Posts
As storytellers, we are ethically bound to not abuse this trust. There have certainly been those who have; Hitler, Pol Pot and McCarthy are a few I can think of offhand. But as artists and creators, we need to recognize that our audiences have given us permission to move them, within a certain set of boundaries. They want to be moved by the story, perhaps moved to reflect on their own lives and actions, maybe even moved to create change. But it isn't our job or right to deceive them with our stories into believing things they might otherwise find reprehensible.
We aren't the only ones who use manipulation in our daily work. Almost everyone does. Doctors, lawyers, graphic designer, marketers, architects, salespeople, landscapers, anyone who is passionate about what they do will use some form of emotional manipulation to persuade their audience or clients that what they offer is the best choice.
This is where it gets hazy. To what degree is it ethical to manipulate someone who hasn't agreed to the implied contract we have with our audiences as storytellers? What happens when this manipulation is the basis of the job? What are the societal implications?
I was spurred into this line of thought by a video released by Dove. This company does a great job of manipulating me. Their Real Beauty campaign argues that presenting artificial images of beauty is harmful and that they support a wider range of what can be beautiful, be it size or skin or ability. All of this, of course, is in the hope that you’ll buy their products. While I don’t use Dove products, I do love the message, that when we alter images artificially it creates impossible expectations of beauty that are harmful.
The video they released is below, give it a look. I like its subversive nature and, obviously, it got me thinking on the boundaries of acceptable manipulation. Modern advertising, pop culture, couture and more are built in these manipulated images, so it’s not going to change any time soon, but what would happen if it changed a little? And what are the boundaries of acceptable manipulation? In advertising, in art, and in our own lives.
I’d love to know what you think.
(c)2013 Laura S. Packer
Interesting thoughts, Laura. I have never considered it manipulation, but perhaps that is one word for what we do. The audience, after all, is free to react as they wish, I do not expect or look for a specific reaction from them, although it is true that how we use our words, body language, and voice can create certain emotional responses. I don't go into a story thinking I want them to laugh or cry--I'm thinking I want them to see and feel the story as I do, to draw from what I find enriching, moving or just funny. Sharing is my goal, the shared enjoyment of the story's images and impact. Perhaps it is the same thing, just a different name.
ReplyDeleteHi Granny Sue,
DeleteI know, it feels distasteful calling it manipulation. I agree, the audience is free to react as they will, but we *do* present our work hoping for some kind of reaction, one within a specific range. Wanting them to see or feel the story as we do and so on requires that we use all of our skill as performers and empathic human beings.
Manipulation is a tool, it's how we use it that matters. Just like any tool.
I wrote this post because I was (initially) just going to post the video to facebook, but then got to thinking that I couldn't legitimately call out Dove or any other advertiser for manipulating my feelings, because I do the same thing. EVERYONE does. Parents do it every day with their kids.
It's a tough one to wrap my head and heart around, that's for sure. So the best I can do is try to be honest and ethical in what I do.
I think the Media have truly got us in a box. A very small box. I think Dove, by using this kind of devise (deception) is as bad as anything else that is out there. To create an app that does more than it says is false marketing - something that in the UK would be slapped with a hefty law suit. Why not simply lead by example? Milan has now placed certain regulations in where models now have to be over a certain weight, they can no longer be skeletal 30 pounders! If the fashion industry lead the way by making beautiful elegant clothes for people in size 10 and larger instead of size zero and magazines showed real people, then that would be a real start. It is easy to dress a pole with no shape, but to dress someone with bumps and curves takes more skill.
ReplyDeleteNow if we want to talk about the tv industry who only cast "beautiful people" then I can go there too. One of the reasons I love anything made outside of the US is that normal looking people are in their tv shows instead of people who have groomed themselves to look a certain way - square jawed, rip, stereo typical comic book characters. Take a look at the characters in the UK version of Couples and the awful American remodeling for a perfect example.
It all puts so much un-needed pressure on young girls growing up. Have you ever seen a full girl in a lead role on a Disney show or Movie? Aren't they always the funny side-kick? Hmm. Great role modelling Disney.
Hi Simon,
DeleteI ENTIRELY agree with you. Dove is as bad as anyone else. This blog post was sparked by my wanting to post this video on facebook, then realizing a) I was being manipulated and b) the work I do can be considered manipulation.
The media really does have us in a box, over beauty (male, female, other), value, worth, money.... you name it. It's horrible for girls and creates terribly unreal expectations amongst both girls and boys. As a woman who doesn't fit in that size 0 box (quite literally) and as someone who is a friend to a woman dying from anorexia, it makes me enraged.
This post was my musing on the nature of manipulation. Everyone does it, where is it permissible and expected? Parents do it all the time. Where are the lines? Where are *my* lines as a storyteller?