One "Hot" Ride

The Video above pokes fun at the often overly sexual nature of car commercials.  Specifically, this video is making fun of a Cadillac ad that ran in 2008 features the always stunning, Kate Walsh.  In the video, she says in a sensual voice, “…the real question is: when you turn your car on, does it return the favor?”

The Link makes fun of that ad by making it even more sexual, but in a stupid way.  The makers of the video make it clear how silly and over the top they are being, and by extension, how silly and over the top the Cadillac commercial is.  Cadillac is a big name car company and what they do generally carries a lot of weight.  It's upsetting that they would show such a lack of responsibility, given their influence on trends in the auto industry.

If You are interested in seeing the original Cadillac commercial, it can be viewed at this link:
Cadillac Commercial

More Than a Happy Meal?

Carl’s Jr has also not always been known for their classy advertisements.  “Celebrities” such as Paris Hilton, Audrina Patridge, and Kim Kardashian have graced the their ads.  What do all of these women have in common? Being famous yet having virtually no talent and all having a sex tape out…coincident, we think not.  For many men and women in our society these women are the epitome of sex.  

It continually shocks us that women agree to star in these ads for we feel that they are incredibly degrading to women.  The irony of having these pencil thin women gorging themselves on these large, completely innutritious burgers is also quite hilarious to us.  You do not get that skinny and hot from eating Carl’s Jr. burgers, not even close.  


So why do they keep coming out with more ads with virtually the same content? Well obviously something is working, they are targeting a small demographic of people, young to middle age men, but that group continues to be loyal followers no matter how many tasteless ads Carl’s Jr. puts out. 

Celebrity Approved, Celebrity Endorsed

http://www.dailystab.com/scarlett-johansson-glamour-november-2009/

As any magazine subscriber or grocery store visitor knows, different celebrities are featured on the cover of various tabloids each week. This is no exception for Glamour Magazine’s November 2009 issue, as Scarlett Johansson demanded attention as the chosen cover girl. However, we were surprised to see Scarlett Johansson in a somewhat compromising scene. Scarlett was featured wearing only a shirt, with the words “Sex and Love” displayed across her body as an attracting element. Personally, we had respected Scarlett Johansson as both an actress and a role model for young women. Therefore, we were disappointed that she had been featured on the cover in a sensual way. Often times, individuals purchase magazines based on the people that cover them. For many of us, it is not very difficult to be persuaded to buy a magazine that we would not usually purchase if our favorite actress or musician graces the cover. When we saw Scarlett Johansson on the cover of November’s magazine, we did not think it would be controversial among an older population, but we worried about younger consumers. We were immediately concerned about younger teenagers and pre-teens that may idolize the celebrity, locate the magazine as a result, and find her posing in a more sensual manner. We worried about the possible conclusions that these younger individuals would make based on the cover image, and the effect that one celebrity could have on them in terms of their views on sexuality.

Historically, Glamour Magazine has been focused around beauty tips and fashion, so we felt that it was unnecessary for Scarlett to be represented sensually. The cover could be viewed as an advertisement for sex, which could directly affect the views of consumers, especially younger populations. Our society is constantly dominated by sexual messages from various media outlets. This truth is further proven by this magazine cover, as Scarlett Johansson is represented as a sexual figure on a magazine that originally included make up and fashion trends. If this is so, what positive celebrity role models do teenagers truly have? If many of these individuals are displayed in sexual terms, what are the effects on those that idolize them?

Selling More Than Just A Trench Coat

                                                                                                      http://harryallen.info/?cat=22&paged=5

After discovering this Lord and Taylor ad, we were immediately surprised. After reconfirming that the advertisement was indeed for Lord and Taylor, we were able to recognize some negative aspects that we perceived. Lord and Taylor is a respectable department store. Its prices are relatively expensive, attracting a typical population of successful, older individuals. With this in mind, we were surprised that Lord and Taylor chose to use a sexual scenario to promote a trench coat. The ad seemed outlandish, considering their reputation as a classy and reputable establishment. We believe that the choice to use this ad was risky, as the loyalty of many of its consumers could be jeopardized. More traditional and modest buyers may be shocked and outraged by an ad that contains such a sexual state. Depending on the extent of their disapproval, they may choose to take their business elsewhere which could result in the opposite of the advertisement’s intent.

By analyzing the advertisement further, even more controversial aspects could be recognized. The ad displays two women, one Caucasian and one African American. The Caucasian woman wears the trench coat in a buttoned manner, while the African American woman is holding her trench coat open in order to flash a man on the street. While this might not be perceived by all, we questioned if the advertisement could be interpreted as displaying that one demographic group is more promiscuous than another. If this message is received, many individuals may be greatly offended, and may choose to shop elsewhere. It seems as if the manufacturers of the ad should have weighed if memorability is greater than maintaining the population of loyal consumers that are already present. Someone should ask them, is a trench coat really worth it?

Evolution of Calvin Klein Advertisement -80s

Calvin Klein has always been known for having ad campaigns that pushed the limits of what our society considers tasteful. And in 1982 this ad campaign featuring Iman, a well-known model, debuted.  

http://whoisscout.com/2009/11/19/ck/

These images highlight the female body and are more a form of art.  Iman is striking different, uncommon poses in an attempt to entice the viewer’s sense of curiosity.  The clothes also are relatively modest, which is in stark contrast to later Calvin Klein ads.  In the purple outfit, the only skin that is showing is her hands and her head.  The garment is also very flowing and not form-fitting at all, which does not attract sexual attention.

