Is it me or... (possibly NSFW... probably not though)

[goldilocks]

there is nothing more i can really say on this matter - you can tell me that i have no commercial knowledge of advertising, and no idea what it feels like to be a size 22 woman looking through a catalogue of slim women - both of which are true.
but imo the woman on the cover looks good - she wears the clothes well - she has brought attention to the advert - job done?!

[semi-pro waster]

Originally Posted by Kitten

You said what you believed to be the aim, and I told you what I believed it to be.Not sure how that's telling you you have no commercial experience of marketing. :/

In your last sentence of the previous post you do say that you've got plenty of experience with marketing campaigns. I'm sure it was not intended as bragging (for want of a better word) but it could possibly come across as slightly dismissive based on your greater knowledge.

[LeperousDust]

Tbh it boils down to what works, and they spend enough money on advertising and have enough experience themselves to know what works. Bottom line is, this way it must sell more money en masse, otherwise they'd do it another way.

Although one cool way would be to have a few secret catalogues, only delivered to the the representatives that are the same with varying size models, and its up to pheebs to get out the appropriate catalogue when shes there. Although this would eventually be "discovered" and probably cause scandal and more hassle than its worth. So were back to square one

[Mondo]

Surely part of the idea of that image is to sell the seductive side of the product, and an image that a lot of woman would like to have (deep down, or deep deep down). The idea that by wearing that product you are in some ways getting the same sexiness/appeal as the model in the poster.

I understand that only a minority of women in this country are that size and not arguing that a main part of their customer will need a larger size. I don't see that poster as putting the larger size ladies off, that poster says "buy me (the product), you can look like me". In the contrary, If they had put someone with the national average size wearing the same product, they wouldn't have sell as much and it makes no business sense even if its the more realistic representation thing to do.

It is the same idea that using pretty people to sell holidays, yogurt, mineral water and everything on TV. People see pretty people and by getting that product you are buying into that image.

[Muban]

Why the need for extremes though that is what I find a bit odd. Why not go for a more natural looking model, who is a healthy weight and women can still relate to? Big or small I don't see women having problems with women with normal figures like these:



I don't think the picture in the OP is anywhere near as attractive as it could be, neither do I think her unattractive. I do think though that it could put some people off. Yes I know people should read the whole catalogue (perhaps there are better pictures within it?). But if we are talking marketing, lets face it the most important picture is the one on the front.

EDIT: Of course it is all down to what you personally find attractive as well, but I think their figures put across a far more sexy image.

[Mondo]

May be the theme of that ad is what is there, not "natural" or be representational of the national average (like the M&S one). I doubt they set out to create every ad campaign to think of what the mindset of the average size lady thinks of the image it puts out. It is probably more like "do you think this looks sexy? rather than " do you think women who are not this size will find this offensive?"

And money will always comes first, they know that sex sells, like it or not, people like to be thin. I am not advocating stick thin but in general, most people would like to lose a pound here or there, bit form the tummy, pound from the thigh....etc It is just what works in an ad, it has been like that pretty much since television came along.

[Muban]

I think there are people here missing the point. I am talking from a point of view of sales only too. And where do people keep getting the term offensive from? They are also selling to mostly women remember too not to men.

I just don't think the picture in the OP comes across as sexy really. I don't think it's a picture that would entice women to buy. Surely that is what they want more than anything, women to want to buy their product?

EDIT: If you are referring to the pics i posted they aren't M&S :P and they aren't representational of the national average either, they are slimmer than the national average.

[goldilocks]

Offensive:
causing anger or annoyance
unsavory: morally offensive
unpleasant or disgusting

Reading what people have been writing on here - the picture obviously 'offends'.
Pheebs used the word *awful*, other people have called it horrible, unattractive, and unhealthy.
In what way does that come across as 'positive' or 'pleasant'?
It's just a word!

How can people 'miss the point' on something which is based primarily on opinions?
Some people think the lady is attractive and some don't, some people think it is a good advert, and others dont.

Personally - I don't find the pictures Muban has posted attractive, but that is because I don't look like that, and don't wish or aim to look like that. (As such, I wouldn't buy underwear which 'suggested' that that is how it would make me look/feel)
If you are selling an item by selling the 'attractive lifestyle' I would go for skinny and busty (AS rather than M&S) every time. (from a sales point of view only)

[Muban]

I don't think anyone here needs dictionary term explained to them. I was going to write a reply, but it seems here today everything is getting taken out of context. Probably by both sides too, so I am going to stand aside and let everyone else discuss it

[goldilocks]

Muban, it feels unlikely to me that any healthy discussion can ever take place about such a touchy subject (i.e. women / appearance / weight / attractiveness).

I never post in order to cause offense or to sound harsh, but I think it is important to have a balance of opinions. (especially when it all seemed to be weighted against what i think!!)
The reason i posted the definition (without wishing to cause annoyance) was because both yourself and Kitten picked up on it - i think people tend to see the word as being very personal, when it is (in the context i was using it) just a blanket term to cover the derision people seem to have against the image.

If i hadn't posted - the thread (so far) would have suggested that 100% of women want larger / curvier girls to advertise / model. I don't believe this is the case. (see previous, etc)
If my posts have annoyed - I am sorry.