I found an interesting web posting about the new Dove campaign, you know, the one where they use real women not supermodels. Though real women have real curves and are proud of their "real beauty" (or so the campaign purports) - it appears at least some New York graffiti artists feel differently.
These people are "personalizing" outdoor executions with messaging - much of it predictable (you might have seen similar "work" in your neighborhood), but this quip struck me as particularly biting: fat girls can be corporate shills too.
While I chuckled at the anti-marketing theme of this comment
(in the spirit of political correctness, let me add that I think fat men can be corporate shills too), I couldn't help but wonder - was this a man sending up all womankind - or a man or woman reacting to too much push marketing (regardless of its "reality")? Or, could it be a woman indicating she doesn't agree with the positive "love yourself" vibe of the campaign?
For more insight I visited the Dove campaign website. There "you can meet 6 women who are proud of their curves," view video of the campaign photo shoot, and read essays about what 11-17 year old girls think "real beauty" means.
One feature is a poll where you vote on key beauty "issues" - for examples, are freckles "beauty marks" or "ugly marks"? Is a mane of silver hair "gray" or "gorgeous"? The voting results got me thinking about our grafitti artist.
For the gray/gorgeous question, 80% of the votes were for "gorgeous" - but 20 were for "gray." Similar %s were revealed for the beauty/ugly question.
I'm skeptical that men would go to the Dove site (much less male graffiti artists). Which means at least some women are voting for gray, ugly, wrinkled (vs. wonderful) and the other "negative" options.
I guess Dove should be happy that women who don't buy their "value prop" (any engagement with the brand is valuable, right?) - but I still wonder why women interested enough to visit a site whose voting indicates they're not about "real beauty" would bother visiting the site.
I'd be interested in anyone's perspective on any of this. Is this approach to creative a good one (using real people instead of airbrushed ideal people)?