The Social Media Conundrum

Lush Cosmetics made headlines last month when they decided to quit social media to raise awareness about the damaging effects to people's mental health that it has been shown to have. "I've spent all my life avoiding putting harmful ingredients in my products. There is now overwhelming evidence we are being put at risk when using social media. I'm not willing to expose my customers to this harm, so it's time to take it out of the mix," Lush co-founder and CEO Mark Constantine OBE stated.You don't have dig very deep to find a plethora of articles about the damage social media has on mental health. From the addictive qualities that make social media akin to playing the slots—to the disappointment and depression caused by FOMO (fear of missing out)—to the fake filters that present a misleading picture of who we really are—social media wreaks havoc with our lives.You also don't have to dig very deep to find "Social Media Designer" as a job title or in the list of essential skills that a graphic designer should have when applying for a job. Graphic designers have always found work where consumers interact with content. With 4.48 billion people using social media worldwide, there is no doubt they need skills in this area. All kinds of classes and bootcamps are available to get certified in social media marketing and they can add this skillset to their resume and portfolio.Recently, a bi-partisan probe has launched a probe into Meta Platforms (formerly known as Facebook) to look into the harmful effects Instagram has on kids and the techniques used to increase the frequency and duration of engagement by young users and the harm caused as a result. New York Attorney General Letitia James has joined the coalition and has said the company continues to put profits over safety and we need to protect our children and young adults. A Meta spokesperson claims they are continuing to add features to deal with the negative issues caused by their platforms including prompts to "Take a Break" and ways to nudge them toward other types of content. It's yet another conundrum; how can they possibly protect their users while at the same time profiting from them?The question is huge, how does a graphic designer work ethically and responsibly within the minefield of social media marketing? All and any ideas are welcome.https://thehill-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/arts-culture/582898-lush-cosmetics-quitting-social-media-to-bring?amp&fbclid=IwAR31-FU0Nzg4Upke0mPcq_lVZKJF_Sxny5CJ9mJju066NAs-Wgt5eV0xdVMhttps://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/lush-cosmetics-quitting-social-mediahttps://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/instagram-investigated-coalition-of-states-effects-kidshttps://lancastergeneralhealth.org/health-hub-home/2021/september/the-effects-of-social-media-on-mental-healthhttps://www.mcleanhospital.org/essential/it-or-not-social-medias-affecting-your-mental-healthhttps://www.statista.com/topics/1538/social-media-marketing/#dossierKeyfigureshttps://backlinko.com/social-media-users#social-media-usage-statshttps://khn.org/news/social-media-is-harming-the-minds-of-our-youth-right-maybe-not/

Photoshop and Body Shaming

I'm a huge Margaret Atwood fan and read the Handmaid's Tale, a science fiction novel about a dystopian totalitarian society, years ago. I've been a fan of the Hulu series too. I recently watched the documentary about Atwood, "Margaret Atwood: A Word after a Word after a Word is Power," and was fascinated when she talked about how much of the material for her 1985 novel was based on true events. With that in mind, it's not a huge leap to imagine the recent New York Times story about altered yearbook photos at Bartram Trail High School in St. Johns County, Fla as more real-life material.In the photo above, someone with Photoshop (or a similar image editing program) added a black bar to the young woman's chest to block her cleavage. There are multiple examples in the yearbook where this was done—without the permission or knowledge of the students. They only found out when they opened the yearbook. Edits were only done on images of female students, no male student photos were edited. Students said their first reaction was fury, then they felt sexualized and exposed.Image manipulation is ubiquitous these days. Most of us assume retouching is used for advertising along with a plethora of other uses. Its use for body shaming is not surprising, but definitely alarming, and perhaps we should view it as a huge red flag.Sources:https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/23/us/yearbook-photos-st-johns-girls-altering.html?referringSource=articleSharehttps://www.insider.com/handmaids-tale-based-on-real-world-origins-history-events-2019-8#:~:text=%22The%20Handmaid's%20Tale%22%20may%20be,in%20religious%20and%20political%20history.&text=Its%20real%2Dlife%20origins%20are,30%20years%20after%20its%20publication.

