Description
This paper offers an ethical analysis of visual representation that provides criteria for and sheds light on the appropriateness dimension of marketing communications. It provides a theoretically informed framework for recognizing and understanding ethical issues in visual representation. An interdisciplinary conceptual review and analysis focuses on four representational conventions, synthesizing ethical concerns, to provide a broader context for recognizing and understanding ethical issues in marketing representation: face-ism, idealization, exoticization and exclusion.
AN ETHICS OF REPRESENTATION FOR
INTERNATIONAL MARKETING
Janet L. Borgerson
Jonathan E. Schroeder
University of Exeter
Discussion Papers in Management
Paper number 04/03
ISSN 1472-2939
Abstract
This paper offers an ethical analysis of visual representation that provides criteria for and
sheds light on the appropriateness dimension of marketing communications. It provides a
theoretically informed framework for recognizing and understanding ethical issues in visual
representation. An interdisciplinary conceptual review and analysis focuses on four
representational conventions, synthesizing ethical concerns, to provide a broader context for
recognizing and understanding ethical issues in marketing representation: face-ism,
idealization, exoticization and exclusion. This framework is discussed and applied to
marketing communications. It argues that valuations of communication appropriateness must
be informed by an awareness of the ethical relationship between marketing representations
and identity. It is no longer satisfactory to associate advertising solely with persuasion, rather
advertising must be seen as a representational system, with pedagogical as well as strategic
functions. We conclude by discussing the theoretical, research, and managerial implications
that arise from an ethics of visual representation. Urges moving beyond an advertising =
persuasion model to encompass representation and culture in marketing communication
studies. Contributes to understanding the ethical implications of marketing communication.
Challenges marketers and researchers to broaden their conception of marketing
communication to one more consistent with an image economy.
Keywords: Advertising, Consumer Behaviour, Ethics, Image, International Marketing,
Social responsibility, Visual Communication
Inter-disciplinary CSR Research Conference
‘Ethical Issues and International Marketing’ track
Nottingham, October 2004
___________________________________________________________________________
Janet Borgerson, School of Business and Economics, University of Exeter, Streatham Court, Rennes Drive, Exeter,
UK, EX4 4PU. Phone: +44 (0) 1392 264502 Email: [email protected]
Jonathan Schroeder, School of Business and Economics, University of Exeter, Streatham Court, Rennes Drive,
Exeter, UK, EX4 4PU. Phone: +44 (0) 1392 262537 Email: [email protected]
1
An Ethics of Representation for International Marketing
In contemporary marketing communications, images claim center stage. The focus on image
– over and above function – challenges basic notions of marketing practice, shifts appropriate
topics of analysis, and reinforces the visual domain’s centrality. Serving as stimuli, signs, or
representations that drive cognition, interpretation, and preference, images influence what we
know and believe (cf. Zaltman, 2002). Not surprisingly, images constitute much corporate
communication about products and services, economic performance, and organizational
identity. Pictures of people – models, celebrity endorsers, spokespersons, “average”
consumers, managers and employees – make up a large part of marketing imagery.
Moreover, images provide resources for, and, hence, shape, our understandings of the world,
including the identities of its people and places. If marketing communications depend upon
images, including brand images, corporate images, product images, and images of identity,
then ethical tools meant to provide guidance for international marketing communications
must be capable of addressing the concerns that such depictions evoke.
In this paper, we investigate marketing communication’s role in “the taken-for-
granted political and ethical practices of envisioning others” (Heywood & Sandywell, 1999,
p. x). Discussions of marketing ethics rarely include visual issues, apart from largely
atheoretical concerns over shock advertising, sexual appeals, or stereotyping; rather, they
typically revolve around deception, the questionable accuracy of product claims, and the
targeting of vulnerable consumers, such as children (e.g., Smith & Quelch, 1993). These
approaches to marketing ethics generally adopt an information-based model of marketing
communication, emphasizing marketing’s role as a strategic conduit of information for
consumers, rather than fully acknowledging how marketing also acts as a representational
system that produces meaning outside the realm of the promoted product or service (see
Schroeder & Salzer-Mörling, 2005; Scott & Batra, 2003). This situation emerges in part
because of a failure to confront the ethical concerns that arise in the wake of the prominence
of the image – including advertising images, corporate images, and images of identity –
within today’s image economy.
Ethically motivated criticisms of marketing communications are often simplistically
understood as generalized critiques of capitalism and related excessive consumption (e.g.,
Crane & Matten, 2004; Thompson, 2004). Our work in marketing communication ethics does
not include criticism of consumption per se, nor do we take a moralistic stance against
materialism, or marketing’s possible role in promoting materialistic desires. Rather, we have
2
chosen to elaborate on ethical issues pertaining to representations of identity, in that
represented identities profess to express something true or essential about those represented.
Just as personnel policies have had to accommodate changing norms about hiring and
promotion when it comes to women and minorities, marketing managers must be aware of
representational practices that may cause harm. Our analysis concerns not only the ethical
implications, or consequences, of representational conventions – customary ways of
depicting products, people and identities – within marketing communications, but emphasizes
the ethical context from which such representational conventions emerge.
Whereas discussions of marketing communication ethics often focus on appropriate
use of images, most lack a conceptual framework for recognizing and understanding ethical
issues in visual representation. Typical guidelines for marketing communication ethics list
such items as legal matters, including false claims, misleading statements, and improper
labeling, deceptive pricing, and image appropriateness, as relevant for ethical review
(Armstrong, 2004; Crane & Matten, 2004). However, ethical checklists provide few criteria
by which to judge whether ads contain, for example, “sexual innuendos which are considered
inappropriate for audience,” or “no ethnic stereotyping.” We introduce an ethics of visual
representation that provides such criteria and shed light on the appropriateness dimension of
marketing communications. Evaluations of ad appropriateness must be informed by an
awareness of the ethical relationship between marketing representations and identity. We
conclude by discussing the implications arising from an ethics of visual representation as a
vital issue for international marketing communication practice and research.
Visual Representation Within the Image Economy
Visual images exist within a distinctive socio-legal environment – unlike textual or verbal
statements, such as product claims or political promises, pictures cannot be held to be true or
false. Images elude empirical verification. Thus, images are especially amenable in enabling
strategists to avoid being held accountable for false or misleading claims. For example,
cigarette manufacturers have learned not to make text-based claims about their products,
relying instead on visual imagery such as the lone cowboy roaming the American west.
Concerns about the persuasive power and rhetorical influence of marketing images
have been countered by references to so-called “postmodern” notions of resistance and rising
advertising literacy (cf. Elliott & Wattanasuwan, 1998; O’Donohoe & Tynan, 1998;
Pettigrew, 2001). That is, continued concern around marketing communication’s power to
3
exert influence and reinforce ethically irresponsible representations of identity, such as a beer
company’s sexist and long-running, imaginary “Swedish bikini team,” has been met with
claims that consumers knowingly interpret visual or text-based advertising messages,
selectively choose meanings, and resist rhetorical persuasion. For example, a recent business
ethics textbook downplays concerns about advertising’s perpetuation of harmful stereotypes
by claiming that many “social commentators […] contend that, as a society, we have never
been so informed and educated about the role of advertising, promotion, and branding as we
are today” (Crane & Matten, 2004, p. 276). On the contrary, we argue that, outside of
university courses in communication, there is relatively little education about marketing
communication’s social, cultural, and pedagogical roles, nor about the production, history,
and theory of visual representation.
Marketing communication’s ubiquity does not necessarily improve one’s capacity to
see – to actively engage one’s senses in reflective analysis (Schroeder, 2002). Further, it is
unclear how each new generation of consumers might benefit from such so-called advertising
literacy; that is, children are not born with the innate ability to understand the underlying
context of cultural meanings at work in marketing communications, no matter how many
times parents tell them that an advertised toy will only be fun for a few minutes, although it
looks great in the ads, or that a pair of athletic shoes cannot really make you run faster, or
that models really do not look like that in real life.
Even when consumers realize an image or image-based scenario is not “real,” these
images influence how they perceive and respond to their world. Whereas decades of women
realize that the bloody shower scene in Alfred Hitchcock’s harrowing film, Psycho, is not
“real,” images from that scene, and others like it, no doubt have discouraged many from
enjoying a shower. Similarly, images of the “exotic other” – from Augustus Earle’s sketches
of early 1800s Pacific islanders and Edward S. Curtis’s twentieth century photographs of
Native Americans to the iconic native island girl in tropical holiday promotions, suntan lotion
ads, and fashion shoots – give us a sense that we know places, times, and peoples that we
have never experienced. Given such wide-ranging influence, recent work in marketing
scholarship urges us to consider marketing images as cultural texts, and not merely as
accurate or true strategic pictures that transparently record faces, families, or familiar
products, services, and sights (Mick, Burroughs, Hetzel, & Brannen, 2004, for a review;
Schroeder, 2002; Scott, 1994).
Images in marketing communication frequently stand in for experience, especially
when other sources have less prominence, and serve as a foundation for future attempts to
4
comprehend and construct the world around us. As a result, images in marketing
communications understandably have attracted attention from marketing strategists,
advertising practitioners, and consumer researchers, and have increasingly evoked criticism
from cultural theorists and policy makers. Moreover, although researchers increasingly
acknowledge consumer response as fundamental to ad interpretation, the power of images is
not well understood. Ours is not a naive claim that consumers believe artificial, stereotypical,
or idealized realms do or can exist, or that consumers consume advertising images from a
single, unitary, or predetermined (so-called “structuralist”) perspective. Rather, marketing
images contribute to the “reality” into which contemporary consumers are socialized and
often evade notions of creative interpretation and critical resistance.
According to some critics, pictures themselves contain such potent rhetorical
authority that they require drastic action to curb their persuasive appeal (see Latour &
Wiebel, 2002; McQuarrie & Mick, 1999; Schroeder, 2002; Scott, 1994). For example, Dan
Romer, from the Annenberg Public Policy Center, has argued that “banning pictures from ads
would help end the image that smoking is fun and give marketing campaigns about tobacco
dangers a chance to work” (“Cigarette Ads,” 2001, p. 6). Images of beautiful people
exhibiting no signs of nicotine addiction or its debilitating effects help maintain a positive
vision of smoking. This persuasive power of marketing images depends largely upon the
rhetorical representational conventions of photographic reproduction; that is, advertising,
corporate reports, packaging, product catalogs, promotional materials, and Web graphics rely
heavily upon photographic information technology to produce meaning within a circuit of
production and consumption.
Photographic images – including digital pictures, film, video, and Internet graphics –
perform so often and so fluidly for marketing, scientific, legal, and political purposes that it
can be difficult to keep in mind that photographs are selectively edited and culturally-
produced images that exist within shifting planes of meaning and significance. Photographs
often appear as if they are merely visual records of what has happened, how people look, or
where events took place at a particular moment. Marketing communication researchers must
acknowledge the subjectivity of visual representation in studying the commercial landscape
that everyday consumers encounter, keeping in mind that art directors, photographers,
advertising executives, and corporate strategists choose from a range of images and juxtapose
these with product and text in order to create “ordinary advertisements.”
Viewers make sense of visual images in a number of ways, many of which are
automatic or without awareness (cf. Bargh, 2002). Many perceptual processes fluctuate
5
between conscious and unconscious control. For example, cognitive as well as physiological
processes govern eye movement, attention, and awareness. Perceptual codes influence visual
information processing – Westerners generally read from left to right, and from top to
bottom. Further, perceptual cues, such as relative size, shape, color, and symmetry contribute
to consumer cognition at a level at which most are perhaps only dimly aware (cf. Arnheim,
1974). Objects or people that appear larger in the visual frame are generally ascribed more
perceptual and symbolic importance than those that appear small. Representational
conventions – or common patterns of portraying objects, people, or identities – work in
conjunction with these perceptual and cultural processes that often elude marketing
communication research.
Ethical Foundations
An image economy requires approaches to ethics and marketing communication that move
beyond codes of conduct, individual manager’s actions, or particular campaigns. Our ethics
of visual representation focuses on representational practices and their ethical implications, as
well as emphasizing the ethical context from which representational conventions emerge.
Along these lines, philosopher Margaret Urban Walker (1998, p. 178) contended that the
assumption that people are a kind or type is propagated and created by representational
conventions, which “are among those that construct socially salient identities for people.”
She further argued that if representational practices “affect some people’s morally significant
perceptions of and interactions with other people, and if they can contribute to those
perceptions or interactions going seriously wrong, these activities have bearing on
fundamental ethical questions” (Walker, 1998, p. 179). One of the most serious outcomes of
representational practices is that people’s perceptions, even “misinformed perceptions”, often
have “the weight of established facts” (Gordon, 1995, p. 203).
