Media is usually one of the first things we chat about when we chat about body image. And while feelings about food and our bodies are usually a lot more complex than just thinking we have to emulate whatever we’re seeing in whatever media we’re consuming, it certainly has an effect. So, for this newsletter, we’re tackling the topic of media.
And a broad topic it is! It’s almost as if everything (TV, radio, newspapers, adverts, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn (?), YouTube videos, billboards, those guilt-inducing covid ads at bus stops…) we’re faced with in our interaction-limited lives is media. Even when we are in full social swing, all the things we accidentally set eyes on throughout the day have a way of filtering through to our minds. If Mad Men has taught me anything (I actually haven’t seen Mad Men) it’s that the genius of advertising is that you don’t think it works, and then before you know it you’re daydreaming about frog-shaped earrings. The same applies with all of the toxic food and body imagery that proliferates in much of the media we consume.
Included in this newsletter is an event announcement, an amusing ad, a Vagenda review, some links to articles about Meghan Markle’s treatment in the media, a note on media hegemony, a recipe for a media-free lunch, a reflection on photoshop, some media recommendations, and a lack of the usual who to follow suggestions.
The next newsletter is the final one! The topic is ‘Health’, and we’d love to hear if you have any reflections or ideas about what health means to you (or anything else) at gufabpositivitysoc@gmail.com
What to say!
On beginning this newsletter I thought, ‘why has it taken so long to talk about media at GUFAB? It’s such a relevant topic!’. I have subsequently realised that much of what we can say about the issues in media have been said many times. That’s not to say that all of the previous newsletters have been bursting with originality and free from cliche, but they at least felt a little un-humdrum. So, what to say? Read on to find out which odd little elements I’ve stuck out at!
An Event! Collage Crafting Workshop: Subverting Media Portrayals of Food and Body
I’m excited to tell you that GUFAB are hosting an event on Monday 15th March! That’s this Monday if you’re reading the newsletter on the day it’s released or today (!) if you’re reading it when we post about the newsletter on social media.
For this event we’ll be chatting about the way the media portrays food and bodies and creating new meanings from media items through the medium of collage! What a mouthful!
Whether you want to create something political or something colourful to go on your wall, I think there can be something really powerful in using the images and text given to us in the media to make something we want to see.
Full details about the event and some ideas of where to get collaging materials on the Facebook event page!
Who does wear the pants? The advertising experts who advocate women’s lib but also need to sell trousers…? And decide to do so by appealing to the fashion requirements of feminism and also femininity? Nice. As pointed out by Jeffrey Meek in my sexualities and social control seminar yesterday (the source of this source) - capitalism always finds a way.
Blatant attempts to co-opt actual social justice for advertising purposes may not be so obvious today bu- actually wait, remember that Kendall Jenner Pepsi advert from a few years ago? They’re still at it.
The Vagenda: A Zero Tolerance Guide to the Media
When I had my formal feminist awakening at age fifteen, I expressed this in the only way I knew how. I spent all the money I’d earned at my weekend job on whichever feminist books Amazon recommended me, and then I didn’t read them. This means I have a shelf (often visible in the background of my zooms - tune into the collage event on Monday for a glimpse) of pink books which I’m sure contain many wisdoms which would be useful to share in this newsletter. One such book is The Vagenda.
Luckily for me, the only way I usually achieve anything is because I have to. On a deadline. Even if that deadline is a self-imposed society newsletter. Which I’ve chosen to release fortnightly. Even though I definitely don’t have that much to say. Anyhoo. This newsletter has given me a reason to dip into Holly Baxter and Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett’s Vagenda, and this is what I found.
The Vagenda is funny. It’s the most fiction-like non-fiction gets. Maybe other people who find non-fiction reading a slog can relate to what I mean here. It’s so fun to read that I can actually see myself snuggling down on a Sunday afternoon, and not just because I want to feel virtuous.
I kind of wish I’d read The Vagenda when I was fifteen. While my feminism was going strong, my body positivity not so much. It’s hard to know which things would have gotten through to your past self, but I like to think if I’d read The Vagenda when I first bought it it might have hurried my body liberation narrative on a little bit.
