Introduction
Celebrity culture has captivated the public for generations, and does not seem to be slowing up in the near future. With the rise of social media and an attention toward celebrity-based entertainment, gone are the days of the only reading about this type of gossip in the weekly tabloids. The internet and social media have given way to a new form of celebrity entertainment in which they are now critiqued for their fashion choices on and off of the red carpet. This hybrid entertainment form allows commentators to assess anything a celebrity wears and then deem it “fashionable” or “unfashionable.”
However, this reductive binary of assessing fashion often takes an unsettling turn by reducing celebrities to mere vessels for clothing, or more precisely, vessels for ideals and unrealistic standards of beauty. While this has been studied and debated over the years, the influence of reality television has called much more attention to this matter than in prior years. Throughout this case study it will be paramount to better understand how these fashion commentator/reality shows actually have a potentially negative impact on viewing celebrities as targets for mean comments rather than as real, living people with thoughts. Objectification will be a key concept to understand throughout the course of this work. While it has been termed in different ways over the years, “general objectification occurs when an individual is reduced from a human being to the status level of an object, which strips the individual of his or her autonomy and dignity” (Hopper & Aubrey 2015, p. 26).
Framing theory will be used as the main theory with which to better understand the role of critiques toward celebrity fashion choices. Framing, as defined by Kirk Hallahan, can be seen “as a property of a message, a frame limits or defines the message’s meaning by shaping the inferences that individuals make about the message (Hallahan 1999). Specifically, using Hallahan’s model for framing, attribute framing will be kept in mind when looking at the positive and negative comments that are directed toward celebrities. Attribute framing can be defined as “characteristics of objects and people [which] are accentuated, whereas others are ignored, thus biasing processing of information in terms of focal attributes” (Hallahan 1999). This will be important to keep in mind when attempting to better understand how attributes play a role in reducing female celebrities to binaries rather than seeing them as complex individuals. The ultimate goal is to find gaps in the understanding of this matter and attempt to formulate actionable steps for those in fashion entertainment to follow and engage in greater inclusivity and less objectification.
Literature Review
The following literature review features pieces of theoretical and scholarly material that work to better understand the role of celebrity fashion TV shows in modern society. The term celebrity is widely used and ranges from models to actors and singers among other professions. A celebrity in her own right, the late Joan Rivers was known for comedic chops on QVC, late-night television and in the fashion world with the show, Fashion Police. Often critical of fashion, and criticized herself for off-color remarks, her background on QVC and flamboyant fashion sense helps to better understand what qualifies someone to be an expert critic of something so personal as one’s style choices (Courtney & Wettach 2006). In an essay on celebrity fashion choices, Daniel Harris discusses the strict rules for dressing and the critique celebrities face when they dress down. The idea that celebrities have become “surrogate dressers” to the masses may suggest why they are so heavily scrutinized (Harris 2010).
This concept of a “surrogate dresser” can apply to a slew of celebrities, none more so than the often highly criticized Lady Gaga. In an essay on Lady Gaga’s celebrity status and fashion choices we see how a celebrity uses fashion to stand for a cause and express individuality. Lady Gaga has been scrutinized for her choices in the past, but this work suggests that fashion should be unique and imaginative, not merely reduced to whether something is deemed “acceptable” by social norms (Geczy & Karaminas 2017). Whether something is acceptable or not is deeply rooted within one’s understanding of cultural norms and expectations. The term “fashion victim” is widely used in the industry and is related to the culture surrounding the highly critical world of fashion. Bjorn Schiermer discusses this and more in his work on the dynamics of individualization and de-individualization in fashion.
He notes that these dynamics have much to do with “the object that one perceives and it is by the object that one is seduced…in short: in the presentation of self, one chooses objects that oneself finds attractive” (Schiermer 2010, p. 95). This attention to personal attraction is unique to each individual, but it is also helps to better explain the objectification of women. Unsurprisingly, a main player in self-objectification stems from the media’s portrayal of women on social media and magazines; this is mainly supported by the rise in comparisons to peers on Facebook and in magazines, as highlight in the Fardouly et al. 2015 research (Fardouly et al. 2015). Chandra Feltman and Dawn Szymanski extend this thinking with their 2017 study in which they discuss self-objectification, which has “been consistently linked to more body shame and appearance anxiety, decreased internal state awareness and…poor mental health outcomes among women” (Feltman & Szymanski 2017).
