Celebs Without Makeup: Beauty Bashing Via Video?

body-image-artwork.jpgAwhile back I found this poignant painting (at left) on Ashley Cecil’s blog. She uses a paintbrush to bring issues to the forefront through artistic journalism, and this post about kids’ exposure to daytime TV is no exception.

This art piece depicting body image messages being sent to kids in our media culture moved me so much, I bought it for our work in Shaping Youth’s counter-marketing sessions! I’ve been saving it for a pertinent topic like media myths and beauty, so these YouTube celebrity videos of stars sans primping fit the bill.

In what could be construed as a “user-generated content” salute to the Dove evolution ad, we’re seeing multiple compilations of celebrities without makeup making the viral video rounds among teens, revealing, alas…NO ONE is “perfect.”

These amateur clips manage to strip away appearance-based perceptions in ‘ohmigawd’ teen style, using soundtracks loaded with irony like: Pretty Woman, You are so Beautiful and Beautiful Day.

Question: Are these videos empowering or demeaning?

Are they a backlash to our glamorama culture from kids tired of dealing with expectations? Or are they just more virtual voyeurism and mean-spirited potshots to pull the red carpet out from under the hotshots in Hollywood?

Lots of nuances worthy of deconstruction here…Pop culture has always been fascinated with ‘oops moments’ and candid cameras (like those Glamour mag dos & don’ts that use incognito blackout bars to hide faces of critiques) but these viral videos feel a tad different…

While the Dove love “campaign for real beauty” provided voluntary unveiling of a media myth, these videos seem like punch-n-pummel “told you sos” to snag celebs in ambush-style when they’re not at their best.

That’s more akin to tabloid fodder…Trashy mags do this with public figures all the time…but somehow, UGC (user generated content) takes it to a personal, even ‘artistic’ editorial level by setting it to a musical score in paparazzi-style harshness.

Some are simply strong reality checks, but some videos border on spiteful, “in-your-face” teehees…As if people are going out of their way to tear-down personas and reveal candids of stars snapped at their “I haven’t had my coffee yet” worst.

To me, this opens an even bigger media dialogue…

Is it becoming a media norm to ‘tear down’ in order to ‘build up’ self-esteem at another’s expense? (one earful of the lyrics in this soundtrack; you’ll see what I mean!)

If it IS becoming ‘normative’ behaviorally, where’s that mockery and snarky nastiness coming from? Media?

Has youth universally accepted reality show humiliation and voter-driven judgment calls in the name of ‘hilarity?’ If so…is it any wonder the world’s a bit less pleasant and more caustic?

Not playing the blame game, but clearly there are some negative precedents being established, n’est ce pas?

Mind you, I realize that “before & after” makeover magic has been a HUGE part of women’s mags and newsstand sales from time eternal so this is nothing ‘new.’

Maybe this “slam-city” stuff is just a matter of DEGREE, or its the juxtaposition of put-downs as entertainment that’s unsettling…then again, maybe it’s not disturbing to anyone at all? (although I’m sure the celebs could write a chapter or two on that one)

What do YOU think?

Is the pervasiveness of new media’s digital distribution just like swapping show-n-tell entertainment mag rags at poolside? (a teen summer staple if ever I’ve seen one lately)

I think it’s the ‘catch ’em when they’re vulnerable’ part that concerns me most…because like most celebrity media, there’s trickle down impact on kids.

The last thing we need is more ‘mean girl media myth’ perpetuation via UGC send-ups of humiliation to start a trend of lousy photo fests. (And that goes for relational aggression from either gender)

Pals that are pranksters can turn fun photos and baited set-ups into a cyberbullying scene fast. (even by accident, if any slumber party or camp out ‘joke’ turns into wild viral internet fodder)

Consider that once that ‘ewww you look horrid’ photo is posted, zapped to a cellphone, or flung into cyberspace it’s nearly impossible to retrieve. (as you can see by the web celeb saturation of these same stars ‘repurposed’ time & again)

On the flip side, if teens are receiving a body positive message with these viral videos of stars “au naturale” it takes the conversation in an entirely different direction…As in, “get real/be real, I’m ok/you’re ok”…

It’s healthy to see that “bed-head” abounds and no one wakes up as a magazine cover icon.

Stars that choose to be seen through the lens of everyday life, are particularly appealing to many teens who hail them as heroes. (e.g. Jamie Lee Curtis when she conveyed her own ‘true colors’ message in More Magazine long ago made a big splash with MOMS for sure!)

I guess the word choosing is what sets the stage to differentiate kindness vs. malice in the candid camera category…you can tell when someone’s snap-happy for sensationalist drek.

One could argue these celebs are subject to ‘brand erosion’ having their personal privacy undermined, captured on film, and derailed by errant press.

It’s not like these photos are self-incriminating actions like being drunk/drugged sans undies or busting up a night club…these shots are of stars simply “caught being human.”

Shazam. There goes the coach into a pumpkin.

As public figures, media has erased the boundaries of good taste and thrown down the gauntlet in ‘anything goes’ style leaving ANY modicum of civility in the dust.