They say ‘Magazines take an instructive role, claiming to be able to teach you everything you need to know about being a woman, before presenting you with a parade of bodily problems which need ‘fixing’, and then laying on advertisements for miraculous products which can supposedly do just that.’ We can see the cycle here.
Media Violence
Meghan Markle’s ordeal with the racist British press demonstrates the violence of the UK media environment. Here are a couple of articles talking about the press’ treatment of Meghan if you want to read some coverage that doesn’t focus on Piers Morgan.
Adwoa Darko’s article touches on the British monarchies link’s with the media in Britain and how those ties maintain Royal power.
Kovie Biakolo, while focusing on Meghan Markle’s situation, highlights that Markle is still in a position of privilege. For a look at Black women’s treatment in the media more broadly, check out the article below.
‘Findings indicate that youth, both male and female, readily identified many images of black women as negative, inaccurate, and offensive. Further, their responses suggest their concern about the impact of these images on how majority groups may perceive black women and black communities, overall.’
This quote is from a research project by Valerie N. Adams-Bass, Keisha L. Bentley-Edwards and Howard C. Stevenson which investigated US perceptions of Black women in the media. Titled ‘That's Not Me I See on TV . . . : African American Youth Interpret Media Images of Black Females’ and available to read here.
Hegemony, Baby
That sounds like a good title only if you pronounce hegemony in the way that I do which is hedgeymoney. I’ve also heard heg eh mon ee. Either way, the title doesn’t have much relevance, I just think it’s the explanation to some of the mass media’s problems. Why do so many newspapers pedal the same sexist bullshit? Hegemony baby. Why do they all seem to pander to particular political ideologies? Hegemony baby. What do we need to overthrow in order to have truly free media which can perform it’s democratic role? Hegemony baby!
Media hegemony is the idea that the mass media is perpetuating particular ideals, leading to their dominance in society. In the case of food and our bodies, the dominant narrative is that of diet culture. This is the idea that we all have to conform to a certain body standard, and which shames those who don’t. While media hegemony is important in terms of the narratives it promotes, I’m more interested in who is dominating the media and choosing to maintain the current culture.
According to mediareform.org.uk, 5 companies own 80% of the print and online news media. This is a problem when those five companies benefit from the body-shaming narratives which sell more papers, get more online interactions, and get people to buy more stuff. There is little room for dissenting voices when those who dominate media production are stuffy, sexist men. Socialogy 1B (or was it 1A?) taught me that media is constructed (and so is almost everything else). The things which end up being reported aren’t accidental, especially when the people in control are a small group of elites in collaboration with other super-rich folks.
So how do we challenge this? Supporting smaller media platforms is one opportunity to both support companies other than the big conglomerates and to supply yourself with some alternative narratives. The internet may offer the answer! My mind casts back to online women’s magazine The Pool which folded at the beginning of 2019. The Pool couldn’t generate enough ad revenue to pay its writers, and so it closed. Google and Facebook take a huge share of digital ad revenue, and so the hegemony continues. An option is to support smaller media companies by clicking their ads or making small donations if you’re a particularly big fan.
While I am paranoid that all feminist-y newsletters on Substack are identical (thus making me just another person pushing their generic thoughts into people’s inboxes), there are several I like enough to recommend despite this concern. Newsletters can offer individuals who otherwise wouldn’t have a prominent media voice the opportunity to say important things. That said, media and opinions coming solely from individuals hold the possibility of being flawed (ahem) so read with caution. Awards for good boy’s Please Clap newsletter is good (if I remember rightly from the last time I read it about a year ago). I also like Franki Cookney’s The Overthinker’s Guide to Sex - plus she records each episode in podcast form for those nice walk accompanying revelations. Have a gander at Burnt Toast, a newsletter which answers parent’s questions about not passing on body image issues to children (perhaps helpful in order to look after our own inner children). Most newsletter authors have a way that readers can offer support, so consider doing so if you’re a fan.
Point being, find the media being produced by people who you think might understand you. As far as newspapers and news websites are shit, the internet is a big place. If GUFAB research has taught me anything, it’s that there are people out there writing the things we need to be reading, it’s just about finding them.