Contemporary ethical theorists have written extensively on the relation between
representation and identity, or, ontological status (e.g., Bartky, 1990; Borgerson, 2001;
Butler, 1987/1999; Gordon, 1995; Walker, 1998). Ontology centers on notions of being or
identity – including human identity – who one is and who is not, including how relationships
form and function. Ethics and ontology are linked by a concern about how visual markers
such as skin color, embodiment, and gendered attributes represent or determine the status of
human beings, particularly in the context of racism and sexism. Thus, what we think we
know about others from representations of identity – including those within marketing
6
communications – can affect how we see, treat, and understand them. Although alternative or
resistant ways of looking at marketing images are possible, for example, reading mainstream
ads as “gay” or interpreting sexist ads as “camp,” “ironic,” or “parody,” this often simply
reflects responses to or reconfigurations of the dominant system (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990;
Kates, 1999). Representations of subordinate groups, for example, the poor (Kay & Jost,
2003); the elderly (Carrigan & Szmigin, 2000); and ethnic minorities (O’Barr, 1994; Taylor,
Lee, & Stern, 1995) rarely contradict and typically reproduce versions of subordination. For
example, a comprehensive study of gender roles in television advertisements around the
world, found that, despite some recent changes, ads “typically show men as authoritative and
knowledgeable, whereas women are confined at home” (Furnham 1999, p. 434). In this way,
the global commercial environment reproduces stereotypes that tend to limit women’s
opportunities and potential.
Basic communicative building blocks revolve around identity and difference (cf.
Woodward, 1997). Ontological assumptions related to representations of identity, or
assumptions about who and what the represented ones are, intersect with culturally defined
hierarchies and dominant semiotics used in marketing communications. Dominant semiotics
– grounding what categories, characteristics, or individual signs can mean within the
dominant culture – prescribe and structure the elements of identity and difference that will be
readily rendered as culturally intelligible. Semiotic meaning draws upon dualistic notions of
being, identity and difference – such as self/other, male/female, white/black,
rational/emotional, culture/nature, and normal/exotic – the opposed elements of which
stabilize various positive and negative cultural associations and values. These semiotic
associations are taken seriously, and often purport to express something natural and true.
Setting one element against the other, for example white vs. black, has perpetuated and
reinforced the dualistic hierarchical orderings that historically have favored the male, the
white, and the rational (cf. Goldberg, 1993). Representational conventions in marketing
communications draw upon these meaning systems, which may reinforce and reproduce
damaging images of identity. In such a context, those associated with the privileged elements
– the male, the rational, and the normal – stand in the position to claim knowledge of and
denigrate all that is important to know about those associated with the subordinated elements
– the female, the emotional, and the exotic (Borgerson, 2001).
This type of semiotically dualistic relation engages with the potential for epistemic
closure, an ethical concept calling attention to the danger of typified representations of
identity that increase the probability of human subjects interpreting what they experience or
7
have represented to them as (stereo) typical. Typified representations, especially those that
are racist or sexist, for example, may undermine a group’s dignity and historical integrity and
cast a demeaning light upon their physical and intellectual habits and ontological status as
human beings (cf. Miller, 1994). A worldview informed by epistemic closure abstracts and
condenses characteristics that create a familiar identity or pattern for beings of a kind.
Epistemic closure leads an individual to believe that he or she knows the other’s being
completely, and this assumption denies the other status as human being and limits
possibilities for human relationships (Gordon 1997). We contend that marketing images are
never appropriate if they create epistemic closure without reasonable justification.
Marketing representations have the power to make us believe that we know
something we have no experience of and to influence the experiences we have in the future.
One often feels that one has learned something in observing or examining an image of a
person or a geographic location, yet the way that such representations stand in when
experience is lacking, or function in conjunction with experience, is of particular concern in
marketing strategy and ethical analyses of marketing communications. How does one
recognize ethically problematic representations? We argue that marketing requires a
semiotic understanding of the cultural context in which images and representation circulate,
which we sketch in the following sections.
The Status of Marketing Communications
Although marketing communication remains first and foremost a strategic tool, our analysis
attempts to locate marketing images within a complex visual signifying arena that includes
the interrelated domains of the aesthetic and the ethical (cf. Hall, 1997). Therefore, we
situate marketing communications within a system of visual representation that creates
meaning within the circuit of culture – often beyond the managerial control of any one
organization or strategic vision. This circuit assumes that marketing messages both create and
contribute to culture, largely via representational conventions (see Hall, 1997; Schroeder &
Zwick, 2004; Stern & Schroeder, 1994; Thompson, 1995). A simple representational
convention occurs in wristwatch ads, where most watches show the time as ten minutes past
ten o’clock. Another familiar convention appears in the vertical orientation of celebrity “head
shots”, executive portraits, and pictures of satisfied consumers in “portrait” format that
profoundly influenced media outlets such as magazines and newspapers. Other, more
8
complicated conventions include the way fashion models pose in highly stylized manners,
taught by modeling agencies and expected by photographers and designers.
Conventional views of representation hold that categories, such as objects, products,
or consumers, exist in the material and natural world, and that their material characteristics
define them in perfectly clear terms; representation, according to this view, is of secondary
importance in the construction of meaning. In our view, meaning is produced or constructed
by social and cultural forces; thus, representation assumes primary importance. Marketing
scholarship has turned to the concept of representation for insight into diverse market-related
phenomena, including advertising imagery, research methods, information technology, and
photography (Stern, 1998). The process of representing objects, ideas and identities shapes
how we think of them; in this way, representation enters into the very constitution of things
and categories. Because representation refers to meaning production through language
systems, how language – including visual representation – is used is central to creating
meaning. Using representation as an analytic tool, researchers have emphasized how cultural
practices, such as laws, rituals, norms, art, and advertising, contribute to meaning production
within marketing (e.g., Andersson, Hedelin, Nilsson, & Welander, 2004; Floch, 2001; Hall,
1997; Messaris, 1997; Schroeder, 2002; Schroeder & Salzer-Mörling, 2005).
As part of a long line of visual expression, marketing representations remain
embodied and embedded within a myriad of historical, cultural, and social situations,
contexts, and discourses. At times this image creation draws upon and reinforces simplified,
even subordinating, representations of cultural difference, group identity, and geographic
specificity. According to cultural theorists Hall and Sealy (2001, p. 4), within visual
representations: “profound differences of history, culture and experience have often been
reduced to a handful of stereotypical features, which are “read” as if they represent a truth of
nature, somehow indelibly described on the body. They are assumed to be “real” because
they can be seen – difference, visible to the naked eye.” Such epistemically closed
representations of identity, harnessed in the attempt to create brand images or corporate
identity, potentially undermine the full human status of represented groups and individuals
(e.g., Dávila, 2001; Goffman, 1979; O’Barr, 1994; Schroeder and Borgerson, 1998; Stern,
1993; Williamson, 1978).
Identities that are exoticized, sexist, or racist, damage the reputation of represented
groups, and associated group members, and manipulate their being for consumption by
others. Furthermore, some identities are systematically excluded from marketing images,
while others are represented in ethically problematic ways. The claim is not that some
9
advertising, as well as other forms of marketing communications, might offend the concerned
group and its members, but that certain forms of representation may limit their opportunities
for the future by undermining or sabotaging their reputation. For example, Native American
groups have protested professional sports teams such as the Atlanta Braves, the Cleveland
Indians and the Washington Redskins’ use of stereotyped, red-faced Indian figures in their
promotional imagery, claiming that these representations have little to do with their identity,
the oppressive history that they have endured, and their ongoing struggles to become valued
American citizens (cf. Whitt, 1995).
Representational Conventions
Visual theorists have raised important points regarding the production of media
representations and the potential repercussions for individuals, groups, and societies (e.g.,
Gross, 1988; Lutz & Collins, 1993; van Leeuwen, 2000). Many studies have documented and
criticized how ads often portray women and racial minorities in stereotyped and often
negative ways (e.g., Bristol, Lee, & Hunt, 1995; Cortese, 1999; Giroux, 1994; Goldman &
Papson, 1996; Schroeder, 2000; Stern, 1993; Whitt, 1995). In a groundbreaking discussion of
“image ethics,” media researcher Larry Gross began to articulate an ethics of representation
pertaining to the media. He proposed two fundamental principles: first, groups should be
allowed to speak for themselves. Second, media practices, including advertising, should be
used to equalize the unequal distribution of power in society, or at least not to perpetuate
inequality (Gross, 1988). These proposals have far reaching implications for making
subordinated voices heard and for promoting human equality. Consistent with Gross’s image
ethics, we would hope that an ethics of representation could convince those in marketing
communications, as Hippocrates suggested, to “first do no harm.”
Visual communication theorist Theo van Leeuwen (2000; 2001) identified two basic
questions regarding the conventions of visual representation: (1) how are people depicted in
relation to each other or their surroundings?, and (2) how are people depicted in relation to
the viewer ? He focuses on pictorial representations of people, and asks “what options, what
choices does “the language of images” give us to depict people?” (van Leeuwen, 2000, p.
341). For van Leeuwen, representational choices revolve around issues of exclusion of
certain identity groups, portrayed social roles, stereotypical depictions, and categorization
into types. These representational variables often combine to produce epistemically closed
10
portrayals; for example, creating a category of “third world poor” to juxtapose with images of
affluence from the developed world.
Van Leeuwen identified several strategies (or representational conventions) of visual
racism, in an in-depth study of how people are represented in images. Visual racism involves
issues of “othering,” exclusion, and stereotyping – where stereotyping involves not just
negative cultural depictions but also showing certain people as homogeneous groups without
distinguishing individual characteristics and differences. For example, typical National
Geographic magazine photographs often portray “natives” as different from the assumed
reader – other to the reader’s self (Lutz & Collins, 1993). Van Leeuwen’s analysis of the
relationship between the viewer and depictions of people, identified three pictorial
dimensions: (1) the social distance – given certain assumptions about how the social status of
one differs from the status of another, (2) the social relation – power differences, including
how involved or detached the figures appear, and (3) the social interaction – the gaze of the
depicted figure (outward, downward, and so forth) and its implications for interpersonal
connection.
Visual representations express social psychological relations, such as closeness,
involvement, and status (Larsen, Luna, & Peraccchio, 2004; Nederveen Pieterse, 1992).
Some images invite interaction; whether the pictured person looks at, or gazes at, the viewer
is critical in determining the potential (implied) relationships. Although these interactions or
relations are imagined, viewers often perceive depicted individuals or groups as though they
were strangers or friends, and, in terms of the camera angle, physically or socially above or
below them. Camera angles also structure social relations, whether the viewer sees depicted
subjects from above, eye level, or below; and can allude to symbolic involvement or
detachment, coming face to face with someone, confronting them, or sidling up to them (van
Leeuwen, 2000). A woman lying down can be generally said to exhibit less status, as an
object of the male gaze (Goffman, 1979; Schroeder & Borgerson, 1998). In a television
advertisement, a “long shot,” (one taken from far away, often with a telephoto lens), may
indicate a distant relationship between characters, or between a character and the viewer,
whereas a close-up is likely to connote intimacy.
These pictorial dimensions – social distance, social relation, and social interaction –
indicate a larger ethics of power and representation articulated within the gaze. To gaze
implies more than to look at – it signifies a psychological relationship of power, in which the
gazer is superior to the object of the gaze. Royalty gaze upon their subjects, viewed as
property in the kingdom. Explorers gaze upon newly “discovered” land as colonial resources.
11
Although recent theoretical treatments of the gaze acknowledge the myriad forms it may
take, including a female gaze, advertising has been called an extreme expression of the male
gaze, producing stereotyped and typified representations of men and women, the good life,
and sexual fantasy (cf. Jacobson & Mazur, 1995; Schroeder & Borgerson, 2003; Schroeder &
McDonagh, 2005; Stern, 1993).
Marketing communications often depend upon the gaze to build relationships between
consumers and fashion models, products, or companies. Shields and Heinecken’s (2002, p.
83) research suggested how the gaze interacts with marketing communications: “while both
men and women discussed the pleasure of looking at attractive females, men tended to make
their comments within the larger context of the way they look at women in general, not
confining their comments to the advertisements in front of them.” For example, one male
respondent reported that ads please him as a “visual stimuli kind of thing. I find women
attractive and it makes me feel good to look at them…I guess I equated that with having a lot
of fun. You know, being at a party…kind of like being on a beer commercial” (in Shields &
Heinecken, 2002, p. 84). Here the male consumer’s gaze expresses social distance, social
relation, and social interaction; he apparently believes that he is in a position to judge and
appreciate attractive women, that he is welcome to party with them. In this way, marketing
communications help and compel him to define his identity and his potential relationship
with women.
The representational choices described by van Leeuwen, in conjunction with such
pictorial variables as distance, angle, and gaze, animate images of identity, and help point to
marketing practices, such as drawing unreflectively upon semiotic meanings and representing
people as “others” or persons not like “us,” that can produce unethical imagery (Borgerson &
Schroeder, 2002; O’Barr, 1994; van Leeuwen, 2000). Further, these choices may lead to
subtle racist, sexist, and or epistemically closed representations that could undermine
marketing communication, particularly global campaigns aimed at diverse consumers.