The highly desirable, or alluring, draw of celebrities pulls people in to wonder what they are wearing from head to toe. The research conducted by Morris et al. creates a fully encompassing view of the issue at hand by saying “during red carpet event, female actresses are more likely to be asked about their dress or nail color than their work in acclaimed and influential films (prompting the 2014 social media campaign #AskHerMore)” (Morris et al. 2018, p. 1302). Their research findings revealed differences in appearance-focused objectification compared to sexual objectification. The first suggests “appearance-focused objectification undermines attributes of human nature, promoting an association between women and objects” (2018, p. 1313). However, it was found that “sexual objectification undermines attributes of women’s uniquely human capacities, promoting an association with animals” (2018, p. 1313). As society continues to push for ideal body types, much of this objectification further hinders celebrities, mainly female celebrities, from being seen as autonomous people with capabilities beyond their appearances. This further extends to the scrutiny pregnant celebrities face, especially when portrayed by the media. Researchers Hopper and Aubrey discuss this in detail even mentioning “the media’s obsession with post-partum bodies” (Hopper & Aubrey 2015, p. 26). They go on to discuss how the media praises celebrities who lose weight quickly, while shaming those who don’t. Their research focuses on the role of U.S. magazines in this process; however, shows on television and on social media have now taken a large hold of commentating on pregnant celebrities and non-pregnant celebrities alike. None more so than the coverage of the yearly red carpet award shows.
In the vein of red carpet commentary shows, Nicole Cox’s 2011 study on TLC’s What Not to Wear dives into another female-oriented reality show. However, instead of celebrities, everyday women are critiqued and then given makeovers. The findings from this study revealed that female commodification, or objectification, exists in this framework to only further capitalistic goals (Cox 2011). To better reach women (who are the main consumers of these shows), networks like Bravo, and parent company NBC-Comcast, have created advisory boards of women in varying fields to better represent a more inclusive and constructive conversation of important matters. This could serve as a way to placate the industry wide issues of reducing women to often-stereotypical monikers, simply because of their fashion choices (Cox, 2015).
Method
For this case study, I will examine reality TV and award shows that focus on fashion critiques of celebrities to ultimately present a comprehensive qualitative content analysis (6 clips of Fashion Police from the 2011 award season and 6 clips of What the Fashion from their most current season). The main objective is to look for themes in divisive language that criticizes or compliments a woman’s appearance and/or clothing choice. From there, these groupings of language will help to use the attribute framing theory to showcase the attributes most commonly given to women. These shows will help to further understand the complex nature of celebrities and the fashion industry seen through the lens of reality TV.
The shows, Fashion Police and What the Fashion, were chosen because they both have similar celebrity-oriented content structures but differ in delivery and tone. Fashion Police aired on the E! network from 2010-2017 and featured a host of comedians and members of the fashion entertainment industry such as Joan Rivers, Kelly Osbourne, Giuliana Rancic and Brad Goreski among others. Known for its outlandish segment titles, below is a list of some of the more divisive ones:
· “Bitch Stole My Look”
· “Busted!”
· “Slut Cut”
· “Starlet or Streetwalker”
· “Guess Me from Behind”
The second show that will be examined is called What the Fashion, which is also a product of the E! network but is featured on Snapchat instead of the traditional network channel. This show still airs weekly, as it started only in early 2018, and is hosted by E! News contributors, Morgan Stewart, Zuri Hall and Justin Martindale. While it is less structured than the former show, it does attempt to bridge off of it in a similar style. It shows that the role of fashion commentating has changed in platform, but perhaps not in content. The goal will be to better define apparent attributes to answer the two research questions.
Research Questions:
· Is there a difference in rhetoric toward female celebs from 2011 to 2018?
· Are women reduced to basic attributes or are they objectified based on their appearance rather than actions?
Results
After analyzing the 12 clips from both shows it was found that there were 3 key attributes given to celebrities from within the Fashion Police commentary. These attributes were created as a result of the comments given toward the celebrities at the 2011 award shows. While most of the panel was generally on the same page, there were a few dissenters depending on whether or not they liked the celebrity or if they felt that what they were wearing wasn’t too bad.