A (Media) Free Lunch
As they say, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. And for me these days, there’s no such thing as a media free lunch. Perhaps a symptom of not knowing how to switch off, or a fear of loneliness, I can’t seem to eat my lunch without listening to a podcast or watching an episode of something. In fact, I am eating my lunch as I write this. So, how do we have a media free lunch? Here’s a recipe to that end.
Step One: Assemble your ingredients. Whether that means getting leftovers out of the fridge, taking some bread out of the freezer, getting together some salad/curry/soup ingredients or whatever, get what you need. Notice the silence around you. Look around your kitchen. Look back at your ingredients. Proceed.
Step Two: Do your prep work. Resist the urge to set some music or a podcast going, read an article, or run to the toilet (unless you really need) while your food is spinning in the microwave, descended into the toaster or heating on the hob. Stand in place and accept the silence. If microwaving, await the ding for a welcome moment of relief.
Step three: Eating. This may be the most difficult part. With no distractions, eating can feel boring, or you may be itching to resume the course of your day. But wait! This is an opportunity to feel your connection to the physical world. Here you are making the external a part of yourself! Why sully that with communication from some media production team? As much as I love a side of the BBC Radio Four Food Programme with my lunch, sometimes enough is enough! Take this time to ponder something that’s been in the back of your mind. I often use these moments to think about past loves, the latest joke I made on zoom which flopped, or when I’m going to wash my hair. While this could’ve been a chance to learn something new, instead you’ve had a fun moment to consider something completely unimportant. Revel in that.
‘There’s no such thing as a free lunch’ hints at the neoliberal business-y ness of ulterior motives*. A media free lunch offers the opportunity to invest in the mundane, challenging the idea that every moment needs to be full or well-spent, contrary to neoliberal ideas of individual productivity. Next time I’m alone in my kitchen, I’ll be attempting a media free lunch. Join me (from the anonymous safety of your own home pls) and see how it feels.
*I don’t know how everything I write seems to take on a varyingly subtle to glaring anti-capitalist element. I honestly don’t plan it. I wouldn’t even say I’m a very good anti-capitalist - I love to consume!
Doctor, fix me
And by doctor I mean doctored images. By which I mean photoshop. I don’t know if punny titles are really the draw of this newsletter but just in case they are, there’s my attempt. So: photoshop, facetune, filters. What’s the deal with altering our images?
When we talk about crises in body image, someone usually ends up talking about false portrayals of celebrities in magazines. And undoubtedly, the repeated exposure to people of false shapes and sizes begins to infiltrate our conception of what a person is supposed to look like. The thing is, I think we all know now that those images are false. Maybe we need to be reminded of this sometimes, especially when it’s all we see, but we sort of all know. Plus, do we ever actually buy magazines anymore? Occasionally I splash out on a magazine if I’m wanting some fancier collage materials, but chances of me picking up a Hello! magazine are slim.
Nowadays when a celebrity is outed for being photoshopped, whether they had knowledge of the practice or not, I feel more sorry than surprised. If we were all subject to the gaze of so many people, I’m sure we’d feel as if we had to maintain the standards that our peers were setting out. Of course, doing so is weak and if it means perpetuating an unrealistic standard to even one extra person it’s not acceptable. But I can see that if you were a celebrity and you felt you had to meet these standards, you’d facetune to fit in.
But aha! It’s not just celebrities! A benefit of social media could have been to take back the dominant idea of what a ‘normal’ person looks like and show ourselves as we actually are. But instead, the pressure to conform has meant that instead of challenging the standard, we end up trying to meet it instead. And with the wide availability of at-home editing apps, we can all change how we look. And we expect it less with people we know. Apparently two-thirds of people edit their photos, so the likelihood is that some of the people who we follow are doing so.
I remember painstakingly trying to edit out a spot on my chin in a picture when I was younger. I also remember a girl in my year at school blurring everyone’s skin in group pictures so it wouldn’t be obvious that she’d done so to herself (Kris Jenner and Gordon Ramsay style). I’ve helped my Mum photoshop out her eye bags in post-Marathon pictures and once I edited out a friend’s sweat patch in a picture I wanted to post. It’s not just pictures of celebrities that aren’t real, it’s all of us. Even when I can think to myself that I haven’t edited a picture of myself for years, I still only post the ones I like the most. But, like the cliche of celebrities and their photoshopped pics, we also all know that social media is a facade we all present.
