Dove, a Unilever beauty company, has always tried to promote beauty for women of all shapes, sizes and colors and has included models of those -this in numerous advertising campaigns for their beauty products. . Yet an October 2017 ad sparked controversy over the depiction of non-white women in these ads. In the body lotion ad, a black model wore a shirt the same color as her skin. She then removed the shirt from herself, and under the shirt was now a white model who was then wearing a shirt with her own skin tone before taking off her shirt to transform into an Asian model with her own skin tone. Some viewers considered this racist, while others, including the model, took no issue with this and felt the ad was disproportionate, which brings us to the question: how can an ad with a diverse set of models could have been perceived as racist? A review and application of Stuart Hall's cultural studies theory will help us study such a thing. This article will cover the theory, what happened during and in response to the ad, apply it to the ad, and prescribe a way to avoid such controversy in the future. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why violent video games should not be banned"? Get an original essay Cultural studies, a theory of mass communications by sociology professor Stuart Hall, is a form of neo-Marxist criticism that claims that Mass media manufactures consent from the masses (the public) to maintain dominant ideologies, frameworks that help us interpret, understand and make sense of social existence. According to cultural studies theory, the media allows the more powerful to remain in power by convincing the less powerful to remain powerless. The history of the theory dates back to when Frankfurt School theorists, who were strong supporters of Karl Marx and his beliefs in economic determinism, believed that human behavior is shaped by differences in available financial resources and the power differentials between the rich and the poor. , thus creating the second component of the theory, which shows the worst side of capitalism. This is where the term "cultural industries" comes from, encompassing producers of television, radio, film, newspapers and other forms of media. These cultural industries produce and reproduce values ​​and ideas by exercising hegemony over society. This swinging, this production and this reproduction are not intentional; the media just doesn't monitor it and reinforces it. However, the theory prescribes things that people can do. They can simply consume the content produced by the media and not raise questions about the message, which is called operating within the dominant code, although in this component, therefore there cannot be any changes resulting from it . They could enforce a negotiable code by seeking exceptions to what is the norm, even if the masses still generally follow the ideology perpetuated by the media. Finally, people can change the message by substituting an opposite code and deviating from the norm, thereby exposing bias and going against the establishment (Griffin, 2009). Although this theory may be particularly applicable to news, it can also be used to understand reactions to other forms of media, including advertisements. In October 2017, Dove released a video advertisement for a newbody lotion and, to do this, the video featured several models of different skin colors taking off their shirts, which matched their skin tones, and then transforming into each other in a sequence. One of the models, a black model, took off her shirt and transformed into a white woman. Naomi Blake, a makeup artist, saw the ad on Facebook and commented that the ad was "tone-deaf." Another viewer saw this ad as a cleansing product and good for people of all skin colors, such as the white model took off her shirt and transformed into another non-white woman. One commenter said: “I think they meant it was for all skin types... it went from black to white to another race (BBC, 2017). » However, not everyone agreed that there was racist intent in the ad. Lola Ogunyemi, a Nigerian who grew up in the United States, spoke out and explained that she didn't think it was racist at all and was thrilled to be asked to take part in a global beauty campaign , Ogunyemi said in his message. article for The Guardian, "the experience I had with the Dove team was positive. I had a wonderful time on set. All the women on set understood the concept and the overarching objective : using our differences to highlight the fact that all skin was different deserves gentleness However, she said Dove should be more careful and explain themselves better in the future to avoid any misunderstandings about their advertisements. “There is certainly something to be said here about how advertisers need to look beyond the surface and consider the impact their images can have, particularly when it comes to marginalized groups of women. It's important to consider whether your content shows that your consumer's voice is not only heard, but also valued. Dove apologized, saying: “An image we recently posted on Facebook failed to represent. women of color in a thoughtful way. We deeply regret the offense it has caused (Ogunyemi, 2017). » To follow Ogunyemi's advice and hear the consumer voice, we need to explore why some may have perceived this ad as racist. While applying cultural studies theory to this artifact, we must also examine the history, both past and recent, of norms. beauty and beauty products in general as the components are applied. The first element of the theory, allowing the more powerful to remain in power while undermining the less powerful, can be interpreted when models change skin color. were meant to be racist, given that a white woman transforms into another woman of color within seconds of appearing, seeing a woman of color become a white woman can mean a "cleaner" woman than the woman of 'before for some viewers, showing that this white woman can be better than the black woman. A historical example of one powerful group holding power over another group in terms of race and beauty standards is when white British settlers were colonizing Australia and considered the Aborigines unsanitary and dirty. . Kathleen Jackson, a woman of Wiradjuri heritage, wrote about her childhood, during which her grandmother always made her look her best in public. This was because her grandmother had been raised under the Aboriginal Protection Act, a policy which allowed Aboriginal children to be removed from their families if welfare officersthe State considered them “too unsanitary”. Beauty standards were already established along lines of class, gender, and race, and these expectations were used to justify colonial expansion and the oppression of indigenous peoples through European economic and cultural ideals, and indigenous peoples were considered an unsanitary and dirty people. , and to avoid being deported, children were made to be beautiful by colonial standards. To go even further, European colonialists believed it was possible to “remove” indigenous characteristics (Jackson, 2015). Although these policies are not in effect today, the powerful have remained in power and dominate the beauty industry, with ethnic minorities being unemployed more often than the white majority in Western media (Jewell, 2017). And within today's beauty industry, there is yet another component of Stuart Hall's cultural studies that has helped maintain the dominant ideology through the subtle influence of capitalist practices. The second component of the theory, the reflection of capitalism in its time. the worst, is visible in beauty products and promotion. Women may never live up to established beauty standards because of a physical characteristic, whether it's weight, scars, or skin color. Unfortunately, throughout history, capitalism has played a role in exploiting women into buying products to try to feel really beautiful, buying the product to feel better, or promoting racist ideals. An advertisement for Pears soap, dating from 1884, depicts a white child bathing a black child. After the bath, the black child's body turned white, showing how "clean" he now is. Another advertisement, this time for Nulla-Nulla, an Australian soap brand from 1901, depicting an Aboriginal woman making a frightening face, and all around her is a slogan that reads: "Strike earth on the head ". Additionally, the woman carried a sign reading “dirt” to signify that she was “dirty,” a European colonial view. However, this was only for this one product, as Nulla-Nulla's slogan was "Australia's White Hope, the Best Household Soap" (Jackson, 2015). In another example, an advertisement for Cook's Lightning Soap showed an older white woman washing dirt off a young child, whose skin had turned from a dirty shade to a white shade. (Mitchell, 2017) And outside the window stood a line of children who may have just been very dirty, but who could pass for black. And in addition to this controversial ad campaign, Dove has partnered with Fair & Lovely, a company that manufactures skin whitening products sold in over forty countries (Conor, 2017). Overall, capitalist marketing and advertising has insisted throughout history that darker skin meant dirt while white skin meant purity and beauty. The most notable element of this theory that can be applied to this artifact is the hegemonic nature of this advertisement that many viewers interpreted. With a history of the beauty industry perpetuating non-white people, particularly women and children, as below beauty standards and as women who need to wash their skin more, the dominant group , primarily white women, will be maintained as an ideal group. standard of beauty, cleanliness and “normality”. Jaywant Singh, professor of marketing at Kingston University, said in an interview with The Independent: "Racial prejudice and.