Whereas van Leeuwen proposed a rather deterministic model of pictorial meaning, we argue
for an approach that considers the cultural and ethical context in which meaning arises, which
we believe can supply the necessary theoretical underpinning for an ethics of visual
representation.
In the next section, we present several representational conventions to ground
analysis and enhance understanding of the ethical implications of images in marketing
communication. We discuss how the language of images presents marketers with choices
12
about how to depict people, among other subjects, and how these choices coalesce into
certain representational conventions.
A Framework for Image Analysis
In order to articulate an ethics of representation for marketing communication, we focus here
on four representational conventions to provide a broader context for recognizing and
understanding ethical issues in marketing representation:
• face-ism
• idealization
• exoticization
• exclusion
Face-ism describes how mass media systematically show men with more prominent faces
than women and how women are negatively affected by this representational convention
(figures 1 and 2). Idealization concerns how marketing communications routinely depict
ideal types (figure 3)– young, thin models, unrealistic scenarios, or unattainable goals – and
the negative effects these often have, beginning in childhood (e.g., Belk & Pollay, 1987;
Martin & Gentry, 1997; Richins, 1991; Shields & Heinecken, 2002). Exoticization, which
refers to the process of making someone seem exotic, strange, or different in ways that call
attention to certain identity characteristics, such as skin color, dress, or appearance can be
seen as a crucial category (figures 4 and 5). Exclusion indicates how certain types of people –
for example, poor, marginalized, or under-represented individuals and groups – have
traditionally been left out of the marketing communication pantheon.
These analytic categories, discussed in greater detail below, together with
aforementioned pictorial dimensions, can be useful in generating ethical insights and
investigating how marketing communications represent and construct identities. However, it
must be kept in mind that they do not comprise an exhaustive list and may at times overlap.
We believe that they illuminate the key representational tensions and ethical issues within
contemporary marketing communications.
Face-ism
In their classic study on the forms and consequences of stereotyping, Archer and his
colleagues identified a pervasive form of representational bias that they call face-ism. Five
13
studies involving various media were conducted to investigate the facial prominence of men
and women and subsequent social psychological consequences. Their interest in facial
prominence stemmed from their belief that, “because the face and head are the centers of
mental life—intellect, personality, identity, and character—the relative prominence of this
part of the anatomy may be symbolically consequential” (Archer, Iritani, Kimes, & Barrios,
1983, p. 726). The phenomenon of face-ism refers to the prominence or significance of the
face in photographs or images, and can be indexed through a consideration of a ratio based
on two linear measurements – the distance between the top of the subject's head and chin
divided by the distance between the top of the head and the lowest visible part of the subject's
body. Thus a “mug shot,” which shows only the head of a recently arrested person, has more
facial prominence than a full-body picture of a runway model. Because it is a ratio, the face-
ism index can be applied to any human image, including people depicted in advertisements
and other marketing communications.
Archer and his colleagues found that males were portrayed with more prominent faces
than females in news photographs appearing in American periodicals, in newspapers from
various countries, and in art portraits dating from the past 600 years. When asked to draw
human figures, both male and female research participants drew women with less prominent
faces and more prominent bodies. In a crucial follow- up experiment, the researchers
demonstrated the possible negative consequences of face-ism. In rating people portrayed in
manipulated photographs, participants consistently rated those with less prominent faces as
less intelligent, less ambitious, and less attractive, regardless of the sex of either the rater or
the person in the photograph (Archer et al., 1983).
In other words, when either men or women appear in images that show more of their
body, viewers tended to attribute fewer positive attributes to them. Those who were portrayed
with greater relative facial prominence were perceived as more intelligent, ambitious, and
physically attractive, suggesting “that perceived intellectual (and other) qualities may be
significantly and favorably affected by something as simple as the relative prominence of the
person’s face [in a photograph]” (Archer et al., 1983, p. 732). Interestingly, these results
suggest that both men and women could potentially suffer the effects of face-ism from being
shown with less relative facial prominence, However, despite the progress of the feminist
movement, increased attention to the women’s market, and the growing number of women in
roles of power, face-ism remains a well substantiated yet little known representational
convention that continues to favor men (King, 2002; Levesque & Lowe, 1999).
14
Idealization
A growing body of consumer research has revealed specific links between glamorized images
in television ads and dissatisfaction with the self (e.g., Peck & Loken, 2004; Richins, 1991).
Photographic techniques, such as digitization, cropping, and image manipulation can
accelerate the extent to which marketing messages negatively affect self-image. In a recent
analysis of the effects of idealized imagery in marketing communications, Shields and
Heinecken (2002, p. xv) argued that:
There is profound evidence suggesting that girls and young women [in Western
cultures]are particularly vulnerable to particular kinds of mass media messages: those
pertaining to body images, size, and appearance. They are not more vulnerable than
boys or men because they are somehow weaker against the power of these messages.
They are more vulnerable because the culture they are born into subscribes to the
notion that women should be the objects of vision. Female bodies are held up to
inspection to a much greater degree than are men’s in this culture. Women’s worth is
judged generally by appearance first and abilities second.
Idealized bodies, in particular, help construct notions about female identity,
attractiveness, and normality in ways that can damage identity. Critically, images influence
how we think about the ideal or good life, what is sexy, and what will be seen as attractive by
desired others (cf. Belk & Pollay, 1985; Crocker & Linden, 1998; Pollay, 1985). These points
were reflected in some of the comments of young women interviewed by Shields and
Heinecken (2002, p. 86); for example: “. . . making women appear to be objects […] hurts
women’s image to men” and “it hurts because this ad is trying to show that we are supposed
to be there for men. We are men’s obsession. We are just lying there, waiting for them.” Such
comments point to the negative role of marketing communication’s identity constructions as
they illuminate ethical problems with contemporary imagery.
Exoticization
A particularly virulent form of stereotyping that combines several problematic
representational conventions, exoticization affects many identity categories appearing in
marketing communications, including Africans, Asians, Blacks, Native Americans, and
indigenous peoples (Desmond, 1999; O’Barr, 1994; Williamson, 1986; Woodward, 1997).
For example, marketing representations of Hawaiians, Polynesians, and other Pacific
15
Islanders, reflect a dominant cultural view of the exotic other (Costa, 1998). In other words,
“Hawaiians are repeatedly presented as people whose lives are less complex and less
valuable than the lives of Euroamericans” (Wood, 1999, p. 113). Research on marketing
representations from advertising, tourist brochures, record albums, Hollywood films, and
kitsch Hawiiana has revealed that exoticized (and often eroticized) depictions of “natives” are
commonly used to portray the image of Hawaii (Borgerson & Schroeder, 2002). This vision
of an exotic vacation paradise currently informs tourism campaigns for the Virgin Islands,
Ibiza, Jamaica and Bali, positioning islanders against tourists, in a kind of representational
pattern that may undermine identities and reputations (cf. Borgerson & Schroeder, 2003).
Visions of “exotic” peoples do not just exist “out there” but must be created and
recreated. Much of the ideological power of the representations lies in their almost infinite
repetition—similar images are presented over and over, in a wide variety of marketing
contexts and epochs. Unfortunately absent from most marketing communications about
Hawaii, island resorts, and paradisal escapes is the reminder that exoticization always
functions within a context of unequal power and epistemic closure. The indigenous peoples
of Hawaii have a rich, largely unrepresented culture, yet the image of Hawaii that dominates
many people’s imagination comes from marketing communications, travel brochures,
cookbooks, record albums, musicals, and films. These representations are instrumental in
constructing the image of Hawaii as an exotic, primitive paradise within colonial, patriarchal,
and racist discourses, placing Polynesia within an “orientalist” discourse of the other (e.g.,
Said, 1978).
Exclusion
Exclusion indicates the likelihood of not representing particular people in marketing
communications. In other words, it marks an absence. Although this seems unlikely in an era
of increasingly focused target marketing, some people, such as minorities, the poor, or
otherwise “different” individuals, have been traditionally underrepresented (or excluded
entirely) from marketing images. For example, companies such as BMW, Timberland,
Tommy Hilfiger, and Abercrombie & Fitch have come under fire from minority groups for
not reflecting them as consumers or for excluding them from the brand’s identity, by not
including diversity within advertising, catalog imagery, and websites (cf. Berger, 2001). By
excluding – to varying degrees – certain representations, possible meanings, interpretations,
and understandings are limited in ways that may negatively influence certain individuals,
groups, scenarios, and even geographic locations.
16
Some may argue that increasing representation of the formerly excluded in marketing
images is an improvement over earlier periods, when many marginalized groups were not
represented at all. One might think that simply including images of under-represented or
marginalized cultural groups in marketing communications would reduce exclusion’s ethical
impact, but this strategy often leads to exoticized images, images informed by typicality and
“token” images. For example, Benetton’s approach to cultural “inclusion” has been widely
criticized as perpetuating stereotypes of difference – an ironic result that illustrates the
complex intersection of identity, representation, and marketing within the global economy.
Consumer Interpretation and Representational Conventions
Representational conventions such as these, and related pictorial dimensions, may operate
within marketing communications to systematically and unconsciously influence consumer
perception at a fundamental cognitive level, via a process that we have called tacit
interpretation (Schroeder & Borgerson, 2004). Relatively few people realize how face-ism,
idealization, exoticization, and exclusion pervade marketing representations, or how they
influence perceptual processes. We are not implying that consumers or marketers are
unaware of representational conventions; nevertheless, consumers may remain unable to
resist or deconstruct them (cf. Kates, 1999; Thompson & Haytko, 1998). In many cases, the
typified, idealized, exoticized, or excluded identity stands in for the human being within
representational practices. Representational conventions such as face-ism are especially
significant because they establish a link between visual representation and attributions,
illuminating the central role visual representations and semiotic dualisms have in social
stereotyping.
Marketing Research Implications
Representational conventions can be seen as part of a class of tacit interpretation effects that
lead people to judge others on the basis of subtle visual cues, social categories, and cognitive
schemas. Moreover, they generally serve to psychologically justify the status quo, operating
as identifiable and stable interpretive conventions, which often operate unconsciously (cf.
Bargh, 2002; Schroeder & Borgerson, 2004). Additionally, representational conventions
point to potential blind spots in consumers’ responses to images of identity, alerting
researchers to methodological implications. That is, conventions, such as face-ism,
idealization, exoticization, and exclusion should be considered within research design,
17
particularly experiments that manipulate pictures of people. Any study that employs
depictions of people may be affected by these kind of representational conventions.
For example, in their research on how cropped photographs affect product
evaluations, Peracchio and Myers-Levy (1994, p. 192) showed some participants an ad with
an “exotic-looking women who appeared to be consuming the product.” It is unclear, from
their brief description, what was “exotic” about the woman, how this was visually
represented, and how her appearance might have affected viewer’s perceptions about her and
the product she appeared to be consuming – or why the researchers used this particular image
at all. Further, “exotic” is not a neutral descriptive term – it invokes a long history of
Orientalism that undermines and undervalues the intellectual capacities and human qualities
of those labeled “exotic” (e.g., Said, 1978). Thus, by depicting an “exotic-looking woman” in
their study, they may have inadvertently confounded their experimental design, as research
participants may have responded to the representational ramifications of exoticism. In this
way, representational conventions have the potential to compromise research validity. Thus,
each study that utilizes images of people needs to assess the potential for representational
bias, including exoticization and face-ism.
Conclusion
Marketers must become culturally, ethically, and visually literate in representation and
semiotics if they are to recognize and understand ethical problems in international marketing
communications. Hence, judgments of image appropriateness should be informed by an
awareness of potential epistemic closures. We insist that an ethics of representation must
invoke issues that arise when brand identity, corporate communication, and visual strategy
relies upon representations of identity. We argue that ethical analyses of marketing
communications must offer accounts for how its images represent identity. Moreover,
representational conventions point to potential blind spots in consumer’s responses to images
of identity, alerting marketers to gaps between strategic conceptions of brand identity and
consumer perceptions about brand image.
Linking marketing communication to ontological dilemmas in identity representation
enables researchers to recognize a global communication system based on visual images.
Recognizing the theoretical, methodological, and strategic implications of face-ism,
idealization, exoticization, and exclusion contribute to understanding the ethical implications
of marketing communication. Further ethical issues point to marketing’s commodification of
18
human beings, employing bodies and body images to promote products and services, thus
associating identity with consumption, and existence with market processes.