Photoshop: In the Name of the Law

For years there have been debates about truth in advertising and whether or not images that have been digitally altered should be labeled as such. Proponents say that digitally altered images used in beauty ads are harmful to consumers, that these ads are misleading, manipulative, and contribute to negative body images. The documentary “Killing Us Softly” by Jean Kilbourne reveals the misogynistic fantasy world of the undernourished, oversexed, and objectified women. Kilbourne makes an excellent case for how difficult it is to be healthy in a toxic cultural environment when the ideal is impossible to achieve.Opponents of labeling claim that this would require warnings on a multitude of advertising materials. For example, the roads used in car advertising are never as serene as they appear. If labeling is required for all digitally altered images, it would extend across a wide range of graphic imagery and require costly and time-consuming measures to enforce it.A recent New York Times article about an altered image used for a lineup highlights the argument taking place in another arena—not just the world of advertising, but in our justice system. Court records and interviews with police departments across the nation show that this has become a regular practice. Some criminal justice experts say that the practice can actually make lineups fairer by adding features to make it harder to distinguish the perpetrator from other suspects.Mat dos Santos, the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon, thinks otherwise and states, “If you can’t do a good photo lineup, the answer is not to change the photos; the answer is a photo lineup just shouldn’t be done.”What do you think, have we reached a tipping point? Do we need laws in place when law enforcement is using Photoshop to alter evidence?Sources:https://www.pixelz.com/blog/photoshop-models-laws/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/24/us/police-photoshop-tattoos.html?smid=nytcore-ios-sharehttps://uclawreview.org/2017/06/21/truth-in-advertising-should-america-ban-photoshop/

Are we ready for #unphotoshopped?

One of the conversations that has come up again thanks to the #metoo movement is the effect of airbrushed images. In a recent NY Times article, Vanessa Friedman reports on the stand that CVS has taken to stop "materially altering" the imagery associated with its beauty products.Altering images has gone on long before Photoshop. Composite images can be found as far back as the Civil War era where Abraham Lincoln's head was placed on John Calhoun's body. There are somewhat benign examples like Oprah's head on Ann Margret's body and then the blatantly racist examples like the darkening of OJ Simpson on Time Magazine's cover shortly after Simpson's arrest.These days you don't need a darkroom or Photoshop; there is no shortage of free apps available for altering images. While many of these effects may seem harmless, research shows that in fact it can be very damaging to self-esteem. The documentary "Killing Us Softly" by Jean Kilbourne reveals the misogynistic fantasy world of the undernourished, oversexed, and objectified women. Kilbourne makes an excellent case for how difficult it is to be healthy in a toxic cultural environment when the ideal is impossible to achieve.Like the topic of ethics itself, the conversation about what "materially altering" is brings up many questions. Will it be ok to remove stray hair and under-eye circles? Will crow's feet and laugh lines be off limits?Photoshop has become so ingrained in our culture that it may take our culture some time to get used to the #unphotoshopped in Advertising. There should be no doubt that it's about time that we get started.

Fashion Week: When Does It Become Dangerous?

Fashion week is here again. It's fun, it's festive, often ludicrous, but is it also dangerous?During her presentation this summer at "Here London 2016," visual artist Yolanda Domínguez talks about how we define ourselves by the images we see. Domínguez points to the abundance of images that are young, white, and female and asks what happened to everyone else? She goes on to point out the ridiculous poses that we see in fashion advertising and the adjectives that go with them: docile, submissive, available, and violated. Advertising as shown in the image above serves to reinforce a society where violence against women is perpetuated and accepted. It's not just ludicrous, it's dangerous.In 2015 Domínguez decided to show fashion brand launch images to a group of 8 year-olds with her project, "Children vs. Fashion." The results were very revealing. The children decoded the images and exposed the differences in how women and men are portrayed. They thought the women were scared, sick or drunk and many wanted to help them. Men on the contrary were seen as happy and heroic.In other projects, Yolanda Domínguez engages her audience to participate and asking for volunteers to take part in staging events to raise awareness. Her current project is called "Little Black Dress." She is looking for volunteers; she asks participants to pose in this classic fashion icon—regardless of their size and ethnicity. Domínguez calls upon us to shatter the existing fashion tropes, and create new images that are representative of actual women.As you catch a glimpse of the beautiful, amazing, and ridiculous outfits that are revealed this week, also consider the dangerous side effects of consuming these images.Contact Yolanda Domínguez if you'd like to participate in "Little Black Dress" and watch the full "Here London 2016" presentation here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNnR2aQoefk 

