Advertisements: The spell we're under

by Abigail Nanquil

As consumers think about buying clothes, not many think about the influence of advertisements over their decisions. We have been exposed to so many advertisements over the course of our lives that remembering each individual one is impossible (Petracca 74). However, these simple schemes to get us to buy a product can actually work; “attention is caught, communication occurs between producers and consumers, and sales result” (Petracca 89). The people in advertisements are beautiful and stylish, stimulating our senses and making us want to be like them. There are other times where an advertisement tries to convince the consumer that life will be a lot better if their product is bought, which wins us over in a heartbeat. But one thing that we don’t think about is exactly how these products are made, clothes especially. Sweatshops have been a monumental issue in the clothing industry ever since two huge factory exposures in 1995 and companies have been working hard to disassociate themselves from this type of labor (Modern Sweatshops). Still, there were recent discoveries within the last year involving popular clothing brands such as The Gap and sweatshops, and despite this, The Gap continues to bring in money with an estimated $15.943 billion in sales in 2007 (“The Gap”). Are consumers keeping their morals out of line when it comes to buying clothes? Or are the advertisements really affecting consumers more than they think?
In a 14-page ad campaign in the 2008 September issue of Vogue, The Gap revealed their new fall line. Each page contains a person modeling the clothes, The Gap logo, the name of the clothes featured, the name of the model, the price of the clothes feature, and a fill in the blank sentence. As I interpret the ad, it seems like each individual model on the page is free to fill in the blank however they want. To demonstrate this fact, each fill in the blank is written in a different style of handwriting, as if to assume that the model wrote that in the blank as they went through the photo shoot. Phrases such as “Make up your own _philosophy_”, “Trust your own _intuition_” and “See your own _inner beauty_” seem to create this ideal persona of a confident and carefree personality. In a way, the consumer can either accept the terms in the blank, or even fill in the blank however he or she wants if the clothes are bought. Therefore, through a consumer’s eyes, wearing these Gap clothes will allow you to be free and look good at the same time. This is a prime example of one of Fowles’ basic appeals of advertising: need to escape. By definition, the need to escape is where freedom is the key; “the freedom that every individual yearns for whenever life becomes too oppressive” (Petracca 84). According to Fowles, “many advertisers like appealing to the need for escape because the sensation of pleasure often accompanies escape” (Petracca 84). Consumers would be able to escape their stressful lives with the simple purchase of The Flannel Jacket (worn by Lily Donaldson, model) for just $148.00 or The Cord Blazer (worn by Hugh Dancy, actor) for just $88.00. To be free is to be stylish and to be confident is to be refined.
One of the aspects of The Gap advertisement campaign is the fact that the pictures themselves are black and white. However, although there is nothing “eye-popping” about the color scheme, the fill in the blank sentences are strategically placed over a portion of the model’s body drawing attention to the clothes. As a consumer, I first read the fill in the blank sentence and then shift my attention to who is wearing the clothes and lastly the clothes themselves. I reacted very positively to the advertisement. Each of the models looks comfortable in the clothes that they are wearing, and they looked good in the position that they were in. This advertisement campaign appealed to my favorite kind of style: not too bold, but still managing to stay sophisticated and fashionable, which leads up to another of the fifteen basic appeals: need for aesthetic sensations. Fowles states that “advertisers know there is little chance of good communication occurring if an ad is not visually pleasing” (Petracca 85). The Gap was extremely clever with including very famous and attractive people such as Hugh Dancy and Liv Tyler. Consumers want to know what they are wearing because they look very good. When asking my friends what they thought of the advertisements, one of the first reactions was “Hugh Dancy is so gorgeous!” and that triggered their need to look at the rest of the campaign. Consequently, the need for aesthetic sensation leads right back to the need to escape. By demonstrating that these clothes really do look good, the consumer can transform themselves into a stylish new person and place themselves into this whole world with celebrities and upper class people. But as we immerse ourselves in the world of beautiful people with stylish clothes, do consumers remember the world in which these clothes were actually made?
In October of 2007, a British newspaper, The Observer, found children in a very dirt sweatshop “working on piles of beaded children’s blouses marked with serial numbers that Gap admitted corresponded with its own inventory” (McDougall). These children were “as young as 10 years old working 16 hour days in conditions close to slavery in India” (Claeson). In response to all of this madness and in order to clear their name, The Gap retracted all of the shirts made in the sweatshops and planned what would be the “biggest commitment to ending child labor ever” (McDougall). Random inspections will be given in each factory, and there is talk that there could be a relabeling of garments “to allow the customer to directly track online exactly where they are made” (McDougall). Gap spokesman Bill Chandler stated, “Gap Inc. has had many conversations with experts in the field before and obviously since The Observer investigation. The company is open to new ideas. … Under no circumstances is it acceptable for children to produce or work on garments” and president of Gap North America stated that the firm’s prohibition of child labor was non-negotiable (McDougall).
Even though The Gap has taken these extraordinary measures to separate themselves from this scandal, there continues to be child labor scandals throughout the clothing industry. The Levi’s company has workers in Saipan to create jeans together for just over $3 an hour while the CEO makes over $25 million a year (Glaister). In 2005 alone, “Nike admitted that up to 50% of its Asian factories restricted access to toilets and drinking water; up to 50% of factories deny workers even one day off every week; and in 25% of factories workers are paid below even inadequate legal minimum wages” (SweatFree).
As a consumer of the aforementioned brands of clothing, as much as I would not like to admit it, I would still buy their products. I had also asked two other people the same question: if their favorite store made their clothes in sweatshops with horrible working conditions, would they still buy the product? Both of the answers were yes. They said that they would feel bad buying something at the cash register for one day, but every time after that they would just forget about the sweatshops and buy the clothes. In this case, the advertisements have engrained themselves into our senses. Advertisements keep us coming back for more, regardless of who is making the clothes, where they are making them, and the environment in which they are making them. Unless we are directly affected by the horrors of sweatshops, we will continue to buy these products because of our wanting to look and feel good.


Works Cited
Claeson, Bjorn. "Gap Child Labor Revelations - Wake Up Call for the Industry." Common Dreams News Center. 1 Nov. 2007. 14 Sept. 2008 .
"The Gap." Co-Op America: Economic Action for a Just Planet. 12 June 2008. 14 Sept. 2008 .
Glaister, Tom. "New World Order: Sweatshops R Us." ConsumerAffairs.com. 15 July 2007. 15 Sept. 2008 .
McDougall, Dan. "Indian 'slave' children found making low-cost clothes destined for Gap." The Observer 28 Oct. 2007. Guardian.co.uk. 28 Oct. 2007. 14 Sept. 2008 .
"Modern Sweatshops." SweatShop Watch. 14 Sept. 2008 .
Petracca, Michael. Common Culture : Reading and Writing about American Popular Culture. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2006.
"SweatFree Communities: The Decent Working Conditions and Fair Competition Act." SweatFree Communities. Feb. 2007. 14 Sept. 2008 .