The unflattering celebrity attribute is a result of framing multiple actresses as having ill-fitting or simply unflattering clothing. There was no real connection in any of the clothes, but simply an agreed upon perception that what they were wearing was not flattering for the event. This differs greatly from the hot celebrity attribute in which the celebrities were either celebrated for showing more skin or scrutinized for showing too much skin. Finally, the beautiful celebrity attribute is a result of commentators saying that the celebrities looked stunning or beautiful in what they were wearing. There were generally no negative comments on this and the only connective force was that all of these women were dressed moderately conservative (not showing a lot of skin, but also not covered up) and in a more classic way (had timeless qualities or simple silhouettes).
· The Unflattering Celebrity
o Included celebrities that were wearing what were deemed to be either “odd, frumpy or unflattering”
o This included commentary such as:
§ Michelle Williams – 2011 Golden Globes
· “Bad hair, bad dress, made for a tacky bedspread”
· “Her boobs just don’t look good”
§ Natalie Portman – 2011 SAG Awards
· “This would have been a perfect dress had she not been pregnant”
§ Kesha – 2011 Billboard Awards
· “Nice dress and I think I’d like to see it on a female”
· The Revealing Celebrity
o Included celebrities that were wearing what were deemed to be either “hot, sexy or revealing”
§ January Jones – 2011 Golden Globes
· “She looks sexy, hot”
§ Halle Berry – 2011 Golden Globes
· “In that dress you know the answer to, guess who’s single again”
§ Nicki Minaj – 2011 Billboard Awards
· “She looks like a late night hooker”
· The Beautiful Celebrity
o Included celebrities that were wearing what were deemed to be either “beautiful, gorgeous or chic”
§ Anna Hathaway – 2011 Golden Globes
· “She is stunning. Gorgeous head to toe”
§ Angelina Jolie – 2011 Golden Globes
· “She looks stunning, effortless”
§ Gwyneth Paltrow – 2011 Oscars
· “I thought she looked incredible in this dress”
· “So chic. Great, great, great”
The What the Fashion clips were analyzed in the same way as the first set of clips; however, they did differ greatly in the end. Where it was easy to find attributes for the Fashion Police grouping, the latter spoke more about the clothing and less about the celebrities. For example, there was more description about the pieces of clothing and what they loved rather than commentary on how the celebrity looked as a whole (i.e. “she looks bad” vs. “hate the gloves with that outfit”). There is still a comedic element but it is much more youthful in presentation and tone. The comments below, which are taken from various clips throughout the first season of the show, highlight the attention to the positive or negative aspects of the clothing. This is a departure from the previous show, which focused more on how the women themselves looked in the clothing. While the commentators did discuss the celebrities in the outfits, they largely took out the adjectives, which were replaced with more words about liking or disliking the article of clothing. Below is an example of some of the common responses about the most discussed celebrities on the show.
· “This is more subdued and classed up” (about Gigi Hadid)
· “It’s fabulous. The gloves are a little distracting” (about Gigi Hadid)
· “I loved this oversized suit” (about Kim Kardashian)
· “I like the color of the dress. I don’t love that it seems to have a zebra pattern on the dress” (about Blake Lively)
· “It just is not working in any way” (about Rita Ora)
· “I love the orange and the purple, very complimentary colors (about Beyonce)
· “It’s effortless, it’s easy. I love the soft pink against her complexion. She is really shining” (about Lady Gaga)
· “I mean when you kill 1,500 ostriches this is what you get” (about Lady Gaga)
· “Very high fashion, very glitzy” (about Halsey)
Discussion
Despite having different outcomes when each show was analyzed, this qualitative content analysis did shed light on the issues facing celebrities as they are scrutinized for their fashion choices. Fashion Police revealed an attention to the celebrity behind the clothing whereas What the Fashion revealed more about the current commentary celebrities face. This updated show is a pseudo-spinoff of Fashion Police with more attention to every day fashion rather than award specific shows. In answering the first research question about changing rhetoric from 2011 to 2018, there has been a definite move toward more positive attributes toward female celebrities. In the past, the attention was on how a woman looked in the clothing, but now there is an emphasis on what the commentators like about the clothing and not whether the celebrity solely looks unflattering, revealing or beautiful.