Subverting the Narrative

It won't come as news to most of us that Photoshop and the multitude of photo apps that alter images have led to unrealistic views of ourselves. Women and men alike face body image issues in an era when taking selfies at every possible moment has become the norm. The objectification of women in advertising is a serious problem that has been hotly debated for years. Showing flawless and anatomically impossible bodies is harmful on many levels, and unfortunately it has become even more ubiquitous.Many of us consider it a welcome sight when advertisers challenge this narrative. The Dove Real Beauty campaign was among these. Their efforts to show women as they are were widely praised, though some critics felt that ad campaigns for products like Axe and Slimfast should be altered or cancelled as well if Unilever (the owner of these brands) was genuinely concerned.Justin Dingwall is a commercial photographer from South Africa who is using his skills to make work that subverts the standard narrative of what beauty is. In his fine art series Albus, Dingwall tackles the stigma associated with albinism. Worldwide, it's estimated that 1 in 20,000 people are born with albinism; in South Africa, the estimate is 1 in 4000. Those who live with albinism in Africa are often discriminated against and subjected superstition and violence.In a series of over 40 portraits featuring Thando Hopa and Sanele Xaba, Dingwall uses lighting and styling to question traditional ideas of femininity and masculinity and accepted standards of beauty. He includes religious symbolism; butterflies to convey transformation and The Madonna to convey comfort, acceptance, provision, and compassion. His beautiful portraits set a new standard, while also challenging us to consider how we perceive beauty.What have you seen that subverts the stereotypical narrative of beauty?Sources:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/21/dove-real-beauty-campaign-turns-10_n_4575940.htmlhttp://www.designindaba.com/articles/creative-work/albus-photo-series-challenging-established-standards-beautyhttp://www.justindingwall.com/https://www.thebalance.com/advertising-women-and-objectification-38754

Consumed by Consumerism

Most graphic designers associate Photoshop wizardry with making visual magic to engage consumers. One of my favorite digital artists, Erik Almas, is a master at this. His campaigns for Absolut and other products are amazing and award-winning, and his work epitomizes the power of digital imaging tools to make people and places flawless, and products larger than life.It’s a much rarer occasion when we see these tools being used for anti-consumerism, which is exactly the point with the image “Decorum,” by visual artist Margeaux Walter. A visually stunning image, at first glance “Decorum” wows the viewer with the sheer abundance of luxurious leopard fur. Yet upon further inspection, we realize the irony of the photo as the leopard gazes back out on a of scene conspicuous consumption and total suffocation.Walter says about her work, “I'm interested in how ads, technology, and consumerism are changing our lives. We are becoming products of our products, being suffocated by our materials.”Resources:http://www.chronogram.com/hudsonvalley/on-the-cover/Content?oid=2322822http://www.erikalmas.com/#campaigns

The Perfect Response

Three students from Leeds University in Great Britain recently had the perfect response to Victoria's Secret ‘Perfect Body’ Campaign when the company introduced a new bra collection called “Body by Victoria” with an ad campaign featuring ultra thin models with the words “The Perfect Body” running across the image.The students were outraged by the campaign, claiming the ads perpetuate low self-esteem and negative body image in women. They asserted, as does the National Eating Disorders Association (NEDA), that this contributes to a culture ridden with unhealthy eating habits and disorders. They created an online petition on Change.org and requested that Victoria’s Secret apologize and amend their irresponsible advertising. They racked up nearly 30,000 supporters. Images that celebrate the amazing diversity among women were posted online by supporters like Dear Kate and to the Twitter hashtag #iamperfect in response to the campaign.The three young women, Frances Black, Gabriella Kountourides, and Laura Ferris, talked about the influence that the hugely popular company has on young women and called upon them to take their responsibility seriously. In addition to raising awareness and gaining support, the students’ efforts paid off. Victoria’s Secret quietly replaced the ad with another. The wording was amended to say, “A Body For Every Body.” Although as many will note, even though the words have changed, the perfect body images remain the same. The students’ response may have been perfect, however Victoria’s Secret still falls a bit short.Sources:http://www.jrn.com/kmtv/now-trending/Victorias-Secret-quietly-changes-Perfect-Body-slogan-after-criticism-281993701.html?lc=Smarthttps://www.change.org/p/victoriassecret-apologise-for-your-damaging-perfect-body-campaign-iamperfecthttp://nypost.com/2014/10/31/victorias-secret-perfect-body-campaign-sparks-backlash/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11213078/Victorias-Secret-lingerie-advert-changed-from-perfect-body-after-internet-storm.html

Should Beauty Trump Authenticity?