How can marketing prevent these problems in visual representation? We have
suggested ways to clarify complex issues of representational ethics in marketing by applying
contemporary work in communication theory, marketing, and philosophical ethics. When
marketing campaigns represent identities of groups or individuals so that the representations
themselves purport to express something true or essential about those represented, aesthetic
and ethical questions intersect, and allow certain ontological assumptions to emerge. In
addition to damaging the reputation of members of represented groups, some forms of
representation that are exoticized, stereotypical, sexist, or racist actually manipulate these
groups for consumption by others. Given extant power inequalities and lack of access to mass
media forms of representation, subordinated or oppressed individuals and groups often do not
have much control over how they are represented, particularly within the discourse of
marketing communication. We do not suggest that marketing communication causes these
cultural prejudices, rather that there are relatively stable problematic representational
conventions that might be avoided through close ethical analysis of marketing campaigns.
19
References
Andersson, S., Hedelin, A., Nilsson, A., & Welander, C. (2004). Violent advertising in
fashion marketing. Journal of Fashion Marketing & Management, 8, 96-112.
Archer, D., Iritani, B, Kimes, D., & Barrios, M. (1983). Face-ism: Five studies of sex
differences in facial prominence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45,
725-735.
Armstrong, J. S. (2004), Evaluating ads. Available: www.advertisingprinciples.com.
Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and visual perception. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bargh, J. A. (2002). Losing consciousness: Automatic influences on consumer judgment,
behavior, and motivation. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 280-285.
Bartky, S. (1991). Femininity and domination. New York: Routledge.
Belk, R. W., & and Pollay, R. W. (1985). Images of ourselves: The good life in twentieth
century advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 887-97.
Berger, W. (2001). Advertising Today. London: Phaidon.
Borgerson, J. (2001). Feminist ethical ontology: Contesting “the bare givenness of
intersubjectivity”. Feminist Theory, 2, 173-187.
Borgerson, J. L., & Schroeder, J. E. (2002). Ethical issues of global marketing: Avoiding bad
faith in visual representation. European Journal of Marketing, 36, 570-594.
Borgerson, J. L., & Schroeder, J. E. (2003). The lure of paradise: Marketing the retro-escape
of Hawaii. In S. Brown and J.F. Sherry, Jr. (Eds.), Time, space and place:
Retroscapes rising (pp. 219-237). New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1990). Reproduction. London: Sage.
Bristor, J., Lee, R. G. & Hunt, M. (1995). Race and ideology: African American images in
television advertising. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 14, 1-24.
Butler, J. (1999/1987). Subjects of desire: Hegelian reflections in twentieth-century France.
New York: Columbia University Press.
Carrigan, M., & Szmigin, I. (2000). Advertising and older consumers: Image and ageism.
Business Ethics: A European Review, 9, 42-50
Cigarette ads still enticing teens to smoke, study shows. (2001, June 12). The Providence
Journal-Bulletin, p. 6.
Cortese, A. J. (1999). Provocateur: Images of women and minorities in advertising. Lanham,
MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Costa, J. A. (1998). Paradisal discourse: A critical analysis of marketing and consuming
Hawaii. Consumption Markets & Culture, 1, 303-346.
Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2004). Business ethics: A European perspective. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Crocker, D. A., & Linden, T. (Eds.) (1998). Ethics of consumption: The good life, justice and
global stewardship. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Dávila, A. (2001). Latinos, inc.: The marketing and making of a people. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
Desmond, J. (2003). Consuming behavior. New York: Palgrave.
Desmond, J. C. (1999). Staging tourism: Bodies on display from Waikiki to Sea World.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Elliott, R., & Wattanasuwan, K. (1998). Brands as symbolic resources for the construction of
identity. International Journal of Advertising, 17, 131-144.
Floch, J.-M. (2001). Semiotics, marketing and communication: Beneath the signs, the
strategies, trans. R. O. Bodkin. Hampshire: Palgrave.
20
Furnham, A. (1999). Sex role stereotyping in television commercials: A review and
comparison of fourteen studies done in five continents over 25 years. Sex Roles, 41
(September), 413-4317.
Giroux, H. A. (1994). Disturbing pleasures: Learning popular culture. New York:
Routledge.
Goffman, E. (1979). Gender advertisements. New York: Harper & Row.
Goldberg, D. T. (1993). Racist culture: Philosophy and the politics of meaning. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Goldman, R., & Papson, S. (1996). Sign wars: The cluttered landscape of advertising. New
York: Guilford.
Gordon, L. R. (1995). Bad faith and antiblack racism. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities
Press.
Gordon, L. R. (1997). Her Majesty’s Other children: Sketches of racism from a neocolonial
age. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Gross, L. (1988). The ethics of (mis) representation. In L. Gross, J.S. Katz & J. Ruby (Eds.),
Image ethics (pp. 188-202). New York: Oxford University Press.
Hall, S. (Ed.) (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices.
London: Open University Press/Sage.
Hall, S., & Sealy, M. (2001). Different: Contemporary photographers and Black identity.
London: Phaidon.
Heywood, I., & Sandywell, B. (1999). Introduction: Explorations in the hermeneutics of the
visual. In I. Heywood & B. Sandywell (Eds.), Interpreting visual culture:
Explorations in the hermeneutics of the visual (pp. ix-xviii). London: Routledge.
Jacobson, M. F., & Mazur, L. A. (1995). Marketing madness: A survival guide to consumer
society. Boulder, CO: Westview Press
Kates, S. M. (1999). Making the ad perfectly queer: Marketing “normality” to the gay men’s
community. Journal of Advertising, 28, 25-37.
Kay, A. C., & Jost, J. T. (2003). Complementary justice: Effects of “poor but happy” and
“poor but honest” stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation
of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85 (5), 823-837.
King, J. M. (2002). Photographic images of gender and race in Fortune 500 company Web
Sites in the United States. Business Research Yearbook 7, 852-856.
Larson, V., Luna, D., & Peracchio, L. A. (2004). Points of view and pieces of time: A
taxonomy of image attributes. Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (1), 102-111.
Latour, B., & Weibel, P. (Eds.) (2002). Iconoclash: Beyond the image wars in science,
religion, and art. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Levesque, M. J., & Lowe, C. A. (1999). Face-ism as a determinant of interpersonal
perceptions: The influence of context on facial prominence effects. Sex Roles, 41
(3/4), 241-259.
Lutz, C. A., & Collins, J. L. (1993). Reading National Geographic. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Martin, M. C., & Gentry, J. W. (1997). Stuck in the model trap: The effects of beautiful
models in ads on female pre-adolescents and adolescents. Journal of Advertising, 26,
19-33.
McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1999). Visual rhetoric in advertising: Text-interpretive,
experimental, and reader-response analyses. Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 37-
54.
Messaris, P. (1997). Visual persuasion: The role of images in advertising. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
21
Mick, D. G., Burroughs, J. E., Hetzel, P., & Brannen, M. Y. (2004). Pursuing the meaning of
meaning in the commercial world: An international review of marketing and
consumer research founded on semiotics. Semiotica, in press.
Miller, D. (1994). Ontology and style. In J. Friedman, J. (Ed.), Consumption and identity (pp.
71-96). Amsterdam: Harwood.
Natanson, M. (1986). Anonymity: A study in the philosophy of Alfred Schutz. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
Nederveen Pieterse, J. (1992). White on Black: Images of Africa and Blacks in Western
popular culture. New Haven: Yale University Press.
O’Barr, W. M., (1994). Culture and the ad: Exploring Otherness in the world of advertising.
Boulder, CO: Westview.
O’Donohoe, S., & Tynan, C. (1998). Beyond sophistication: Dimensions of advertising
literacy. International Journal of Advertising, 17, 467-482.
Peck, J., & Loken, B. (2004). When will larger-sized female models in advertisements be
viewed positively? The moderating effects of instructional frame, gender, and need
for cognition. Psychology & Marketing, 21 (6), 425-442.
Peracchio, L., & Myers-Levy, J. (1994). How ambiguous cropped objects in ad photos can
affect product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 190-204.
Pettigrew, S. (2001). King or pawn? The role of the Australian beer drinker. Journal of
Research for Consumers, 2. Available: www.jrconsumers.com.
Pollay, R. (1986). The distorted mirror: Reflections on the unintended consequences of
advertising. Journal of Marketing, 50, 18-36.
Richins, M. L. (1991). Social comparison and the idealized images of advertising. Journal of
Consumer Research, 18, 71-83.
Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Vantage Press.
Schroeder, J. E. (1998). Consuming representation: A visual approach to consumer research.
In B. B. Stern (Ed.), Representing consumers: Voices, views and visions (pp. 193-
230). London: Routledge.
Schroeder, J. E. (2000). Édouard Manet, Calvin Klein and the strategic use of scandal. In S.
Brown & A. Patterson (Eds.), Imagining Marketing: Art, Aesthetics, and the Avant-
Garde (pp. 36-51). London: Routledge.
Schroeder, J. E. (2002). Visual consumption. London: Routledge.
Schroeder, J. E., & Borgerson, J. L. (1998). Marketing images of gender: A visual analysis.
Consumption Markets & Culture, 2, 161-201.
Schroeder, J. E., & Borgerson, J. L. (2003). Dark desires: Fetishism, ontology and
representation in contemporary advertising. In T. Reichert & J. Lambiase (Eds.), Sex
in advertising: Perspectives on the Erotic Appeal (pp. 65-87). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Schroeder, J. E., & Borgerson, J. L. (2004). Tacit processes in consumer interpretation. In S.
Brown & D. Turley (Eds.), European Advances in Consumer Research (vol. 7, pp.
70-72). Valdosta, GA: Association for Consumer Research.
Schroeder, J. E., & McDonagh, P. (2005). The logic of pornography in digital camera
promotion. In J. Lambiase & T. Reichert (Eds.), Sex in promotional culture: The
erotic content of media and marketing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schroeder, J. E., & Salzer-Mörling, M. (2005). Brand culture. London: Routledge.
Schroeder, J. E., & Zwick, D. (2004). Mirrors of masculinity: Representation and identity in
advertising images. Consumption Markets & Culture, 7, 21-52.
Scott, L. A. (1994). Images of advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric. Journal
of Consumer Research, 21, 252-273.
22
Scott, L., & Batra, R. (Eds.) (2003). Persuasive imagery: A consumer response perspective.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Shields, V. R., & Heinecken, D. (2002). Measuring up: How advertising affects self-image.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Smith, N. C., & Quelch, J.A. (1993). Ethics in marketing. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Stern, B. B. (1993). Feminist literary criticism and the deconstruction of ads: a postmodern
view of advertising and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 556-
566.
Stern, B. B. (1998). Introduction: the problematics of representation. In B. B. Stern, (Ed.),
Representing consumers: Voices, views, and visions (pp. 1-23). New York:
Routledge.
Stern, B. B., & Schroeder, J. E. (1994). Interpretive methodology from art and literary
criticism: a humanistic approach to advertising imagery. European Journal of
Marketing, 28, 114-132.
Taylor, C. R., Lee, J. U., & Stern, B. B. (1995). Portrayals of African, Hispanic, and Asian
Americans in Magazine Advertising. American Behavioral Scientist, 38 (4), 608-621.
Thompson, C. J. (1995). A contextualist proposal for the conceptualization and study of
marketing ethics. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 14, 177-191.
Thompson, C. J. (2004). Dreams of Eden: A critical reader-response analysis of the mytho-
ideologies encoded in natural health advertisements. In K. Ekström & H. Brembeck
(Eds.), Elusive consumption (pp. 175-204). Oxford: Berg.
Thompson, C. J., & Haytko, D. L. (1997). Speaking of fashion: Consumers’ uses of fashion
discourses and the appropriation of countervailing cultural meanings. Journal of
Consumer Research, 24, 15-42.
Walker, M. U. (1998). Moral understandings: Feminist studies in ethics. New York:
Routledge.
van Leeuwen, T. (2000). Visual racism. In M. Reisigl & R. Wodak (Eds.), The semiotics of
racism: Approaches in critical discourse analysis (pp. 333-350). Vienna: Passagen
Verlag.
van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Semiotics and iconography. In T. van Leeuwen & C. Jewitt (Eds.),
Handbook of visual analysis (pp. 92-118). London: Sage.
Whitt, L. A. (1995). Cultural imperialism and the marketing of Native American culture,
American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 19, 1-31.
Williamson, J. (1978). Decoding advertisements. London: Marion Boyers.
Williamson, J. (1986). Women is an island: Femininity and colonization. In T. Modleski
(Ed.), Studies in entertainment: Critical approaches to mass culture (pp. 99-118).
Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Wood, H. (1999). Displacing natives: The rhetorical production of Hawai’i. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield.
Woodward, K. (Ed.) (1997). Identity and difference. London: Sage/Open University Press.