So how do we fix this doctoring? Some people choose to post ‘real’ images in a counteraction to all the fakery. Truthfully, on my own Instagram I try to strike a balance between authentic, candid pictures which are obviously authentic, candid pictures and choosing not to post the ones which are actually authentic and candid. What I mean is that there is a certain desirability in appearing to be uncaring about what you post or transcending social media standards, but beneath that there are still four too-real pictures for every ‘real’ one you post. It’s not fun to imagine posting a picture you don’t want to. And it’s not everyone’s responsibility to martyr themselves to create a more positive online culture.
If we’re unlikely to change the broad culture which means putting only your best face forward on social media, what can we do? It seems the only option is to alter our perceptions. If we don’t take social media too seriously, and we see it for what it is (a strange selection of perfection) it might have less of an impact. Shape your online space to make it somewhere you actually want to spend time in. Don’t let images you see get inside your head as bases of comparison. Be compassionate towards the people, including ourselves, who are pressured to conform to an unreachable standard. Simultaneously, don’t believe what you see, especially when it’s coming from the most everyday places.
Some Media Recommendations
Ironically, in this newsletter lamenting the effects of a toxic media environment, I’d like to recommend some more of the industry’s output for your consumption. The good thing about such a huge industry is that with all of the bad, there is some good. And those few good things can act as a wonderful antidote to all of the other shit we have to put up with. So, if you fancy watching or listening to something that won’t make your blood boil when you’re least expecting it, check out these recommendations.
‘Spaced’. Available on Netflix and All 4. Released at the turn of the century, Spaced is written by, and starring, Simon Pegg and Jessica Stevenson, and is directed by Edgar Wright. If you’re a fan of that lot already, you’ll love this. Equally, if you’re a fan of that lot already you’ve most likely already watched this? Anyhoo. Proper British-humour nostalgic viewing and nice short episodes for a post-work watch.
Notes on Frump: A Style for the Rest of Us By Emma Copley Eisenberg. I read this today while in search of newsletters to recommend. Notes on Frump discusses what the ‘frump’ style is and isn’t. As someone who has written in previous newsletters about feeling the need to cover up, I relate to a lot of what the author says in this. Also, it’s funny in a subtle, disarming sort of way.
New Internationalist magazine. New Internationalist is a global political magazine that doesn’t touch issues about our relationship with food or our bodies with a barge pole. While these are obviously issues we care about (I say we because I’m writing this and you’re reading it), it can be frustrating to read things which don’t get it right. And so, a benefit of completely avoiding those subjects is that you won’t get angry. Plus you get to feel smart while you read stuff. It’s like a self-congratulatory boost every time you pick the magazine up, whether you actually absorb the info or not.
If it wasn’t obvious, these just happen to be the media things I’ve consumed in the past week. Unfortunately for anyone taking heed, I’m not consuming a lot of media lately. Not because I’m busy, but just because I take way too long to do simple things and spend the rest of my time on Instagram explore.
Who to follow
Never before have the GUFAB who to follow recommendations been more topical. Unfortunately, and in keeping with the ideology I’m peddling in this newsletter, I’m trying to use Instagram less (see 34 words ago where I confess to my current Instagram usage). This means that my basis on which to tell you who to follow is extremely shaky. You may have noticed the dwindling recommendations in basically every newsletter since the first one. And, frankly, I don’t want to spend the next 20 minutes surfing Instagram (while getting distracted by unamusing tiktoks reposted onto reels) to try and find ill-suited Instagram accounts to recommend. Point of this section is: make your social media feeds a comfortable place. Unfollow ungrounded celebrities! Block people you went to school with! Mute your friends! Whatever it takes!
Thanks for reading! The next, and final (!), newsletter is on Health, and whatever the hell that means. Please send any submissions, thoughts, or comments to gufabpositivitysoc@gmail.com
This newsletter was written and edited by Thalia Grou (she/her).