Stunning photographs of disappearing tribes from Jimmy Nelson's new book, Before They Pass Away, have been circulating recently online. Undoubtedly beautiful images, the work has been praised as, "epic portraits that present these dignified inheritors of noble and age-old traditions in a proud spirit and in all their glory—a unique visual experience."Critics offer another point of view as posted in the comments section on Fast Company's website:

This is disturbing. It has popped up a number of times on my newsfeed. It is yet another white westerner's fascination with the authentic and exotic 'other'. This book is totally reminiscent of nineteenth century Social Darwinism and the euro centric belief that 'primitive' cultures were destined to die out when confronted with European 'civilisation'.

I thought what an amazing project then I saw his work on Maori in New Zealand. That is bullshit. No Maori dress like that now and haven't for at least 100 years or more. This is total fabrication. Such a disappointment.

I also wonder about the ethics of such a project since Nelson admits that he couldn't communicate verbally with most of his subjects? Nelson also said "They risk abandoning their authenticity and go towards the material world.” I wonder how much money he will make from his own little piece of material culture.

Nelson says, "I didn't start this project anticipating that I could stop the world from changing. I purely wanted to create a visual document that reminds us and generations to come of how beautiful the human world once was."The controversy surrounding Nelson's work is not new; the beauty of these images brings to mind the work of Edward Curtis. During the early part of the 1900s Curtis undertook a project of photographing Native Americans that would span thirty years, and stir up issues of authenticity and ethics along the way.Creating what many felt were overly romanticized images, Curtis was accused of image manipulation when it was discovered that he had retouched images to remove elements of civilization—as he did in one image that proudly displayed an alarm clock. Some also felt it was not authentic documentation since he posed his subjects and asked them to don ceremonial headdresses and leggings. Curtis felt his portraits gave face to the indigenous peoples of North America, who were threatened by extinction.This question isn't unique to disappearing human cultures; the adoption of the polar bear as a mascot in the fight against global warming raises the same types of questions. Portrayed in Coca-cola ads as pure and adorable creatures, real polar bears have been documented eating their own cubs. One can understand how the cute and adorable polar bear image would engage more supporters than a blood-thirsty cannibal.At the heart of this debates lies the never-ending question that photographers and graphic designers alike wrestle with: what's more important—authenticity—or creating awareness, empathy, and support?Sources:http://www.fastcoexist.com/3021773/see-these-heartbreaking-photos-of-worlds-disappearing-cultures-before-they-fade-awayhttp://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/11/04/lost-tribes-before-they-pass-away-jimmy-nelson-_n_4212518.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/books/short-nights-of-the-shadow-catcher-by-timothy-egan.htmlhttp://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/ecur/item/96515425/resource/http://www.coca-colacompany.com/stories/coke-lore-polar-bearshttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2071638/Polar-bears-Cannibal-pictures-prove-theyll-eat-bear-cubs.html

The Power of Photoshop Users

Much has been written about the atrocities of Photoshop. It has been used for all kinds of photo manipulation—some is considered racist, like the OJ Simpson image that graced Time magazine's cover; some is considered dangerous and ridiculous, like the Iran missile image explosions; and some is considered anti-feminist and irresponsible as shown in this video "Killing Us Softly 4: Advertising's Image of Women" with Jean Kilbourne.Is it true that the best Photoshop work goes unnoticed? Richard Fisher states just that in a post entitled, "Photoshop – the Good, the Bad and the Ugly." The post goes on to say, "when used correctly, it enhances a photo and can be used to remove flaws. Clearly its good practice to check and improve any photo you use even if it is just making sure the contrast is ok. Untidy or low quality images look unprofessional and can reflect badly on your brand. But it’s about being subtle, about having the skill to change and adjust the image so that it is improved without revealing the process of improvement." (1)A recent presentation on TED Talks by photo retoucher Becci Mason focuses on how Photoshop was used to bring joy and memories back to those affected by the devastating 2011 tsunami in Japan. Mason had traveled to the scene as part of a relief effort, All Hands, and while there discovered the damage done to photos, albums, cameras, and memory cards. Using social media to gather over 1,100 volunteers, she created Photo Rescue Japan to spearhead the effort to restore the images. Over 135,000 photographs were cleaned, and hundreds were retouched and returned to their owners.Mason's efforts aimed to restore the images to their original state, not to obviously look photoshopped. But what about the obvious uses of photoshop? There are occasions when obvious manipulation can be used for good. Chaz Maviyane Davies is a graphic designer who uses Photoshop to create images for social activism. His website, maviyane.com, aptly named "Creative Defiance," shows powerful examples of how manipulated images don't only have to be used for advertising and consumerism. Davies also lent his creative efforts to helping Tsunami victims by creating a powerful image that was commissioned to raise funds to aid victims.Photoshop itself is merely tool in the hands of its users, without an end user it is nothing—they are the ones with the power. What have you seen that appalls you? Inspires you?Notes:(1) http://www.graphicdesignblog.co.uk/photoshop-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/Sources:http://www.fourandsix.com/photo-tampering-history/tag/race-and-genderhttp://www.graphicdesignblog.co.uk/photoshop-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/04/retouching-lives-through-photos-and-using-photoshop-for-good/http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/11/photoshop-frenzy-on-iran-missile-tests/http://youtu.be/9JKy6ZfmBn0  

