The Controversial Kamala Cover

The February Vogue covers of Vice President Kamala Harris have stirred up a heated debate on social media. While many debate which cover is more appropriate, the issue also raises the question of, "what is the responsibility of a publication to their subject?"Both covers were shot with the collaboration of Vice President-elect Harris, who chose and wore her own clothes, however, the Vice President's team has said they felt blindsided; the cover on the left in the blue suit is the one that they mutually agreed upon. Contractually, Vogue had the final choice. Harris' team feels they acted in bad faith.Vogue has said their choice speaks to the approachable nature of the Biden-Harris team and that the more informal image represents this. Editor-in-chief Anna Wintour has defended the choice and has gone on the record saying that their intention was not to diminish the importance of Harris' victory. Vogue responded to the controversy by releasing the more formal image as the digital cover.Critics feel the print cover image is disrespectful and does not represent her game-changing position, as the first female vice president, the first Black female vice president and the first female vice president of South Asian descent. Vogue has also been accused of lightening her skin tone.While Vogue makes a point with their argument and legally it looks like they are covered, the question remains, did they act responsibly toward their subject? They were given an opportunity to convey the essence of this pivotal moment in history, perhaps they should have done so with no explanation needed.Sources:https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/style/kamala-harris-vogue.html?auth=login-email&login=emailhttps://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/12/opinion/sway-kara-swisher-anna-wintour.htmlhttps://www.today.com/style/anna-wintour-speaks-out-kamala-harris-vogue-cover-t205582https://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-us-vice-president-elect-social-media-outraged-over-lightening-of-kamala-harris-skin-tone-on-magazine-cover-2867608

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.

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 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.