorders provides the following disturbing statistics:  “The body type portrayed in advertising as the ideal is possessed naturally by only 5% of American females,  47% of girls in 5th-12th grade reported wanting to lose weight because of magazine pictures,  69% of girls in 5th-12th grade reported that magazine pictures influenced their idea of a perfect body shape” (ANAD). Strictly focusing on body type and weight for a moment, perhaps one of the most shocking of all statistics was that, “42% of 1st-3rd grade girls want to be thinner” (ANAD). There is no denying that these statistics are chill-worthy, and this type of pressure should never be placed, willingly or not, on a child as young as seven years old. The beauty of childhood is that seemingly everything is care-free and fun, but nowadays girls too young to even know what mascara is are being latched onto by major beauty industries and subconsciously prescribed a set of values that basically tell them they are not good enough as they are: they must conform in order to be appreciated.

Caption: This is a photograph of a woman doing her makeup, looking into a mirror. However, rather than seeing her true self she sees a message that says, “push push until your thighs don’t touch”.

For many U.S. citizens who hear the stories of how impressionable young teenagers are affected by the subliminal messages that beauty advertisements are selling, they take a moment of sympathy and then move on with their lives. But until they see how drastic of a change Photoshop has the ability to create they remain rather unconcerned for the future of our society. According to an old adage, “a picture is worth a thousand words”, and these pictures not only work to directly evoke feelings from the limbic brain, but they do so without the explicit nature that words carry. In this way, young teenagers, specifically girls, are subtly convinced through altered photographs that their true self is not good enough. As if teenagers are not already hyper-aware of every imperfection they have, they now must measure their selves against an unreachable goal that our society accepts as truth. Teenage girls are emotional and susceptible to peer-pressure or any emotional trigger, which lends itself in explaining why,  “Ads which evoke strong positive emotions are more likely to do well on our measure of Persuasion, and more likely to elicit greater brand appeal” (Brown, 5). When we see a smiling Covergirl running through a field with her hair blowing, we feel as though the soul reason for her happiness is because she is “easy, breezy, beautiful, Covergirl”. Emotions play an essential role in creating affective advertisements, but companies responsible for the development of beauty creatives try to undermine society in a way that makes us feel bad about ourselves. The only way to feel better is if we use their products in an attempt to make ourselves more acceptable, even though these products will never truly make us look like the girl in the advertisement: only photoshop will. 

Caption: This shows a girl thinking about herself on a scale. This is meant to comment on how weight is commonly always on the mind of teenage and even young girls, largely due to media influence. 

Julia Roberts, a famous Hollywood actress recently celebrated her forty-sixth birthday. Regardless of any Botox, plastic surgery, or hundred dollar retinol correction treatments that celebrities now seek out, there is no denying that Roberts is not a teenager. However, when featured in a recent Lancôme advertisement, Roberts seemingly lost all wrinkles, pores, or skin discoloration that women her age naturally develop through the years. Furthermore, Roberts eyes seem to posses an almost vampire-like quality that most likely was not solely achieved through professional lighting and photography. This ad is a result of Photoshop. What is remarkable about this photograph is that it garnered so much attention in the UK that it was banned from being used as an advertisement, perhaps a pathway that the United States should follow as well (CNN, 2011). What can be learned from this specific advertisement is that media do not always result in negative impacts. The controversy surrounding this advertisement opened the public’s eyes to the unrealistic ideals of beauty companies and perhaps this type of critical and analytical attention on this advertisement will make our society, including Lancôme, think twice about Photoshop usage. 

Caption: This is a photo of the supermodel Kate Moss taken by the photographer Chuck Close.  The difference between seeing a natural Moss and the commonly re-touched Moss is shocking and comments a lot on how dependent our society is on photo re-touching.