Un-hate, or unethical?

Benetton's recent release of the "Unhate" ad campaign has caused a firestorm of controversy. The goal of their campaign is a worthy one—to contribute to a new culture of tolerance and to combat hatred. The UNHATE Campaign is the first in a series of initiatives involving community. In addition to the UNHATE Campaign, the UNHATE Foundation, founded by the Benetton Group, is planning a Global "UNHATE Day" with events scheduled for 50 different cities around the world, including Europe, Asia, and Latin America. Other initiatives include "Art for Tolerance," which will support the talent and work of young people living in areas where hatred has generated social injustice and conflicts.Unfortunately, one of the first efforts of their campaign has already been recalled. The photoshopped image of the Pope and Al-Azhar Mosque locked in a kiss caused the Vatican to respond with furious protests. Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi stated, "This is a grave lack of respect for the Pope. We cannot help but express a resolute protest at the entirely unacceptable use of a manipulated image of the Holy Father, used as part of a publicity campaign which has commercial ends.” The Vatican demanded that the image be removed from the campaign and is taking legal action to ensure the doctored image isn't distributed.The White House also released a statement that they have a long-standing policy disapproving of the use of the president's name and likeness for commercial purposes. Despite this, Benetton ads showing President Obama kissing Hugo Chavez are expected to appear in upcoming issues of "Newsweek," "New York Magazine," and the "Economist." Sources say that Benetton did run it by their legal department, getting informed about the consequences they could expect to face when receiving complaints.Benetton has a long history of using advertising to promote social messages. In the 1990s Tibor Kalman created "The United Colors of Benetton," a product-based series of multicultural kids promoting ethnic and racial harmony. Next came the creation of Colors, a magazine produced by Benetton for which Kalman became editor-in-chief. The goal for Benetton was to suggest they had a social conscience. The goal for Kalman was to create a platform for socio-economic issues.What do you think about the UNHATE campaign? Did they intentionally proceed with what many view as unethical behavior through photo manipulation, ignoring image usage rights to promote tolerance and influence culture, or is it merely a means to a commercial end—and bad use of photoshop as many contend?Sources:http://unhate.benetton.com/foundation/http://unhate.benetton.com/http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/fashion/benetton-yanks-smooching-pope-ad-unhate-campaign-vatican-threatened-legal-action-article-1.979430?localLinksEnabled=falsehttp://www.missfashionnews.com/2011/11/16/unhate-benetton/http://www.aiga.org/medalist-tiborkalman/

Should you opt for the retouched school portrait?

Looking back at my school pictures I know I would have begged my parents to spend the extra bucks to get rid of my adolescent acne if it had been an option. When my son was in grade school I always chose the retouched package without even consulting him. I was thinking back on my own experience. But will I be sorry in 50 years when I look back and the images I have are not authentic?The NY Times article "No Boo-boos or Cowlicks? Only in School Pictures" talks about the pros and cons of digitally retouching school portraits and the issues that it raises. The author asks if we are sending our kids the wrong message if we choose to get their photos retouched. Is it good for their self-esteem or are we inadvertently undermining it?Read more about photo manipulation here.

Adobe Photoshop and the age of photo manipulation

In today's digitally sophisticated world the word Photoshop is used and understood readily as a verb. It's not unusual to have clients say just "photoshop" the missing team member into a group photo. There was a time not that long ago when Photoshop was seen as a magical and mystical tool.Watch this interview with the founders of Adobe Photoshop and see how things came together to create this cultural paridgm shift: http://tv.adobe.com/go/photoshop-20th-anniversaryDo you remember the days when Photoshop was a new and novel concept?