Zaltman, G. (2002). How customers think. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
23
Figure 1 Face-ism example I
24
Figure 2 Face-ism example II
Figure 3 Idealization
25
Figure 4 Exoticization
26
Figure 5 Exoticization
doc_228012062.pdf
This paper offers an ethical analysis of visual representation that provides criteria for and sheds light on the appropriateness dimension of marketing communications. It provides a theoretically informed framework for recognizing and understanding ethical issues in visual representation. An interdisciplinary conceptual review and analysis focuses on four representational conventions, synthesizing ethical concerns, to provide a broader context for recognizing and understanding ethical issues in marketing representation: face-ism, idealization, exoticization and exclusion.
AN ETHICS OF REPRESENTATION FOR
INTERNATIONAL MARKETING
Janet L. Borgerson
Jonathan E. Schroeder
University of Exeter
Discussion Papers in Management
Paper number 04/03
ISSN 1472-2939
Abstract
This paper offers an ethical analysis of visual representation that provides criteria for and
sheds light on the appropriateness dimension of marketing communications. It provides a
theoretically informed framework for recognizing and understanding ethical issues in visual
representation. An interdisciplinary conceptual review and analysis focuses on four
representational conventions, synthesizing ethical concerns, to provide a broader context for
recognizing and understanding ethical issues in marketing representation: face-ism,
idealization, exoticization and exclusion. This framework is discussed and applied to
marketing communications. It argues that valuations of communication appropriateness must
be informed by an awareness of the ethical relationship between marketing representations
and identity. It is no longer satisfactory to associate advertising solely with persuasion, rather
advertising must be seen as a representational system, with pedagogical as well as strategic
functions. We conclude by discussing the theoretical, research, and managerial implications
that arise from an ethics of visual representation. Urges moving beyond an advertising =
persuasion model to encompass representation and culture in marketing communication
studies. Contributes to understanding the ethical implications of marketing communication.
Challenges marketers and researchers to broaden their conception of marketing
communication to one more consistent with an image economy.
Keywords: Advertising, Consumer Behaviour, Ethics, Image, International Marketing,
Social responsibility, Visual Communication
Inter-disciplinary CSR Research Conference
‘Ethical Issues and International Marketing’ track
Nottingham, October 2004
___________________________________________________________________________
Janet Borgerson, School of Business and Economics, University of Exeter, Streatham Court, Rennes Drive, Exeter,
UK, EX4 4PU. Phone: +44 (0) 1392 264502 Email: [email protected]
Jonathan Schroeder, School of Business and Economics, University of Exeter, Streatham Court, Rennes Drive,
Exeter, UK, EX4 4PU. Phone: +44 (0) 1392 262537 Email: [email protected]
1
An Ethics of Representation for International Marketing
In contemporary marketing communications, images claim center stage. The focus on image
– over and above function – challenges basic notions of marketing practice, shifts appropriate
topics of analysis, and reinforces the visual domain’s centrality. Serving as stimuli, signs, or
representations that drive cognition, interpretation, and preference, images influence what we
know and believe (cf. Zaltman, 2002). Not surprisingly, images constitute much corporate
communication about products and services, economic performance, and organizational
identity. Pictures of people – models, celebrity endorsers, spokespersons, “average”
consumers, managers and employees – make up a large part of marketing imagery.
Moreover, images provide resources for, and, hence, shape, our understandings of the world,
including the identities of its people and places. If marketing communications depend upon
images, including brand images, corporate images, product images, and images of identity,
then ethical tools meant to provide guidance for international marketing communications
must be capable of addressing the concerns that such depictions evoke.
In this paper, we investigate marketing communication’s role in “the taken-for-
granted political and ethical practices of envisioning others” (Heywood & Sandywell, 1999,
p. x). Discussions of marketing ethics rarely include visual issues, apart from largely
atheoretical concerns over shock advertising, sexual appeals, or stereotyping; rather, they
typically revolve around deception, the questionable accuracy of product claims, and the
targeting of vulnerable consumers, such as children (e.g., Smith & Quelch, 1993). These
approaches to marketing ethics generally adopt an information-based model of marketing
communication, emphasizing marketing’s role as a strategic conduit of information for
consumers, rather than fully acknowledging how marketing also acts as a representational
system that produces meaning outside the realm of the promoted product or service (see
Schroeder & Salzer-Mörling, 2005; Scott & Batra, 2003). This situation emerges in part
because of a failure to confront the ethical concerns that arise in the wake of the prominence
of the image – including advertising images, corporate images, and images of identity –
within today’s image economy.
Ethically motivated criticisms of marketing communications are often simplistically
understood as generalized critiques of capitalism and related excessive consumption (e.g.,
Crane & Matten, 2004; Thompson, 2004). Our work in marketing communication ethics does
not include criticism of consumption per se, nor do we take a moralistic stance against
materialism, or marketing’s possible role in promoting materialistic desires. Rather, we have
2
chosen to elaborate on ethical issues pertaining to representations of identity, in that
represented identities profess to express something true or essential about those represented.
Just as personnel policies have had to accommodate changing norms about hiring and
promotion when it comes to women and minorities, marketing managers must be aware of
representational practices that may cause harm. Our analysis concerns not only the ethical
implications, or consequences, of representational conventions – customary ways of
depicting products, people and identities – within marketing communications, but emphasizes
the ethical context from which such representational conventions emerge.
Whereas discussions of marketing communication ethics often focus on appropriate
use of images, most lack a conceptual framework for recognizing and understanding ethical
issues in visual representation. Typical guidelines for marketing communication ethics list
such items as legal matters, including false claims, misleading statements, and improper
labeling, deceptive pricing, and image appropriateness, as relevant for ethical review
(Armstrong, 2004; Crane & Matten, 2004). However, ethical checklists provide few criteria
by which to judge whether ads contain, for example, “sexual innuendos which are considered
inappropriate for audience,” or “no ethnic stereotyping.” We introduce an ethics of visual
representation that provides such criteria and shed light on the appropriateness dimension of
marketing communications. Evaluations of ad appropriateness must be informed by an
awareness of the ethical relationship between marketing representations and identity. We
conclude by discussing the implications arising from an ethics of visual representation as a
vital issue for international marketing communication practice and research.
Visual Representation Within the Image Economy
Visual images exist within a distinctive socio-legal environment – unlike textual or verbal
statements, such as product claims or political promises, pictures cannot be held to be true or
false. Images elude empirical verification. Thus, images are especially amenable in enabling
strategists to avoid being held accountable for false or misleading claims. For example,
cigarette manufacturers have learned not to make text-based claims about their products,
relying instead on visual imagery such as the lone cowboy roaming the American west.
Concerns about the persuasive power and rhetorical influence of marketing images
have been countered by references to so-called “postmodern” notions of resistance and rising
advertising literacy (cf. Elliott & Wattanasuwan, 1998; O’Donohoe & Tynan, 1998;
Pettigrew, 2001). That is, continued concern around marketing communication’s power to
3
exert influence and reinforce ethically irresponsible representations of identity, such as a beer
company’s sexist and long-running, imaginary “Swedish bikini team,” has been met with
claims that consumers knowingly interpret visual or text-based advertising messages,
selectively choose meanings, and resist rhetorical persuasion. For example, a recent business
ethics textbook downplays concerns about advertising’s perpetuation of harmful stereotypes
by claiming that many “social commentators […] contend that, as a society, we have never
been so informed and educated about the role of advertising, promotion, and branding as we
are today” (Crane & Matten, 2004, p. 276). On the contrary, we argue that, outside of
university courses in communication, there is relatively little education about marketing
communication’s social, cultural, and pedagogical roles, nor about the production, history,
and theory of visual representation.
Marketing communication’s ubiquity does not necessarily improve one’s capacity to
see – to actively engage one’s senses in reflective analysis (Schroeder, 2002). Further, it is
unclear how each new generation of consumers might benefit from such so-called advertising
literacy; that is, children are not born with the innate ability to understand the underlying
context of cultural meanings at work in marketing communications, no matter how many
times parents tell them that an advertised toy will only be fun for a few minutes, although it
looks great in the ads, or that a pair of athletic shoes cannot really make you run faster, or
that models really do not look like that in real life.
Even when consumers realize an image or image-based scenario is not “real,” these
images influence how they perceive and respond to their world. Whereas decades of women
realize that the bloody shower scene in Alfred Hitchcock’s harrowing film, Psycho, is not
“real,” images from that scene, and others like it, no doubt have discouraged many from
enjoying a shower. Similarly, images of the “exotic other” – from Augustus Earle’s sketches
of early 1800s Pacific islanders and Edward S. Curtis’s twentieth century photographs of
Native Americans to the iconic native island girl in tropical holiday promotions, suntan lotion
ads, and fashion shoots – give us a sense that we know places, times, and peoples that we
have never experienced. Given such wide-ranging influence, recent work in marketing
scholarship urges us to consider marketing images as cultural texts, and not merely as
accurate or true strategic pictures that transparently record faces, families, or familiar
products, services, and sights (Mick, Burroughs, Hetzel, & Brannen, 2004, for a review;
Schroeder, 2002; Scott, 1994).
Images in marketing communication frequently stand in for experience, especially
when other sources have less prominence, and serve as a foundation for future attempts to
4
comprehend and construct the world around us. As a result, images in marketing
communications understandably have attracted attention from marketing strategists,
advertising practitioners, and consumer researchers, and have increasingly evoked criticism
from cultural theorists and policy makers. Moreover, although researchers increasingly
acknowledge consumer response as fundamental to ad interpretation, the power of images is
not well understood. Ours is not a naive claim that consumers believe artificial, stereotypical,
or idealized realms do or can exist, or that consumers consume advertising images from a
single, unitary, or predetermined (so-called “structuralist”) perspective. Rather, marketing
images contribute to the “reality” into which contemporary consumers are socialized and
often evade notions of creative interpretation and critical resistance.
According to some critics, pictures themselves contain such potent rhetorical
authority that they require drastic action to curb their persuasive appeal (see Latour &
Wiebel, 2002; McQuarrie & Mick, 1999; Schroeder, 2002; Scott, 1994). For example, Dan
Romer, from the Annenberg Public Policy Center, has argued that “banning pictures from ads
would help end the image that smoking is fun and give marketing campaigns about tobacco
dangers a chance to work” (“Cigarette Ads,” 2001, p. 6). Images of beautiful people
exhibiting no signs of nicotine addiction or its debilitating effects help maintain a positive
vision of smoking. This persuasive power of marketing images depends largely upon the
rhetorical representational conventions of photographic reproduction; that is, advertising,
corporate reports, packaging, product catalogs, promotional materials, and Web graphics rely
heavily upon photographic information technology to produce meaning within a circuit of
production and consumption.
Photographic images – including digital pictures, film, video, and Internet graphics –
perform so often and so fluidly for marketing, scientific, legal, and political purposes that it
can be difficult to keep in mind that photographs are selectively edited and culturally-
produced images that exist within shifting planes of meaning and significance. Photographs
often appear as if they are merely visual records of what has happened, how people look, or
where events took place at a particular moment. Marketing communication researchers must
acknowledge the subjectivity of visual representation in studying the commercial landscape
that everyday consumers encounter, keeping in mind that art directors, photographers,
advertising executives, and corporate strategists choose from a range of images and juxtapose
these with product and text in order to create “ordinary advertisements.”
Viewers make sense of visual images in a number of ways, many of which are
automatic or without awareness (cf. Bargh, 2002). Many perceptual processes fluctuate
5
between conscious and unconscious control. For example, cognitive as well as physiological
processes govern eye movement, attention, and awareness. Perceptual codes influence visual
information processing – Westerners generally read from left to right, and from top to
bottom. Further, perceptual cues, such as relative size, shape, color, and symmetry contribute
to consumer cognition at a level at which most are perhaps only dimly aware (cf. Arnheim,
1974). Objects or people that appear larger in the visual frame are generally ascribed more
perceptual and symbolic importance than those that appear small. Representational
conventions – or common patterns of portraying objects, people, or identities – work in
conjunction with these perceptual and cultural processes that often elude marketing
communication research.
Ethical Foundations
An image economy requires approaches to ethics and marketing communication that move
beyond codes of conduct, individual manager’s actions, or particular campaigns. Our ethics
of visual representation focuses on representational practices and their ethical implications, as
well as emphasizing the ethical context from which representational conventions emerge.
Along these lines, philosopher Margaret Urban Walker (1998, p. 178) contended that the
assumption that people are a kind or type is propagated and created by representational
conventions, which “are among those that construct socially salient identities for people.”
She further argued that if representational practices “affect some people’s morally significant
perceptions of and interactions with other people, and if they can contribute to those
perceptions or interactions going seriously wrong, these activities have bearing on
fundamental ethical questions” (Walker, 1998, p. 179). One of the most serious outcomes of
representational practices is that people’s perceptions, even “misinformed perceptions”, often
have “the weight of established facts” (Gordon, 1995, p. 203).