The question of how do we continue onward is an extremely pressing issue that seems to have escaped many Americans' minds. One of the major problems that distinguishes media now from media in the past is the sheer amount of volume that is produced and exhibited practically everywhere you go. Although it may be daunting, or nearly impossible to ever truly escape from the media of the 21st century, aiding citizens, especially children in learning about media literacy will most likely help to counteract the bombardment of negative images. The National Eating Disorder Association has an entire section on their website entitled, Tips for Becoming a Critical Viewer of the Media, which is dedicated to educating children and adults alike how to combat the influx of media that promotes a disturbingly unhealthy perspective of body weight and image. While tips and education are helpful, there is a definite need for government intervention. Despite the fact that there is some conversation surrounding the topic, government regulation is still not widespread. However, the National Advertising Division is doing what it can to find and report advertisements that go against the division’s morals. What makes the NAD so powerful is that they are respected by the FTC, which has the ability to fine or even sue a company for an impractical advertisement (CNN, 2011). In a game of money, companies will most likely want to avoid such attacks against their monetary gain, but in the grand scheme, small fines are worth the price for successful advertisements that rake in millions of dollars worth of cosmetic sales. The director of the NAD, Andrea Levine explains how “You can’t use a photograph to demonstrate how a cosmetic will look after it is applied to a woman’s face and then – in the mice type – have a disclosure that says ‘okay, not really” (Edwards, 2011). No one actually pays attention to this “mice-type”, and the same affect is had on the viewer whether or not there was even a disclosure stating the photo had been altered. More specific regulation regarding disclaimer size and content should be a stepping stone for the FTC until more serious and specific standards can be set in terms of “what is too much” editing. 

Caption: This photograph aims to show how Photoshop has in a sense “killed” true beauty and made only the digitally altered view of beauty the acceptable one. 

The United States has found itself in quite a conundrum. On one side, Photoshop has opened the door to a new form of artistry and graphic design, enabling citizens to consciously and carefully craft works of art. However, there is also the regressive nature of the product that quietly gnaws away and erodes any semblance of self-esteem that our young generation may have once possessed. As dystopian novelist M.T. Anderson writes in his novel Feed, "the natural world is so adaptable...so adaptable you wonder what's real" (Anderson, 191). Anderson captures the way in which Photoshop has morphed our reality into one that is transformable and constructed. Although Photoshop itself may not be the problem, the United States government cannot take major corporations using this program lightly anymore. Unless we want statistics, death rates, and depression to rise, our society must take a step back and create a narrative surrounding the wide-spread usage of this product within new digital media. For now, we can create a dialogue exposing this large scale problem, but in the future major changes must come about or our society will fall victim to a bleak, dangerous, and “digitally altered” reality. 

Caption: There is a faint watermark of the FTC logo which signifies that the government and the FTC need to work closer together in order to create specific rules and regulation governing Photoshop usage in advertisements. 

Bibliography

Adobe Photoshop. Startup Memories-- The Beginning of Photoshop. YouTube. YouTube, 7 Mar. 2011. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtzFvRjrvXM>.

Anderson, M.T. Feed. Somerville: Candelwick, 2002. Print.

Edwards, Jim. "US Moves Toward Banning Photoshop In Cosmetic Ads." Business Insider. Business Insider, 16 Dec. 2011. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <http://www.businessinsider.com/us-moves-toward-banning-use-of-photoshop-in-cosmetics-ads-2011-12>.
 

Jones, Bryony. "Britain bans airbrushed Julia Roberts make-up ad." CNN World. Cable News Network, 28 July 2011. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/07/28/airbrushed.advertisements.ban/>.

 National Association of Anorexia Nervosa and Associated Disorders. ANAD, n.d. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <http://www.anad.org>.

Prins, J.W., and A.Y.M. Zwaans. "Photo-shopped images, how can we not be influenced?" DSpace Library. Universiteit Utrecht, 2007. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <http://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/34677>.

Secara, Silviana. "Women in Ads. Visual Representation of the Female Body." The Round Table. N.p., 2013. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <http://www.theroundtable.ro/Current/2013/Cultural/Silviana%20Secara%20-%20Women%20in%20Ads%20-%20Visual%20Representation%20of%20the%20Female%20Body.pdf>.

“Should My Advertising Stimulate an Emotional Response?” Millward Brown. Millward Brown, n.d. Web. 24 Mar. 2014. <http://www.millwardbrown.com/Libraries/MB_Knowledge_Points_Downloads/MillwardBrown_KnowledgePoint_EmotionalResponse.sflb.ashx>. 

"Tips for Becoming a Critical Viewer of the Media." NEDA. NEDA, n.d. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <http://www.nationaleatingdisorders.org/tips-becoming-critical-viewer-media>.

Zverin, Jan. "U.S. Media Consumption to Rise to 15.5 Hours a Day- Per Person- by 2015." News Center. U of California, 6 Nov. 2013. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/pressrelease/u.s._media_consumption_to_rise_to_15.5_hours_a_day_per_person_by_2015>.