Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Ethics of Image Labeling

Today the NYT blog "Moral of the Story" has a very well-thought out post, regarding the ethical case for requiring that advertising agencies give disclosure about electronically-manipulated images. One section particularly interested me, so I thought I'd post it in case anyone had thoughts on it:

It could also be argued that a labeling law, equitably applied, would require warnings on nearly all ads, including those that alter reality in other ways. For example, few roads are as serenely traffic-free as those in car commercials (and indeed some automobile ads on TV already note that they were photographed on a closed course). But here’s the distinction: Although that open road deliberately conveys a bogus sense of driving delight, the road itself is not the product. The car is the product. In fashion ads, however, whether for clothes or makeup or shampoo, the model’s beauty is the product, or at least the direct result the product is meant to achieve. Because that beauty cannot be obtained via the proffered merchandise but only through a tricked-out photo, this is a case of false advertising.

I sometimes hesitate to post direct questions, for fear that no one will answer and I'll be a lonely blogdorg, but: What do you think about the fact that beauty is the product, not the bra, lotion, etc? In what cases is this more or less true than others?

Anywho, I highly encourage you to read the whole post. I subscribe to the blog, love the way this guy cogently breaks down such a wide variety of issues.

3 comments:

Eating With Others said...

I think it's sad. And the whole thing make's me mad enough to spit! They sell perfect images and lies and we buy it. Guess what, we are not perfect! We are all off in some way.

The lenght's that we go to in order to alter our bodies to a point where we feel good about ourselves is just nuts.

lisalisa said...

i will answer your uestion with another question. Have you ever noticed that with food, happiness seems to be the product? Like, "the snack you can feel good about". Or the slogan for nabisco: "snack happy!". Hershey's even had a chocolate called "Bliss". Especially this time of year, commercials are saying that if you eat their food, you will be transported to a time when life was simple and everything was good. The good life.
I think it's creepy.

Arielle Bair, MSW, LSW said...

I think it's very true that beauty is the product. It's true that a bra or a a lipstick is the item for sale, but the POINT OF the item is to make a woman feel or look beautiful. I think that items that are marketed to make a woman FEEL beautiful, for example, a bra, is a little bit different than a product marketed to make a woman LOOK beautiful, like a face foundation. To me, they do differ a bit. BUT the overall purpose is there: beauty. I think you're right on with this.

Oh, and hello, by the way. I've been reading, but I'm often too pressed for time to comment. :)