And even though the third black outfit is cut quite low, her chest is not the focal point of the image.  Her outstretched arm and the tilt of her body interest the viewer much more.  The first image also focuses on an almost awkward pose and features Iman fully covered.  

We're not saying that in the 80's our culture was not focused or influenced by sex because it most certainly was, but in the past few decades, sex has become way more prominent in terms of the media’s drive to show it and the viewer’s drive to see it, this is blatantly visible in the evolution of Calvin Klein advertisements.

90s

T

http://www.bloggingstocks.com/tag/Ads+Gone+Bad/

This ad campaign aired in 1995.  Many differences are apparent between this ad and the previous Iman ads.  First of all, the introduction of a male model into the photos, right next to a female model. These two models seem to be very young, no more than teenagers. Their poses are also very unnatural for their age.  The shirtless boy is awkwardly leaning on the ladder, as is the girl flaunting her midriff.  By arching her back and positioning her thumb that she, she is giving off a more sexual or playful air.  


The direct gazes of both the boy and girl are also very different from the previous Iman campaign.  In all three pictures, Iman is avoiding direct gaze with the camera, yet these two models are facing the camera head-on.  We almost feel like they are trying to be older or they are at least posing an air of confident, that they do not actually possess.  

This video includes interviews which include this boy and girl and a few others answering simple questions about their family, etc, but they are hardly wearing anything and the interviewer is an older man who makes a few inappropriate jokes about some answers.  He also makes it a point to say that each interviewee looks good in their Calvin Klein jeans...creepy.

Today

http://lifeisreallybeautiful.com/2010/10/

This final Calvin Klein ad campaign came out in 2002.  At that time we were 10 years old, and we can’t even imagine our moms' dismay if we would have seen this at that young, malleable age.  In the first image, there is a half naked girl draped on top of a half naked boy while smooching on another boy.  And on the ground there is a shirtless boy who appears to be passed out.  The second image is very similar to the first just changing the positions of some of the models.  These images make it seem as if only people who wear Calvin Klein jeans are capable of participating in this behavior considering every person has on the said jeans.  Therefore if you want to be as hot and trendy as these people you must own Calvin Klein jeans. 

This ad only addresses the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Calvin Klein advertisements.  There are countless more ads with mostly naked, frequently wet models usually participating in some sort of sexually suggestive action, Google images has pages upon pages of this inappropriate material.  Calvin Klein jeans = orgy?  Is that the message we should be sending our 10 year old boys and girls?

Heinz Ketchup: Sexy

http://manishsinha.posterous.com/heinz-hot-ketchup-ad

This advertisement for Heinz ketchup shows the level of ridiculousness that our society has reached.  The image shows a plate of food that upon a longer glance makes the shape of a naked woman.  Ketchup has absolutely nothing to do with sex or sex appeal what so ever.  This is a disturbing example of the over use of sexual advertisements.  This image is objectifying woman by literally showing this one as a piece of meat that is served up and ready to go.  Does Heinz feel this is a good image to be associating with their ketchup?  How could it be that a product as nonsexual as ketchup could become the subject of such advertising?  It is flat out unnecessary and nonsensical. 

BMWhat Are You Thinking?

http://www.funnyhub.com/pictures/pages/bmw-face-advertisement.html

This ad is also disturbing.  It’s disturbing not only from the aspect of being an overly sexual advertisement, but it also has very sexist themes.  The woman has her face replaced with a picture of a car.  This could be an attempt to suggest that buying/driving this car is like having sex with a beautiful woman.  There is no need for this sort of comparison.  It makes no legitimate claim as to why you should buy this product, but is instead rather crude.  The sexist portion of this ad comes from the fact that the woman’s face is covered.  By doing this, the woman’s identity is withdrawn and she is being represented as an object of lust.

Promoting Gossip or Promoting Sex?

http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/popwrap/item_opWGqSOH9VIGZVODz0JOVK

To promote new episodes of the show Gossip Girl, the CW released four advertisements displaying different sensual images behind attention-getting quotes. Not surprisingly, the advertisements gained a lot of public attention, as they were seen as both controversial and possibly inappropriate. By simply looking at any of the posters, the viewer is bombarded by an extremely sexual image. Every ad contains a male and female in a sexually suggestive manner, with little to no visible articles of clothing. Each image contains a quote, or some sort of text that represents the show as an indulgence that may not be appropriate for everyone. These elements seem contradictory and unfitting for multiple reasons. First of all, the show’s main viewing population is composed of female teenagers. While most viewers fall in this category, there are certainly younger individuals who watch the show. When these populations are exposed to the posters, what message is received?

We think that the posters clearly promote sex, as the main characters are the subjects of the advertisements. When viewers admire or idolize certain characters, how far will they go to mimic their actions? Will seeing the posters make erotic behavior more acceptable to them? While this is certainly a concern with teenagers, as issues like teenage pregnancy are still prevalent, these advertisements could be even more detrimental for younger viewers. The posters could contribute to a skewed development of what is sexually acceptable, and what is normal in our society in terms of sex. With one of the posters displaying a quote from The Boston Herald, deeming Gossip Girl as “Every Parent’s Nightmare,”  we must question if the intent to advertise if truly fulfilled. Can a greater viewing population be gained when a warning to protective parents is blatantly given? Furthermore, is attaining a greater viewing population more significant than the sexual messages that the youth of our country are exposed to?