The interesting thing about advertisements is that they are usually required to be somewhat true and, more importantly, are "shown" to be true through the media. As a result, it is accepted that these shoes truly work miracles and will make the average woman into the perfect woman. The Shape-ups were one of those shoes that was exploited heavily through the media, but its results are actually not proven at all. According to this article (http://articles.cnn.com/2012-05-16/us/us_ftc-skechers-fine_1_shape-ups-toning-shoes-skechers?_s=PM:US) the promises of losing weight and toning your muscles were all deceptive and none of it true. But how could this be? Didn't they have chiropractor Dr. Steven Gautreau endorsing the shoe? Yes, they did, but it probably should have been mentioned that he is married to a Skechers marketing executive and was compensated for his endorsement.
This whole thing just goes to show what de La Pena stated in "The Body Electric" about how we are willing to put our bodies at risk for the chance that technologies will help improve us. This obsession we have is not healthy, and in this case it really had physical consequences. As was stated in this article (http://product-liability.lawyers.com/blogs/archives/22155-Risk-of-Stress-Fractures-from-Skechers-Shape-Ups.html) the Shape-ups actually can cause stress fractures, which is a small crack in your bone that is usually undetectable to any type of camera except for a bone scan. It does this by changing the gait which causes stress to be redirected to bones that are not supposed to take the stress that is now put on them, causing the stress fracture.
This shows that the combination of pop culture and our obsession over technology, and the belief that it will make us better, are not a good combination.
I agree with your point about how technology influences our lives not only for good. At the same time, I was trying to make some other connections between De La Pena's and Douglas' readings. Especially after have read Douglas' statement about how the media have helped to create our imaginary of the ideal woman, I've been thinking in how in contrast with the electric belt's time, nowadays these kind of products are notably more focused in women. From sneakers to diet pills, women buy these risky objects based only in what the advertisement says and the celebrity that promotes it without making any further research about it. But why?
ReplyDeleteThe only explanation reliable I can think about this gender distinction is that the stereotype of the perfect women created by the media in the 20th century was mainly focused in the physical appearance and is still powerful enough to persuade us to act in some way or to buy certain things. That's why we are always searching for the last technology to have an athletic body, the perfect skin, etc. While for men, I don't think media have created an imaginary about the ideal man, or at least not one that is as tightly related to how they look as in the case of women. In their case I would say the American Dream is the main ideology and being successful is the principal goal. Thus, products that can be showed as a proof of how successful they are like cars, create a huge difference between the things they (and the way media advertise that things) and we buy.