A Free Man: News Photograph

The story behind this photograph is so compelling that it is hard to say the image does it justice.
The man enjoying the sunshine in this photograph is Michael Morton and in 1986 he was wrongfully convicted of murdering his wife. Twenty-five years later he leaves the courthouse a free man as his name was cleared thanks to DNA testing and a team of lawyers who never doubted his innocence.
The full story of Michael Morton is available here.

The reason I choose this specific image is because I believe it is truly representative of what we define as freedom. This is the first time Michael Morton experienced sunlight outside of the prison yard in a quarter of a century and his body language and facial expression convey just how truly appreciative he is.
His situation is certainly not a normal one but if it could happen to him, an innocent man, than it is just as likely that it could happen to one of us, a scary thought but none the less true. Therefore I think this image also acts as a reminder to enjoy the little things in life such as sunshine, because something we take for granted the one day could be taken away without warning the next.
The people walking behind Morton in this image also add to its rhetoric. By having an entourage follow him out of the court house it is symbolic of the support that he has sustained over the years. The man beside him in this image is his attorney, and with his large figure next to Morton he symbolizes someone who can protect him which is essentially what he has done by clearing Michael Morton's name.
By using this image in a news report, such as the 60 minutes interview where I first saw it, it emphasizes the point that this man has had so much taken away from him but he is so happy with something so little (sunshine). When one knows of the background story behind this image it is hard to not have an emotional response to it. By using this image to illustrate his story of becoming a free man I believe it successfully plays on the pathos of the audience to really feel compelled by the story being told.

Then and Now

The two photographs posted above are personal photographs of my sister and I. The first image was taken in 1994 while the second was taken in 2011.

I have always loved seeing photographs from 'then' and 'now' as I think they tell a story through both the similarities and the differences.

My sister and I have always been very different, not just in our physical characteristics but our personalities as well, which is illustrated through both of these photos.  

In the first, I have a head full of hair where my sister, unfortunately, was bald until the age of three. I also have a large and somewhat attention seeking smile on my face where my sister looks like she is being more reserved. These personality traits remain true to the both of us as I have always been outgoing and loud and she has been quiet and shy.

The dresses that we are dressed in within the first image were obviously picked out by my mother. I think the similarities between these outfit choices are symbolic of my mom's failed attempt to make look more alike or more like 'sisters'.

The second image was taken last June at my sisters graduation. To this day no one believes that me and her could possibly be related and I think this image is a true testament as to why. Although we share no physical characteristics and have extremely different personalities we have both grown to have similar interests. This is why I love the second image; I think it shows our differences but at the same time we do not look out of place with each other (this could relate back to the similar outfit choices in the first photograph).  Another reason I love this photograph in comparison to the first one is that the roles have switched. Within the first image i feel like I stand out more as I am taller and look more excited to be in the photograph. In the second image however, it is my sisters graduation day and therefore her time to shine and although you can't tell very well in this image she has also grown to be 3 inches taller than me. 

My sister is currently in first year studying MIT at Western too and we always joke about how we are bound to have the same life path as the majority of our decisions over the years have been the same.

I suppose the main reason I enjoy these images is that they are illustrative of both of our lives and how, regardless of our differences, either physical or personality wise, we still remain sisters. 

Calvin Klein

For my final project I am going to focus on the infamous Calvin Klein advertisements that have gotten nothing less than controversial reviews over the years.
I intend to analyze both commercial advertisements and print advertisements from various campaigns and will be discussing just how the brand uses sex to sell their product. In addition to this, I hope to focus on how the brand uses inappropriate themes within their campaigns such as child pornography and the sexualization of children themselves in reference to their toddler underwear campaign.
As a major topic within the media and within the field of advertising studies I am able to use both news reports and academic papers in regards to these campaigns specifically.
By analyzing these ads I will be able to put together a multimedia presentation as I will need to show both print and commercial ads to further prove my point.

If any of you have suggestions on any other perspectives I could analyze I would love to hear them!

1928 Advertisement

Advertisements have undergone significant changes throughout the last century and this particular ad is a tribute to just how far societies values have changed the advertising and marketing sector over the years. However, after the analysis of this particular image it can be determined that there are still similarities between advertisements from then until now.
This ad was published in 1928 for Lux soap brand, a dishwashing detergent.
Judging from the opening caption and the size of font we are able to determine that the target audience for this advertisement is 'girls'. Wash dishes!' is also in italics which allows it to stand out as the second most important line in the headline after 'girls'. By hailing girls as the intended audience this advertiser is attributing them with the washing of dishes and by making the words 'girls' and 'wash dishes' stand out from the rest of the font the advertiser is essentially telling the audience that if you are a girl you should wash dishes.
The caption as a whole however is a prime example of the sexist underpinnings that this advertisement is portraying. By hailing girls as the audience and trying to capture their attention through their apparent want for 'pretty hands' the advertiser is reducing females as a whole to housekeepers who are looking for ways to multitask both their housework and beauty upkeep. Needless to say, this ad could never be published in today's society as the brand would be condemned for their gender stereotyping and sexist values.
The fact that this ad was published in 1928 is truly representative of the values that were widely accepted at the time in North American society as the majority of women were stay at home mothers and would have found this ad to be persuasive. Many women were most likely intrigued by this idea of beauty and housework combined.
Another detail to note about this advertisement is the picture at the top. The image is of a woman who looks as though she is thoroughly enjoying doing the dishes. The woman looks like your average everyday housewife and is nothing spectacular. By using an average housewife within the image the advertiser may have been trying to appeal to the middle class or even lower class women. The target demographic is made even more clear with the words at the bottom of the advertisement that states 'Lovely hands for less than a cent a day'. The use of the average housewife image in combination with the cost effective caption, the advertiser is insinuating that if they use Lux soap even they could have pretty hands without the need to spend ridiculous amounts of money. In face they are saving money because they are getting dish soap AND pretty hands that would usually only come through relatively pricey lotions.
Finally, the advertisement was given, what appears to be, the home-maker stamp of approval. The fact that a home-makers stamp of approval even existed is fascinating within todays day and age but what is even more interesting is that this stamp most likely would have helped this product sell better at the time. It is yet again another example of how our values have changed.

Although by analyzing this ad it is easy to point out how much our society and values in regards to gender stereotypes within advertising have changed it is also interesting to evaluate how similar they still are. Granted that advertisements can no longer be this blunt in regards to their sexist connotations, their still are underlying gender stereotypes within our ads. The prominent use of women within cleaning products ads for example could be directly linked to the the same mentality used in this advertisement. Their are also seals of approval, not by home makers, but by companies like brand power, telling us which products work best. So, just because the 'home-maker seal of approval' is not longer considered to be a respectable authority does not mean that we do not look for some sort of approval from those who 'know best'. And realistically, those who do approve products most likely get their information from those who use the products within their home. Therefore, although the copy can not be produced as it was in 1928, their are still similarities to advertisements that we see everyday in 2012.