Contemporary ethical theorists have written extensively on the relation between
representation and identity, or, ontological status (e.g., Bartky, 1990; Borgerson, 2001;
Butler, 1987/1999; Gordon, 1995; Walker, 1998). Ontology centers on notions of being or
identity – including human identity – who one is and who is not, including how relationships
form and function. Ethics and ontology are linked by a concern about how visual markers
such as skin color, embodiment, and gendered attributes represent or determine the status of
human beings, particularly in the context of racism and sexism. Thus, what we think we
know about others from representations of identity – including those within marketing
6
communications – can affect how we see, treat, and understand them. Although alternative or
resistant ways of looking at marketing images are possible, for example, reading mainstream
ads as “gay” or interpreting sexist ads as “camp,” “ironic,” or “parody,” this often simply
reflects responses to or reconfigurations of the dominant system (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990;
Kates, 1999). Representations of subordinate groups, for example, the poor (Kay & Jost,
2003); the elderly (Carrigan & Szmigin, 2000); and ethnic minorities (O’Barr, 1994; Taylor,
Lee, & Stern, 1995) rarely contradict and typically reproduce versions of subordination. For
example, a comprehensive study of gender roles in television advertisements around the
world, found that, despite some recent changes, ads “typically show men as authoritative and
knowledgeable, whereas women are confined at home” (Furnham 1999, p. 434). In this way,
the global commercial environment reproduces stereotypes that tend to limit women’s
opportunities and potential.
Basic communicative building blocks revolve around identity and difference (cf.
Woodward, 1997). Ontological assumptions related to representations of identity, or
assumptions about who and what the represented ones are, intersect with culturally defined
hierarchies and dominant semiotics used in marketing communications. Dominant semiotics
– grounding what categories, characteristics, or individual signs can mean within the
dominant culture – prescribe and structure the elements of identity and difference that will be
readily rendered as culturally intelligible. Semiotic meaning draws upon dualistic notions of
being, identity and difference – such as self/other, male/female, white/black,
rational/emotional, culture/nature, and normal/exotic – the opposed elements of which
stabilize various positive and negative cultural associations and values. These semiotic
associations are taken seriously, and often purport to express something natural and true.
Setting one element against the other, for example white vs. black, has perpetuated and
reinforced the dualistic hierarchical orderings that historically have favored the male, the
white, and the rational (cf. Goldberg, 1993). Representational conventions in marketing
communications draw upon these meaning systems, which may reinforce and reproduce
damaging images of identity. In such a context, those associated with the privileged elements
– the male, the rational, and the normal – stand in the position to claim knowledge of and
denigrate all that is important to know about those associated with the subordinated elements
– the female, the emotional, and the exotic (Borgerson, 2001).
This type of semiotically dualistic relation engages with the potential for epistemic
closure, an ethical concept calling attention to the danger of typified representations of
identity that increase the probability of human subjects interpreting what they experience or
7
have represented to them as (stereo) typical. Typified representations, especially those that
are racist or sexist, for example, may undermine a group’s dignity and historical integrity and
cast a demeaning light upon their physical and intellectual habits and ontological status as
human beings (cf. Miller, 1994). A worldview informed by epistemic closure abstracts and
condenses characteristics that create a familiar identity or pattern for beings of a kind.
Epistemic closure leads an individual to believe that he or she knows the other’s being
completely, and this assumption denies the other status as human being and limits
possibilities for human relationships (Gordon 1997). We contend that marketing images are
never appropriate if they create epistemic closure without reasonable justification.
Marketing representations have the power to make us believe that we know
something we have no experience of and to influence the experiences we have in the future.
One often feels that one has learned something in observing or examining an image of a
person or a geographic location, yet the way that such representations stand in when
experience is lacking, or function in conjunction with experience, is of particular concern in
marketing strategy and ethical analyses of marketing communications. How does one
recognize ethically problematic representations? We argue that marketing requires a
semiotic understanding of the cultural context in which images and representation circulate,
which we sketch in the following sections.
The Status of Marketing Communications
Although marketing communication remains first and foremost a strategic tool, our analysis
attempts to locate marketing images within a complex visual signifying arena that includes
the interrelated domains of the aesthetic and the ethical (cf. Hall, 1997). Therefore, we
situate marketing communications within a system of visual representation that creates
meaning within the circuit of culture – often beyond the managerial control of any one
organization or strategic vision. This circuit assumes that marketing messages both create and
contribute to culture, largely via representational conventions (see Hall, 1997; Schroeder &
Zwick, 2004; Stern & Schroeder, 1994; Thompson, 1995). A simple representational
convention occurs in wristwatch ads, where most watches show the time as ten minutes past
ten o’clock. Another familiar convention appears in the vertical orientation of celebrity “head
shots”, executive portraits, and pictures of satisfied consumers in “portrait” format that
profoundly influenced media outlets such as magazines and newspapers. Other, more
8
complicated conventions include the way fashion models pose in highly stylized manners,
taught by modeling agencies and expected by photographers and designers.
Conventional views of representation hold that categories, such as objects, products,
or consumers, exist in the material and natural world, and that their material characteristics
define them in perfectly clear terms; representation, according to this view, is of secondary
importance in the construction of meaning. In our view, meaning is produced or constructed
by social and cultural forces; thus, representation assumes primary importance. Marketing
scholarship has turned to the concept of representation for insight into diverse market-related
phenomena, including advertising imagery, research methods, information technology, and
photography (Stern, 1998). The process of representing objects, ideas and identities shapes
how we think of them; in this way, representation enters into the very constitution of things
and categories. Because representation refers to meaning production through language
systems, how language – including visual representation – is used is central to creating
meaning. Using representation as an analytic tool, researchers have emphasized how cultural
practices, such as laws, rituals, norms, art, and advertising, contribute to meaning production
within marketing (e.g., Andersson, Hedelin, Nilsson, & Welander, 2004; Floch, 2001; Hall,
1997; Messaris, 1997; Schroeder, 2002; Schroeder & Salzer-Mörling, 2005).
As part of a long line of visual expression, marketing representations remain
embodied and embedded within a myriad of historical, cultural, and social situations,
contexts, and discourses. At times this image creation draws upon and reinforces simplified,
even subordinating, representations of cultural difference, group identity, and geographic
specificity. According to cultural theorists Hall and Sealy (2001, p. 4), within visual
representations: “profound differences of history, culture and experience have often been
reduced to a handful of stereotypical features, which are “read” as if they represent a truth of
nature, somehow indelibly described on the body. They are assumed to be “real” because
they can be seen – difference, visible to the naked eye.” Such epistemically closed
representations of identity, harnessed in the attempt to create brand images or corporate
identity, potentially undermine the full human status of represented groups and individuals
(e.g., Dávila, 2001; Goffman, 1979; O’Barr, 1994; Schroeder and Borgerson, 1998; Stern,
1993; Williamson, 1978).
Identities that are exoticized, sexist, or racist, damage the reputation of represented
groups, and associated group members, and manipulate their being for consumption by
others. Furthermore, some identities are systematically excluded from marketing images,
while others are represented in ethically problematic ways. The claim is not that some
9
advertising, as well as other forms of marketing communications, might offend the concerned
group and its members, but that certain forms of representation may limit their opportunities
for the future by undermining or sabotaging their reputation. For example, Native American
groups have protested professional sports teams such as the Atlanta Braves, the Cleveland
Indians and the Washington Redskins’ use of stereotyped, red-faced Indian figures in their
promotional imagery, claiming that these representations have little to do with their identity,
the oppressive history that they have endured, and their ongoing struggles to become valued
American citizens (cf. Whitt, 1995).
Representational Conventions
Visual theorists have raised important points regarding the production of media
representations and the potential repercussions for individuals, groups, and societies (e.g.,
Gross, 1988; Lutz & Collins, 1993; van Leeuwen, 2000). Many studies have documented and
criticized how ads often portray women and racial minorities in stereotyped and often
negative ways (e.g., Bristol, Lee, & Hunt, 1995; Cortese, 1999; Giroux, 1994; Goldman &
Papson, 1996; Schroeder, 2000; Stern, 1993; Whitt, 1995). In a groundbreaking discussion of
“image ethics,” media researcher Larry Gross began to articulate an ethics of representation
pertaining to the media. He proposed two fundamental principles: first, groups should be
allowed to speak for themselves. Second, media practices, including advertising, should be
used to equalize the unequal distribution of power in society, or at least not to perpetuate
inequality (Gross, 1988). These proposals have far reaching implications for making
subordinated voices heard and for promoting human equality. Consistent with Gross’s image
ethics, we would hope that an ethics of representation could convince those in marketing
communications, as Hippocrates suggested, to “first do no harm.”
Visual communication theorist Theo van Leeuwen (2000; 2001) identified two basic
questions regarding the conventions of visual representation: (1) how are people depicted in
relation to each other or their surroundings?, and (2) how are people depicted in relation to
the viewer ? He focuses on pictorial representations of people, and asks “what options, what
choices does “the language of images” give us to depict people?” (van Leeuwen, 2000, p.
341). For van Leeuwen, representational choices revolve around issues of exclusion of
certain identity groups, portrayed social roles, stereotypical depictions, and categorization
into types. These representational variables often combine to produce epistemically closed
10
portrayals; for example, creating a category of “third world poor” to juxtapose with images of
affluence from the developed world.
Van Leeuwen identified several strategies (or representational conventions) of visual
racism, in an in-depth study of how people are represented in images. Visual racism involves
issues of “othering,” exclusion, and stereotyping – where stereotyping involves not just
negative cultural depictions but also showing certain people as homogeneous groups without
distinguishing individual characteristics and differences. For example, typical National
Geographic magazine photographs often portray “natives” as different from the assumed
reader – other to the reader’s self (Lutz & Collins, 1993). Van Leeuwen’s analysis of the
relationship between the viewer and depictions of people, identified three pictorial
dimensions: (1) the social distance – given certain assumptions about how the social status of
one differs from the status of another, (2) the social relation – power differences, including
how involved or detached the figures appear, and (3) the social interaction – the gaze of the
depicted figure (outward, downward, and so forth) and its implications for interpersonal
connection.
Visual representations express social psychological relations, such as closeness,
involvement, and status (Larsen, Luna, & Peraccchio, 2004; Nederveen Pieterse, 1992).
Some images invite interaction; whether the pictured person looks at, or gazes at, the viewer
is critical in determining the potential (implied) relationships. Although these interactions or
relations are imagined, viewers often perceive depicted individuals or groups as though they
were strangers or friends, and, in terms of the camera angle, physically or socially above or
below them. Camera angles also structure social relations, whether the viewer sees depicted
subjects from above, eye level, or below; and can allude to symbolic involvement or
detachment, coming face to face with someone, confronting them, or sidling up to them (van
Leeuwen, 2000). A woman lying down can be generally said to exhibit less status, as an
object of the male gaze (Goffman, 1979; Schroeder & Borgerson, 1998). In a television
advertisement, a “long shot,” (one taken from far away, often with a telephoto lens), may
indicate a distant relationship between characters, or between a character and the viewer,
whereas a close-up is likely to connote intimacy.
These pictorial dimensions – social distance, social relation, and social interaction –
indicate a larger ethics of power and representation articulated within the gaze. To gaze
implies more than to look at – it signifies a psychological relationship of power, in which the
gazer is superior to the object of the gaze. Royalty gaze upon their subjects, viewed as
property in the kingdom. Explorers gaze upon newly “discovered” land as colonial resources.
11
Although recent theoretical treatments of the gaze acknowledge the myriad forms it may
take, including a female gaze, advertising has been called an extreme expression of the male
gaze, producing stereotyped and typified representations of men and women, the good life,
and sexual fantasy (cf. Jacobson & Mazur, 1995; Schroeder & Borgerson, 2003; Schroeder &
McDonagh, 2005; Stern, 1993).
Marketing communications often depend upon the gaze to build relationships between
consumers and fashion models, products, or companies. Shields and Heinecken’s (2002, p.
83) research suggested how the gaze interacts with marketing communications: “while both
men and women discussed the pleasure of looking at attractive females, men tended to make
their comments within the larger context of the way they look at women in general, not
confining their comments to the advertisements in front of them.” For example, one male
respondent reported that ads please him as a “visual stimuli kind of thing. I find women
attractive and it makes me feel good to look at them…I guess I equated that with having a lot
of fun. You know, being at a party…kind of like being on a beer commercial” (in Shields &
Heinecken, 2002, p. 84). Here the male consumer’s gaze expresses social distance, social
relation, and social interaction; he apparently believes that he is in a position to judge and
appreciate attractive women, that he is welcome to party with them. In this way, marketing
communications help and compel him to define his identity and his potential relationship
with women.
The representational choices described by van Leeuwen, in conjunction with such
pictorial variables as distance, angle, and gaze, animate images of identity, and help point to
marketing practices, such as drawing unreflectively upon semiotic meanings and representing
people as “others” or persons not like “us,” that can produce unethical imagery (Borgerson &
Schroeder, 2002; O’Barr, 1994; van Leeuwen, 2000). Further, these choices may lead to
subtle racist, sexist, and or epistemically closed representations that could undermine
marketing communication, particularly global campaigns aimed at diverse consumers.
