Sunday, April 26, 2009

Beauty Products- what are they trying to sell?

Beauty products are always a necessity, whether or not the economy is bad. I have chosen three different beauty product commercials (mostly makeup) to examine.



1.) Maybelline "Dream Mousse"- foundation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pawfKqkLySY)

First off, the brand name for this foundation is formulated to catch our attention. "Dream"- I take this as dreaming to finally find a foundation that actually COVERS flaws. The word mousse is soothing too, sounds much different than "foundation" or "cover up".... it actually *sounds* like a neat product that I would want to buy.

The commercial stars *surprise*- a Victoria Secret model Adriana Lima. This is where the analysis of commercials really begins. Almost all commercials cast amazingly beautiful actors and actresses, which is one of the huge things that affects its viewers. We all know that average people do not look like Adriana Lima, but Maybelline uses her to hold their attention. Most people would love to look like her, therefore her using a certain skin products makes US want to use the product. Her skin is literally flawless in the commercial, making it look achievable for the average person to also look like that.

"100% poreless perfection"- this is the main saying this is used twice in the commercial. Nobody can achieve 100% poreless perfection, but it sounds great, right??



2.) Covergirl "Wetslicks Fruit Spritzers"- lipgloss (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP8XU7ZLS5o)

I chose this commercial because it includes a celebrity- Rhianna. Looks like they collaborated well, since at the end of the commercial Rhianna is promoting her new album as well.

I think that celebrities are often used in commercials because people know who they are- and want to see what they are using to look beautiful. Not only does it benefit Covergirl to cast her, it benefits Rhianna because she gets publicity as well. I think the appeal of this commercial is Rhianna, and her plumpy, glossy lips. Since we all see her with these beautiful lips, we want to use what she is using! Of course, us, the viewers, aren't going to take into account all of the makeup artists working on her before the shoot, or the many different lipglosses that are probably put on her to advertise this one. I think this commercial just goes back to the fact that people want to be like celebrities, plain and simple. Obviously, it is a good marketing technique. (Note: Covergirl also has a commercial starring Drew Barrymore.)







So it seems like the more and more commercials I looked up for beauty products, the more celebrities I came across! Revlon uses Jessica Alba in this commercial, looking a bit seductive, talking about how she really wants her "foundation to match her skin"- SURPRISE- Revlon's new foundation has a dial that you turn to match your skin tone, whatever it be. The commercial is short and to the point, but I think the overall idea here was to use beautiful actress Jessica Alba to convince us to buy it. If that's what she uses, shouldn't we?


The overall idea after watching all of these commercials is that marketing and advertising uses so many techniques to grab our attention and impulse us to buy their products. Celebrities are always a win- win. They are recognizable, and always look flawless- making us want to do the same. For me, it is easy to see through these marketing schemes when I watch them, because I have studied them and know a deeper meaning behind the surface commercial.


We all need to be aware of what commercials are impulsing us to buy their products, and then evaluate why. Ladies, how many times have you bought a new makeup product you saw on TV and HATED it? Such a waste of 10 dollars, right?

Friday, April 17, 2009

Smothers Brothers


The Smothers Brothers consisted of two brothers: Tom and Dick, who would put on a comedic act usually accompanied by a folk song sung by the duo. I had never seen the show before this week, and have watched a couple episodes and snippets. I THINK ITS AWESOME!
Even though humor has changed so much since the 60's, even being born in 88 I can still appreciate and respect (not to mention ENJOY) the Smothers Brothers skits. It's funny to me that they are known as being the controversial duo of the time- yes, their views were left wing, and yes, they poked fun at Nixon (alot)- but what about Jon Stewart and the other political satirists right now? Isn't Jon Stewart known for poking fun at George W. Bush and the war overseas?
I think Smothers Brothers paved the way for political satire and comedy, and they are STILL touring together today, 50 years later!
When I watched watched their "Mariah" skit on Youtube, this is what someone shared as a comment:


"They were amazing. My mother used to watch this when she was young, and I'm so glad I get the chance. They were so funny, and their commentaries were the groundwork for so much of the humor we see today. Their musical work is beautiful as well. Thank you for uploading this, and thanks to the Smothers Brothers for daring to push the envelope at such a sensitive time!"


Agreed :)

Saturday, April 4, 2009

"One...Two...Three...Four...Five...Seven..."

"The homes of America are horrified and the intelligence of Americans is insulted by weird television advertising by which this administration threatens the end of the world unless all-wise Lyndon is given the nation for his very own."
— Senator Barry M. Goldwater referring to the Daisy girl ad






DAISY GIRL:
I think this ad was originally sparked by a comment from Senator Barry Goldwater regarding Vietnam: "... he mentioned some possibilities, one of which was to defoliate Vietnamese forests with a "low yield atomic device." The remark was widely discussed and gave the impression that Goldwater had a casual attitude toward dropping atomic "devices"."

The ad starts off with a little girl picking petals off a flower, and counting in sequence. Then an adult voice comes on and starts counting down, followed by footage of a nuclear explosion and the words of Lyndon B. Johnson: "These are the stakes– to make a world in which all of God's children can live, or to go into the dark. We must either love each other, or we must die."

According to Barnouw, the Doyle Dane Bernbach [Democratic advertising agency] strategy was to make Goldwater over-react. The first quote mentioned reveals their success in this. But, was it an overreaction? Is it really OK to use an innocent little girl to make a hard political statement about war and nuclear bombs? Obviously not, since their were orders to not play the ad again- howeveer, the attention it received was enough that replaying it would be useless.

Overall, I think this ad shows how low politics can really go. Exploiting young children for political reasons is just plain wrong, not to mention the context that the Daisy Girl ad was. Thank goodness for Obama stepping up and not falling into ridiculous political advertising like so many others with an agenda.