The What the Fashion commentators do add flattering comments about the celebrity, but steer clear of more objectifying language (i.e. women seen as objects or women reduced to having less human capabilities). This goes on to support the second research question in that women were seemingly more objectified in the 2011 clips rather than the 2018 ones. While much of this could be due to the overall tone and direction of each show, it could also suggest a change toward more conscious behavior throughout the fashion entertainment industry. Following the rise of the #MeToo movement, networks and hosts are now sensitive to reductive language toward women. There is less of a place for overt criticism, although it still exists throughout the industry. Modern shows would do well to follow a similar structure as What the Fashion in which they focus on the clothes as a separate, yet additive piece to the celebrity, and not an excuse to reduce them to sexist or objectifying language. The framing surrounding these shows serves as a testament to the power of attributes as objectifications of individuals. While this has helped to break down the issues at hand, it is necessary to change this cycle for the future. Only by understanding these issues and how attribute framing works, can industry professionals create more inclusive and less reductive fashion commentary shows.
References
Courtney, J., & Wettach, G. (2006). Talk About Style: Joan Rivers, QVC Discourse, and Stardom. Studies in Popular Culture, 28(3), 111-128. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23416174
Cox, N. B. (2011). A Little Sex Appeal Goes a Long Way: Feminist Political Economy, Commodification, and TLC’s What Not to Wear. Kaleidoscope: A Graduate Journal of Qualitative Communication Research, 10, 19–36. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy1.library.jhu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=95941943&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Cox, N. B. (2015). Banking on Females: Bravo’s Commodification of the Female Audience. Communication, Culture & Critique, 8(3), 466–483. https://doi-org.proxy1.library.jhu.edu/10.1111/cccr.12091
Fashion Police [Television series]. (2011). Los Angeles, California: E! Retrieved from: https://www.eonline.com/shows/fashion_police
Feltman, C. E., & Szymanski, D. M. (2018). Instagram Use and Self-Objectification: The Roles of Internalization, Comparison, Appearance Commentary, and Feminism. Sex Roles, 78(5–6), 311–324. https://doi-org.proxy1.library.jhu.edu/10.1007/s11199-017-0796-1
Fardouly, J., Diedrichs, P. C., Vartanian, L. R., & Halliwell, E. (2015). The Mediating Role of Appearance Comparisons in the Relationship Between Media Usage and Self-Objectification in Young Women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 39(4), 447–457. https://doi-org.proxy1.library.jhu.edu/10.1177/0361684315581841
Geczy, A., & Karaminas, V. (2017). Lady Gaga: American Horror Story, Fashion, Monstrosity and the Grotesque. Fashion Theory,21(6), 709-731. Retrieved from https://www-tandfonline-com.proxy1.library.jhu.edu/doi/abs/10.1080/1362704X.2017.1359947.
Hallahan, K. (1999). Seven Models of Framing: Implications for Public Relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 11(3), 205–242. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy1.library.jhu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=3349009&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Harris, D. (2010). Celebrity Clothing. Salmagundi, (168/169), 233–247. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy1.library.jhu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hgh&AN=55461137&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Hopper, K., & Aubrey, J. (2016). Bodies After Babies: The Impact of Depictions of Recently Post-Partum Celebrities on Non-Pregnant Women’s Body Image. Sex Roles, 74(1–2), 24–34. https://doi-org.proxy1.library.jhu.edu/10.1007/s11199-015-0561-2
Morris, K. L., Goldenberg, J., & Boyd, P. (2018). Women as Animals, Women as Objects: Evidence for Two Forms of Objectification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(9), 1302–1314. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218765739
Schiermer, B. (2010). Fashion Victims: On the Individualizing and De-individualizing Powers of Fashion. Fashion Theory: The Journal of Dress, Body & Culture, 14(1), 83–104. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy1.library.jhu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asn&AN=48443652&site=ehost-live&scope=site
What the Fashion [Television series]. (2018). Los Angeles, California: E! Retrieved from https://www.eonline.com/shows/what_the_fashion
Comments