Whereas van Leeuwen proposed a rather deterministic model of pictorial meaning, we argue
for an approach that considers the cultural and ethical context in which meaning arises, which
we believe can supply the necessary theoretical underpinning for an ethics of visual
representation.
In the next section, we present several representational conventions to ground
analysis and enhance understanding of the ethical implications of images in marketing
communication. We discuss how the language of images presents marketers with choices
12
about how to depict people, among other subjects, and how these choices coalesce into
certain representational conventions.
A Framework for Image Analysis
In order to articulate an ethics of representation for marketing communication, we focus here
on four representational conventions to provide a broader context for recognizing and
understanding ethical issues in marketing representation:
• face-ism
• idealization
• exoticization
• exclusion
Face-ism describes how mass media systematically show men with more prominent faces
than women and how women are negatively affected by this representational convention
(figures 1 and 2). Idealization concerns how marketing communications routinely depict
ideal types (figure 3)– young, thin models, unrealistic scenarios, or unattainable goals – and
the negative effects these often have, beginning in childhood (e.g., Belk & Pollay, 1987;
Martin & Gentry, 1997; Richins, 1991; Shields & Heinecken, 2002). Exoticization, which
refers to the process of making someone seem exotic, strange, or different in ways that call
attention to certain identity characteristics, such as skin color, dress, or appearance can be
seen as a crucial category (figures 4 and 5). Exclusion indicates how certain types of people –
for example, poor, marginalized, or under-represented individuals and groups – have
traditionally been left out of the marketing communication pantheon.
These analytic categories, discussed in greater detail below, together with
aforementioned pictorial dimensions, can be useful in generating ethical insights and
investigating how marketing communications represent and construct identities. However, it
must be kept in mind that they do not comprise an exhaustive list and may at times overlap.
We believe that they illuminate the key representational tensions and ethical issues within
contemporary marketing communications.
Face-ism
In their classic study on the forms and consequences of stereotyping, Archer and his
colleagues identified a pervasive form of representational bias that they call face-ism. Five
13
studies involving various media were conducted to investigate the facial prominence of men
and women and subsequent social psychological consequences. Their interest in facial
prominence stemmed from their belief that, “because the face and head are the centers of
mental life—intellect, personality, identity, and character—the relative prominence of this
part of the anatomy may be symbolically consequential” (Archer, Iritani, Kimes, & Barrios,
1983, p. 726). The phenomenon of face-ism refers to the prominence or significance of the
face in photographs or images, and can be indexed through a consideration of a ratio based
on two linear measurements – the distance between the top of the subject's head and chin
divided by the distance between the top of the head and the lowest visible part of the subject's
body. Thus a “mug shot,” which shows only the head of a recently arrested person, has more
facial prominence than a full-body picture of a runway model. Because it is a ratio, the face-
ism index can be applied to any human image, including people depicted in advertisements
and other marketing communications.
Archer and his colleagues found that males were portrayed with more prominent faces
than females in news photographs appearing in American periodicals, in newspapers from
various countries, and in art portraits dating from the past 600 years. When asked to draw
human figures, both male and female research participants drew women with less prominent
faces and more prominent bodies. In a crucial follow- up experiment, the researchers
demonstrated the possible negative consequences of face-ism. In rating people portrayed in
manipulated photographs, participants consistently rated those with less prominent faces as
less intelligent, less ambitious, and less attractive, regardless of the sex of either the rater or
the person in the photograph (Archer et al., 1983).
In other words, when either men or women appear in images that show more of their
body, viewers tended to attribute fewer positive attributes to them. Those who were portrayed
with greater relative facial prominence were perceived as more intelligent, ambitious, and
physically attractive, suggesting “that perceived intellectual (and other) qualities may be
significantly and favorably affected by something as simple as the relative prominence of the
person’s face [in a photograph]” (Archer et al., 1983, p. 732). Interestingly, these results
suggest that both men and women could potentially suffer the effects of face-ism from being
shown with less relative facial prominence, However, despite the progress of the feminist
movement, increased attention to the women’s market, and the growing number of women in
roles of power, face-ism remains a well substantiated yet little known representational
convention that continues to favor men (King, 2002; Levesque & Lowe, 1999).
14
Idealization
A growing body of consumer research has revealed specific links between glamorized images
in television ads and dissatisfaction with the self (e.g., Peck & Loken, 2004; Richins, 1991).
Photographic techniques, such as digitization, cropping, and image manipulation can
accelerate the extent to which marketing messages negatively affect self-image. In a recent
analysis of the effects of idealized imagery in marketing communications, Shields and
Heinecken (2002, p. xv) argued that:
There is profound evidence suggesting that girls and young women [in Western
cultures]are particularly vulnerable to particular kinds of mass media messages: those
pertaining to body images, size, and appearance. They are not more vulnerable than
boys or men because they are somehow weaker against the power of these messages.
They are more vulnerable because the culture they are born into subscribes to the
notion that women should be the objects of vision. Female bodies are held up to
inspection to a much greater degree than are men’s in this culture. Women’s worth is
judged generally by appearance first and abilities second.
Idealized bodies, in particular, help construct notions about female identity,
attractiveness, and normality in ways that can damage identity. Critically, images influence
how we think about the ideal or good life, what is sexy, and what will be seen as attractive by
desired others (cf. Belk & Pollay, 1985; Crocker & Linden, 1998; Pollay, 1985). These points
were reflected in some of the comments of young women interviewed by Shields and
Heinecken (2002, p. 86); for example: “. . . making women appear to be objects […] hurts
women’s image to men” and “it hurts because this ad is trying to show that we are supposed
to be there for men. We are men’s obsession. We are just lying there, waiting for them.” Such
comments point to the negative role of marketing communication’s identity constructions as
they illuminate ethical problems with contemporary imagery.
Exoticization
A particularly virulent form of stereotyping that combines several problematic
representational conventions, exoticization affects many identity categories appearing in
marketing communications, including Africans, Asians, Blacks, Native Americans, and
indigenous peoples (Desmond, 1999; O’Barr, 1994; Williamson, 1986; Woodward, 1997).
For example, marketing representations of Hawaiians, Polynesians, and other Pacific
15
Islanders, reflect a dominant cultural view of the exotic other (Costa, 1998). In other words,
“Hawaiians are repeatedly presented as people whose lives are less complex and less
valuable than the lives of Euroamericans” (Wood, 1999, p. 113). Research on marketing
representations from advertising, tourist brochures, record albums, Hollywood films, and
kitsch Hawiiana has revealed that exoticized (and often eroticized) depictions of “natives” are
commonly used to portray the image of Hawaii (Borgerson & Schroeder, 2002). This vision
of an exotic vacation paradise currently informs tourism campaigns for the Virgin Islands,
Ibiza, Jamaica and Bali, positioning islanders against tourists, in a kind of representational
pattern that may undermine identities and reputations (cf. Borgerson & Schroeder, 2003).
Visions of “exotic” peoples do not just exist “out there” but must be created and
recreated. Much of the ideological power of the representations lies in their almost infinite
repetition—similar images are presented over and over, in a wide variety of marketing
contexts and epochs. Unfortunately absent from most marketing communications about
Hawaii, island resorts, and paradisal escapes is the reminder that exoticization always
functions within a context of unequal power and epistemic closure. The indigenous peoples
of Hawaii have a rich, largely unrepresented culture, yet the image of Hawaii that dominates
many people’s imagination comes from marketing communications, travel brochures,
cookbooks, record albums, musicals, and films. These representations are instrumental in
constructing the image of Hawaii as an exotic, primitive paradise within colonial, patriarchal,
and racist discourses, placing Polynesia within an “orientalist” discourse of the other (e.g.,
Said, 1978).
Exclusion
Exclusion indicates the likelihood of not representing particular people in marketing
communications. In other words, it marks an absence. Although this seems unlikely in an era
of increasingly focused target marketing, some people, such as minorities, the poor, or
otherwise “different” individuals, have been traditionally underrepresented (or excluded
entirely) from marketing images. For example, companies such as BMW, Timberland,
Tommy Hilfiger, and Abercrombie & Fitch have come under fire from minority groups for
not reflecting them as consumers or for excluding them from the brand’s identity, by not
including diversity within advertising, catalog imagery, and websites (cf. Berger, 2001). By
excluding – to varying degrees – certain representations, possible meanings, interpretations,
and understandings are limited in ways that may negatively influence certain individuals,
groups, scenarios, and even geographic locations.
16
Some may argue that increasing representation of the formerly excluded in marketing
images is an improvement over earlier periods, when many marginalized groups were not
represented at all. One might think that simply including images of under-represented or
marginalized cultural groups in marketing communications would reduce exclusion’s ethical
impact, but this strategy often leads to exoticized images, images informed by typicality and
“token” images. For example, Benetton’s approach to cultural “inclusion” has been widely
criticized as perpetuating stereotypes of difference – an ironic result that illustrates the
complex intersection of identity, representation, and marketing within the global economy.
Consumer Interpretation and Representational Conventions
Representational conventions such as these, and related pictorial dimensions, may operate
within marketing communications to systematically and unconsciously influence consumer
perception at a fundamental cognitive level, via a process that we have called tacit
interpretation (Schroeder & Borgerson, 2004). Relatively few people realize how face-ism,
idealization, exoticization, and exclusion pervade marketing representations, or how they
influence perceptual processes. We are not implying that consumers or marketers are
unaware of representational conventions; nevertheless, consumers may remain unable to
resist or deconstruct them (cf. Kates, 1999; Thompson & Haytko, 1998). In many cases, the
typified, idealized, exoticized, or excluded identity stands in for the human being within
representational practices. Representational conventions such as face-ism are especially
significant because they establish a link between visual representation and attributions,
illuminating the central role visual representations and semiotic dualisms have in social
stereotyping.
Marketing Research Implications
Representational conventions can be seen as part of a class of tacit interpretation effects that
lead people to judge others on the basis of subtle visual cues, social categories, and cognitive
schemas. Moreover, they generally serve to psychologically justify the status quo, operating
as identifiable and stable interpretive conventions, which often operate unconsciously (cf.
Bargh, 2002; Schroeder & Borgerson, 2004). Additionally, representational conventions
point to potential blind spots in consumers’ responses to images of identity, alerting
researchers to methodological implications. That is, conventions, such as face-ism,
idealization, exoticization, and exclusion should be considered within research design,
17
particularly experiments that manipulate pictures of people. Any study that employs
depictions of people may be affected by these kind of representational conventions.
For example, in their research on how cropped photographs affect product
evaluations, Peracchio and Myers-Levy (1994, p. 192) showed some participants an ad with
an “exotic-looking women who appeared to be consuming the product.” It is unclear, from
their brief description, what was “exotic” about the woman, how this was visually
represented, and how her appearance might have affected viewer’s perceptions about her and
the product she appeared to be consuming – or why the researchers used this particular image
at all. Further, “exotic” is not a neutral descriptive term – it invokes a long history of
Orientalism that undermines and undervalues the intellectual capacities and human qualities
of those labeled “exotic” (e.g., Said, 1978). Thus, by depicting an “exotic-looking woman” in
their study, they may have inadvertently confounded their experimental design, as research
participants may have responded to the representational ramifications of exoticism. In this
way, representational conventions have the potential to compromise research validity. Thus,
each study that utilizes images of people needs to assess the potential for representational
bias, including exoticization and face-ism.
Conclusion
Marketers must become culturally, ethically, and visually literate in representation and
semiotics if they are to recognize and understand ethical problems in international marketing
communications. Hence, judgments of image appropriateness should be informed by an
awareness of potential epistemic closures. We insist that an ethics of representation must
invoke issues that arise when brand identity, corporate communication, and visual strategy
relies upon representations of identity. We argue that ethical analyses of marketing
communications must offer accounts for how its images represent identity. Moreover,
representational conventions point to potential blind spots in consumer’s responses to images
of identity, alerting marketers to gaps between strategic conceptions of brand identity and
consumer perceptions about brand image.
Linking marketing communication to ontological dilemmas in identity representation
enables researchers to recognize a global communication system based on visual images.
Recognizing the theoretical, methodological, and strategic implications of face-ism,
idealization, exoticization, and exclusion contribute to understanding the ethical implications
of marketing communication. Further ethical issues point to marketing’s commodification of
18
human beings, employing bodies and body images to promote products and services, thus
associating identity with consumption, and existence with market processes.
