Make Yourself - Nike Ad

Today’s lecture about advertising showed multiple ads that effect people on an emotional level. One ad that struck a chord with me was the one about Coca Cola with comparing guns, violence, and tanks, with baking cakes, stuffed animals, and birthday candles. It was very ironic to see some of the worlds worst problems compared to everyday household items or rituals. This reminded me of a research project that I wrote about last year.

In Nike’s ad called “Make Yourself” they portray the image of strong women, building strength and showing what make’s those women proud, shine, and hot. What Nike refused to show the audience is that they are degrading women in Third World countries and creating an environment where they can’t be strong women outside of the Nike sweatshops.

Nike attracts an emotional appeal of the commercial using the athlete’s quotes and using it as empowerment. They use it against the Nike equipment and apparel with an underlying emotional message; “Rain or shine I push myself to the limit everyday” – Julia Mancuso. Empowerment of women is the message.  Throughout the commercial, we see shots of women working out to get physically and mentally stronger. They are athletes, needing to stay in shape to achieve their future goals. With the use of the athlete’s quotes and the impact of “I’m making myself (fill in the blank), either proud, shine, or hot, the women are determined and strong. The music in the background also empowers them because it is all about finding the fire within you, that you can ultimately achieve anything.

I don’t believe in shortcuts, because you don’t earn anything, you have to earn it” – Sofia Boutella. Women associated with Nike are portrayed to be strong, independent, go getters. When women like myself see this ad, they feel empowered like they can do anything. What we are not seeing is the women in the third world countries in the sweatshop being striped of their feeling of empowerment, or even freedom.

Take a look at the ad, and tell me what you think!

Response to "The Jonas Brothers and their Purity Rings"

In response to Sandra’s Post about The Jonas Brothers and their Purity Rings.

Who would have thought that I would get the opportunity to talk about the Jonas Brothers in university? The time has finally comes. I can say, that yes I was a Jonas Brothers fan in high school, and still am today, so the blog might be a bit bias.

Sandra brings up a very good example about the relationship of popular culture in comparison to religion.  The Jonas Brothers came up into the music scene in about 2006 with their introduction through Disney (Disney being the very censored, clean slate of actors in their roster.) No one really knew what those rings on their ring fingers were, but they openly expressed that they were purity rings, vowing to sustain from sex, until marriage, following the ways of the Bible. After that, none of the interviewers could stop asking about the rings. That was all they wanted to know about the new pop trio. Their music was second; their religious beliefs were first. Finally after multiple interviews, they requested that questions about their religion were stopped, so that they could focus on their music.

As soon as people found out that I liked the Jonas Brothers, all they could do was:

1. Make fun of me because I liked their music and 2. Make fun of them because they wore those purity rings. I, personally really find their vow was genuine, and if they decided to wait to have sex, what was the big issue? Was it because they were famous? Because they were open about it? Or was it because no one really openly admits that they are waiting for marriage to have sex, because in this day age, no one really values it anymore, and its not normal. Like Sandra mentioned Lady Gaga and Kanye are open about their religion and they are not ridiculed, so what’s the difference? Would be great to hear some opinions!

http://christandpopularculture.blogspot.com/2012/01/jonas-brothers-and-their-purity-rings.html

Peace, Love, Gaga.

In lecture, we spoke about the infamous Lady Gaga, and her music video of Bad Romance.  In light of the many things we could say about Lady Gaga, her music, her lyrics, or her fashion, I wanted to focus on the types of communities that she prides herself on in relation to Lynch’s arguments.

Pop Culture serves religious functions in a society – The Social aspect creating a community.

Lady Gaga has her “Little Monsters” which is what she calls her fan base around the world.  She relates to them as the socially unique, outsiders of the norm, and the creators of the new.

She also stands for equal rights for the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered community.

Not only this, but she believes in bully-free world, and is, I believe, currently working on trying to make it the law to stop bullying.

Three very powerful communities. Three very powerful perspectives. Three very powerful beliefs. All following in the footsteps of the Gaga herself. Gaga might not know it, but she herself is creating a community, a leadership with followers.

Not everyone may believe in the Christian faith, nor believe in Gaga, but everyone stands for something, which is what Gaga is partially trying to express.

What I believe Gaga is trying to do is spread the word of love. Demolish hate, and have unconditional love, like in her lyrics of Bad Romance.  And who is the better image of love, than Jesus himself (in Christian beliefs). Jesus, loves unconditionally, forgives, forgets, doesn’t judge, and creates a community of followers who feel comfortable with a leader like that. Gaga is following in the footsteps of Jesus, since she is a devote Christian; one can assume she is getting her inspiration from Him.  Through her, as a popular culture artifact, she is serving the religion in a positive way, in the society. Even though Christianity is not ok with some of her beliefs, one of Christianity’s first teachings is LOVE, and the love of Jesus.

I am going to leave you with a video of her that she taped for the Etobicoke School of the Arts anti-bullying assembly.

 

Response to Miranda Simpson's post: The Gaga Gospel: http://anchor-for-the-soul.blogspot.com/2012/01/gaga-gospel.html

Whenever I hear Gaga and Christianity in the same sentence, I automatically think of her song Judas.  The music video is nothing less than controversial, but it is also, what I believe to be, crossing boundaries. The boundary lines of art, music, imagery, and religion are all blurred in the music video. From what Miranda said as “riding a motorcycle gang [of the apostles]” to a known actor “with a golden Crown of Thorns on his head and golden dreads.”

I very much agree with Miranda where she talks about Gaga looking more like the Virgin Mary, instead of Mary Magdalene with the royal blue shawl. As well as with the representation of the heart of Jesus; knowing exactly the meaning because growing up I always saw a picture of Jesus with His heart on the outside of His robes.

After listening to the song, watching the video, and adding the lyrics, I believe that her song is an overdramatic way of putting:

1.     A stereotypical relationship in which a person can’t stop going back to another even if they have done them wrong. Gaga says "forgive him when his tongue lies through his brain, even after three times he betrays me”

2.     But also she might be relating Christian temptation, of the devil, trying to live the life according to Jesus, but being tempted in an evil direction. Gaga says “I wanna love you, but something’s pulling me away from you. Jesus is my virtue, Judas is the demon I cling to”

Do I necessarily believe that Gaga had to use the name Judas as her guy, or create enormous biblical references in her music video? No. There was obviously some kind of reaction that she wanted (in which she got, rather positive or negative), but than again, everything Gaga does is eccentric and in the public eye. 

Blogspot

A little confused about blogspot, but hopefully it all runs ok! Happy Blogging SMC305!!

-Felicia