EVERY foible or photo is now fair game…Whether it’s a celebrity sans makeup or a teacher denied a credential due to an “unprofessional” Halloween photo of a partying pirate on a MySpace account. (ARGH, maties! I’ll save THAT dialogue on public vs. private sector digital media reach as a blog topic for another time!)

One thing’s for certain though…The “whoa, you should see THIS one” craze is a “forward to a friend” aspect of social media that’s NOT going away…

It’s ever-increasing…to third screen…fourth screen…always on access.

Now more than ever, digital media, viral video, and the ability to comment instantaneously creates a powerful distribution channel. We just need to remind ourselves…

What we DO with the quality of the content is all up for grabs.

404

Comments

  1. “if teens are receiving a body positive message with these viral videos of stars “au naturale” it takes the conversation in an entirely different direction…As in, “get real/be real, I’m ok/you’re ok'” is what hits home for me. instead of bringing the celebrities down, shifting the norm to natural, non-photoshopped as desired and wonderful.

    Thanks for the featuring the painting Amy!

  2. I partly blame the “Ugly Betty” effect. Check out the website for that show– it’s cool to be ugly? What kind of message is that? Ugly is a label. Do we want kids labeling themselves as “ugly”? Weird.

    Anyway– GREAT write up! Totally thought provoking. I’m looking forward to your bit on private vs public

  3. Ashley, yes, I WISH kids WOULD get a positive message from those kind of virals…Some do, I’m sure, but many of those soundtracks were MEAN juxtapositions, as if the editorial message was “nanny-nanny-boo-boo we caught you looking gross”!!!

    Also, I’ll be featuring your painting again when I do a piece on http://www.thebodypositive.org As I’m interviewing the founder soon.

    Thank you so much for using your talents to create such positive, vibrant media! (yes, art is media for certain!)

  4. Izzy, I think the ‘cool to be ugly’ attempt by ABC was MEANT to ‘normalize’ appearances, AWAY from perfection, making her adored by the mainstream masses of “me-to”-ism.

    But you’re right, as media is so adept at doing, it turned Betty into a label and stereotype in itself…an appearance based cue of rebellion. (“I’m so bright and above you, I don’t have to give a rip what I look like whatsoever you Barbie-doll -troll” vs. a warmer ‘be yourself whoever you are’ message)

    I know they were going for the ‘underdog’ & ‘buddy film’ feel good formula as you can see on ABC’s description of the show:

    “In the superficial world of high fashion, image is everything. Styles come and go, and the only constants are the superthin beauties who wear them. How can an ordinary girl – a slightly plump plain-Jane from Queens – possibly fit in?”

    “If you took a moment to get to know Betty Suarez, you’d see how sweet, intelligent and hard-working she is. But few people do, because in the world of high fashion Betty is the oversized peg in the petite round hole.”

    “When publishing mogul Bradford Meade hands the reigns of Mode, the bible of the fashion industry, over to this son, Daniel, he specifically hires Betty as his son’s new assistant – mostly because she’s the only woman in NYC Daniel won’t sleep with. Though this “player” is reluctant to accept her at first, Betty’s indomitable spirit and bright ideas will eventually win him over. Neither of them really knows the ins and outs of the fashion world, but the two are a formidable team against those who will do anything to see them fall.”

    Frankly, the name of the show alone was a total turnoff for me, even though I adore America Ferrera and her work…and embrace the ‘be yourself whoever you are’ message big time.

    A simple ‘brand repositioning’ could’ve done wonders there.

    Sigh. At least they were TRYING this time though, yes? ๐Ÿ™‚
    Thanks for your comment, you always open my eyes to new ways of seeing things…

  5. This is an interesting conversation b/c whether something is beautiful or ugly is so completely subjective. In Betty’s world, maybe she is ugly. In my world, she’s a cutie. However, I had to move from Los Angeles, a city obsessed with standardized ideals of beauty, to Oregon, where even with just a little lipstick on, I’m consistently the most made up person in the room! The move was spurred in large part to raise my four year-old daughter in a place where it might be easier for her to grow up to be happy with how she looks. My personal challenge is to only pass my genes on to her; not my own issues around body image. I think it’s important to talk with her about what beauty really is (and isn’t). When she’s a little older, one way might be to show her these before and after photos and then ask her what she thinks.The good news is that there’s lot of conversation happening around this whole topic. I’m also the moderator on a new site http://www.webelieveingirls.com that’s a place for concerned adults to talk about body image and other issues that face young girls like media impact, clothing and make-up, values, etc. It’s sponsored by Mattel under the Barbie brand (yes, that Barbie), and they’re truly interested in hearing all the different points of view. I hope you’ll come check it out and tell them what you think.

  6. Eve, I’ll be doing a profile piece on this new Mattel community, (the design is very “Dove–campaign for real beauty” in look and tonality I noticed…) I’d love to hear what they have to say, and if you’re the moderator…what YOU’re witnessing as well.

    I’m particularly interested in the impact of Barbie, Bratz Dolls and other toy-driven influences that integrate into girls’ psyche as ‘aspirational’ role models very early on.

    Let’s talk…???

Speak Your Mind

*