How can marketing prevent these problems in visual representation? We have
suggested ways to clarify complex issues of representational ethics in marketing by applying
contemporary work in communication theory, marketing, and philosophical ethics. When
marketing campaigns represent identities of groups or individuals so that the representations
themselves purport to express something true or essential about those represented, aesthetic
and ethical questions intersect, and allow certain ontological assumptions to emerge. In
addition to damaging the reputation of members of represented groups, some forms of
representation that are exoticized, stereotypical, sexist, or racist actually manipulate these
groups for consumption by others. Given extant power inequalities and lack of access to mass
media forms of representation, subordinated or oppressed individuals and groups often do not
have much control over how they are represented, particularly within the discourse of
marketing communication. We do not suggest that marketing communication causes these
cultural prejudices, rather that there are relatively stable problematic representational
conventions that might be avoided through close ethical analysis of marketing campaigns.
19
References
Andersson, S., Hedelin, A., Nilsson, A., & Welander, C. (2004). Violent advertising in
fashion marketing. Journal of Fashion Marketing & Management, 8, 96-112.
Archer, D., Iritani, B, Kimes, D., & Barrios, M. (1983). Face-ism: Five studies of sex
differences in facial prominence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45,
725-735.
Armstrong, J. S. (2004), Evaluating ads. Available: www.advertisingprinciples.com.
Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and visual perception. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bargh, J. A. (2002). Losing consciousness: Automatic influences on consumer judgment,
behavior, and motivation. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 280-285.
Bartky, S. (1991). Femininity and domination. New York: Routledge.
Belk, R. W., & and Pollay, R. W. (1985). Images of ourselves: The good life in twentieth
century advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 887-97.
Berger, W. (2001). Advertising Today. London: Phaidon.
Borgerson, J. (2001). Feminist ethical ontology: Contesting “the bare givenness of
intersubjectivity”. Feminist Theory, 2, 173-187.
Borgerson, J. L., & Schroeder, J. E. (2002). Ethical issues of global marketing: Avoiding bad
faith in visual representation. European Journal of Marketing, 36, 570-594.
Borgerson, J. L., & Schroeder, J. E. (2003). The lure of paradise: Marketing the retro-escape
of Hawaii. In S. Brown and J.F. Sherry, Jr. (Eds.), Time, space and place:
Retroscapes rising (pp. 219-237). New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1990). Reproduction. London: Sage.
Bristor, J., Lee, R. G. & Hunt, M. (1995). Race and ideology: African American images in
television advertising. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 14, 1-24.
Butler, J. (1999/1987). Subjects of desire: Hegelian reflections in twentieth-century France.
New York: Columbia University Press.
Carrigan, M., & Szmigin, I. (2000). Advertising and older consumers: Image and ageism.
Business Ethics: A European Review, 9, 42-50
Cigarette ads still enticing teens to smoke, study shows. (2001, June 12). The Providence
Journal-Bulletin, p. 6.
Cortese, A. J. (1999). Provocateur: Images of women and minorities in advertising. Lanham,
MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Costa, J. A. (1998). Paradisal discourse: A critical analysis of marketing and consuming
Hawaii. Consumption Markets & Culture, 1, 303-346.
Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2004). Business ethics: A European perspective. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Crocker, D. A., & Linden, T. (Eds.) (1998). Ethics of consumption: The good life, justice and
global stewardship. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Dávila, A. (2001). Latinos, inc.: The marketing and making of a people. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
Desmond, J. (2003). Consuming behavior. New York: Palgrave.
Desmond, J. C. (1999). Staging tourism: Bodies on display from Waikiki to Sea World.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Elliott, R., & Wattanasuwan, K. (1998). Brands as symbolic resources for the construction of
identity. International Journal of Advertising, 17, 131-144.
Floch, J.-M. (2001). Semiotics, marketing and communication: Beneath the signs, the
strategies, trans. R. O. Bodkin. Hampshire: Palgrave.
20
Furnham, A. (1999). Sex role stereotyping in television commercials: A review and
comparison of fourteen studies done in five continents over 25 years. Sex Roles, 41
(September), 413-4317.
Giroux, H. A. (1994). Disturbing pleasures: Learning popular culture. New York:
Routledge.
Goffman, E. (1979). Gender advertisements. New York: Harper & Row.
Goldberg, D. T. (1993). Racist culture: Philosophy and the politics of meaning. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Goldman, R., & Papson, S. (1996). Sign wars: The cluttered landscape of advertising. New
York: Guilford.
Gordon, L. R. (1995). Bad faith and antiblack racism. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities
Press.
Gordon, L. R. (1997). Her Majesty’s Other children: Sketches of racism from a neocolonial
age. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Gross, L. (1988). The ethics of (mis) representation. In L. Gross, J.S. Katz & J. Ruby (Eds.),
Image ethics (pp. 188-202). New York: Oxford University Press.
Hall, S. (Ed.) (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices.
London: Open University Press/Sage.
Hall, S., & Sealy, M. (2001). Different: Contemporary photographers and Black identity.
London: Phaidon.
Heywood, I., & Sandywell, B. (1999). Introduction: Explorations in the hermeneutics of the
visual. In I. Heywood & B. Sandywell (Eds.), Interpreting visual culture:
Explorations in the hermeneutics of the visual (pp. ix-xviii). London: Routledge.
Jacobson, M. F., & Mazur, L. A. (1995). Marketing madness: A survival guide to consumer
society. Boulder, CO: Westview Press
Kates, S. M. (1999). Making the ad perfectly queer: Marketing “normality” to the gay men’s
community. Journal of Advertising, 28, 25-37.
Kay, A. C., & Jost, J. T. (2003). Complementary justice: Effects of “poor but happy” and
“poor but honest” stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation
of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85 (5), 823-837.
King, J. M. (2002). Photographic images of gender and race in Fortune 500 company Web
Sites in the United States. Business Research Yearbook 7, 852-856.
Larson, V., Luna, D., & Peracchio, L. A. (2004). Points of view and pieces of time: A
taxonomy of image attributes. Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (1), 102-111.
Latour, B., & Weibel, P. (Eds.) (2002). Iconoclash: Beyond the image wars in science,
religion, and art. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Levesque, M. J., & Lowe, C. A. (1999). Face-ism as a determinant of interpersonal
perceptions: The influence of context on facial prominence effects. Sex Roles, 41
(3/4), 241-259.
Lutz, C. A., & Collins, J. L. (1993). Reading National Geographic. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Martin, M. C., & Gentry, J. W. (1997). Stuck in the model trap: The effects of beautiful
models in ads on female pre-adolescents and adolescents. Journal of Advertising, 26,
19-33.
McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1999). Visual rhetoric in advertising: Text-interpretive,
experimental, and reader-response analyses. Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 37-
54.
Messaris, P. (1997). Visual persuasion: The role of images in advertising. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
21
Mick, D. G., Burroughs, J. E., Hetzel, P., & Brannen, M. Y. (2004). Pursuing the meaning of
meaning in the commercial world: An international review of marketing and
consumer research founded on semiotics. Semiotica, in press.
Miller, D. (1994). Ontology and style. In J. Friedman, J. (Ed.), Consumption and identity (pp.
71-96). Amsterdam: Harwood.
Natanson, M. (1986). Anonymity: A study in the philosophy of Alfred Schutz. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
Nederveen Pieterse, J. (1992). White on Black: Images of Africa and Blacks in Western
popular culture. New Haven: Yale University Press.
O’Barr, W. M., (1994). Culture and the ad: Exploring Otherness in the world of advertising.
Boulder, CO: Westview.
O’Donohoe, S., & Tynan, C. (1998). Beyond sophistication: Dimensions of advertising
literacy. International Journal of Advertising, 17, 467-482.
Peck, J., & Loken, B. (2004). When will larger-sized female models in advertisements be
viewed positively? The moderating effects of instructional frame, gender, and need
for cognition. Psychology & Marketing, 21 (6), 425-442.
Peracchio, L., & Myers-Levy, J. (1994). How ambiguous cropped objects in ad photos can
affect product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 190-204.
Pettigrew, S. (2001). King or pawn? The role of the Australian beer drinker. Journal of
Research for Consumers, 2. Available: www.jrconsumers.com.
Pollay, R. (1986). The distorted mirror: Reflections on the unintended consequences of
advertising. Journal of Marketing, 50, 18-36.
Richins, M. L. (1991). Social comparison and the idealized images of advertising. Journal of
Consumer Research, 18, 71-83.
Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Vantage Press.
Schroeder, J. E. (1998). Consuming representation: A visual approach to consumer research.
In B. B. Stern (Ed.), Representing consumers: Voices, views and visions (pp. 193-
230). London: Routledge.
Schroeder, J. E. (2000). Édouard Manet, Calvin Klein and the strategic use of scandal. In S.
Brown & A. Patterson (Eds.), Imagining Marketing: Art, Aesthetics, and the Avant-
Garde (pp. 36-51). London: Routledge.
Schroeder, J. E. (2002). Visual consumption. London: Routledge.
Schroeder, J. E., & Borgerson, J. L. (1998). Marketing images of gender: A visual analysis.
Consumption Markets & Culture, 2, 161-201.
Schroeder, J. E., & Borgerson, J. L. (2003). Dark desires: Fetishism, ontology and
representation in contemporary advertising. In T. Reichert & J. Lambiase (Eds.), Sex
in advertising: Perspectives on the Erotic Appeal (pp. 65-87). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Schroeder, J. E., & Borgerson, J. L. (2004). Tacit processes in consumer interpretation. In S.
Brown & D. Turley (Eds.), European Advances in Consumer Research (vol. 7, pp.
70-72). Valdosta, GA: Association for Consumer Research.
Schroeder, J. E., & McDonagh, P. (2005). The logic of pornography in digital camera
promotion. In J. Lambiase & T. Reichert (Eds.), Sex in promotional culture: The
erotic content of media and marketing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schroeder, J. E., & Salzer-Mörling, M. (2005). Brand culture. London: Routledge.
Schroeder, J. E., & Zwick, D. (2004). Mirrors of masculinity: Representation and identity in
advertising images. Consumption Markets & Culture, 7, 21-52.
Scott, L. A. (1994). Images of advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric. Journal
of Consumer Research, 21, 252-273.
22
Scott, L., & Batra, R. (Eds.) (2003). Persuasive imagery: A consumer response perspective.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Shields, V. R., & Heinecken, D. (2002). Measuring up: How advertising affects self-image.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Smith, N. C., & Quelch, J.A. (1993). Ethics in marketing. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Stern, B. B. (1993). Feminist literary criticism and the deconstruction of ads: a postmodern
view of advertising and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 556-
566.
Stern, B. B. (1998). Introduction: the problematics of representation. In B. B. Stern, (Ed.),
Representing consumers: Voices, views, and visions (pp. 1-23). New York:
Routledge.
Stern, B. B., & Schroeder, J. E. (1994). Interpretive methodology from art and literary
criticism: a humanistic approach to advertising imagery. European Journal of
Marketing, 28, 114-132.
Taylor, C. R., Lee, J. U., & Stern, B. B. (1995). Portrayals of African, Hispanic, and Asian
Americans in Magazine Advertising. American Behavioral Scientist, 38 (4), 608-621.
Thompson, C. J. (1995). A contextualist proposal for the conceptualization and study of
marketing ethics. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 14, 177-191.
Thompson, C. J. (2004). Dreams of Eden: A critical reader-response analysis of the mytho-
ideologies encoded in natural health advertisements. In K. Ekström & H. Brembeck
(Eds.), Elusive consumption (pp. 175-204). Oxford: Berg.
Thompson, C. J., & Haytko, D. L. (1997). Speaking of fashion: Consumers’ uses of fashion
discourses and the appropriation of countervailing cultural meanings. Journal of
Consumer Research, 24, 15-42.
Walker, M. U. (1998). Moral understandings: Feminist studies in ethics. New York:
Routledge.
van Leeuwen, T. (2000). Visual racism. In M. Reisigl & R. Wodak (Eds.), The semiotics of
racism: Approaches in critical discourse analysis (pp. 333-350). Vienna: Passagen
Verlag.
van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Semiotics and iconography. In T. van Leeuwen & C. Jewitt (Eds.),
Handbook of visual analysis (pp. 92-118). London: Sage.
Whitt, L. A. (1995). Cultural imperialism and the marketing of Native American culture,
American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 19, 1-31.
Williamson, J. (1978). Decoding advertisements. London: Marion Boyers.
Williamson, J. (1986). Women is an island: Femininity and colonization. In T. Modleski
(Ed.), Studies in entertainment: Critical approaches to mass culture (pp. 99-118).
Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Wood, H. (1999). Displacing natives: The rhetorical production of Hawai’i. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield.
Woodward, K. (Ed.) (1997). Identity and difference. London: Sage/Open University Press.
Zaltman, G. (2002). How customers think. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
23
Figure 1 Face-ism example I
24
Figure 2 Face-ism example II
Figure 3 Idealization
25
Figure 4 Exoticization
26
Figure 5 Exoticization
doc_228012062.pdf