The “search for the next BIG thing” (yes big was all in caps) was a campaign where plus size girls uploaded photos of themselves in order to win the chance to become the face of American Apparel’s new plus size clothing line. The winner was to be determined by online voters choosing their favourite model.

What they did not expect was for Carrie Upton to be chosen as the winner by the online voters, as her photos clearly mocked the clothing retailer’s insensitive appeal to larger women. Upton’s photos included herself smothered in chocolate sauce, devouring chicken and even posed like a roast pig, parodying the notion that to American Apparel, plus size women were just overweight slobs.

Upton criticised American Apparel’s attempt to appeal to a larger woman;

“People would have said, “Wow, good for them! How progressive!” But instead, they used cutesy, tired euphemisms and this faux-chummy supportive tone that a lot of people found cheap and insulting. It smacked of that feeling when someone does something well or does a good deed and then nudges you and goes, “See what I did?”"

Apart from the degrading title of the competition, the website included references to plus size women have “full-size fannies” and being “bootylicious”.

While it is unsurprising that American Apparel decided not to feature a woman who openly mocked them, it is clear that by choosing Upton as the winner, women found the campaign insulting and degrading, instead of inspiring and inclusive.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Special Secretariat on Policies for Women (SPM) complained formally about the ad, stating that it perpetuated sexist attitudes and “ignores the great advancements” that woman have made in breaking down these negative attitudes and stereotypes, and after large media attention (potentially exacerbated by Bundchen’s involvement) and increasing complaints, the Brazilian Advertising Self-Regulation Board opened an investigation, yet ultimately dismissed the case stating that “ the stereotypes present in the campaign are common in society and easily identifiable, and don’t belittle the feminine condition”.

Effectively, the board has stated that because the sexist nature of the ad matches the sexist state of society in Brazil, it is acceptable. The review had the potential to challenge the state of society in Brazil, and to deem it unacceptable to standards of equality, but instead the ruling only affirmed that gender stereotypes are ok.

The SPM declined to challenge the Board’s decision, stating that the very fact they took on the case at all was a progressive move. The ongoing controversy that has surprisingly caught the world’s attention, has ended somewhat anticlimactically and without the result many were hoping for.

70% of all active internet users in the US are a part of Facebook, and of these, 62% are women. Furthermore, Americans spend a whopping total of 53.5 billion minutes of Facebook, a number dwarfing the next highest social media sites such as Google’s Blogger (723.8 million monthly minutes) and Tumblr (623.5 million monthly minutes).

As advertisers scramble to cash in on the amount of time people spend on the site, recent data by SocialCode and Buddymedia reveals just how effective facebook advertising is in different age groups. In general, older facebook users (50+) are 31% more likely than users aged 18-29 to click through to advertiser’s websites, whereas the younger groups will most likely click “like” as an expression of brand interest. So far 17.7% of ad display budgets in the US are going to Facebook. With so much money and effort going into Facebook ads, brands should be clever about their image; those appealing to a younger audience should focus their attention on creating an engaging and appealing Facebook brand page in order to benefit most from the way a younger audience behaves and interacts with advertising.

Twitter have released this video reflecting its amazing potential as a medium for communication:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Apart from revealing just how important social media can be to individuals- whose first response on feeling a tremor was to share it with their followers, it reveals just how fast topics can come and go in the twitterverse- with the trending topics before the earthquake dropping off rapidly after the earthquake struck.

The ad seems to portray the idea that the salon can make even victims of domestic violence look beautiful, which will result in husbands giving them diamonds instead of bruises. Understandably, the reaction to the ad has been overwhelmingly negative, with many social media users demanding a boycott of the salon, and women’s shelters in the area expressing their disappointment over the fact that the ad seems to trivialise domestic violence; glamourising the issue instead of treating it as a serious problem.

In response, Salon owner Sarah Cameron has defended the image, claiming that it is a “cutting edge” work of art that is a “satirical look at real life situations that ignites conversation and debate”. Many are less than satisfied with Cameron’s statement, and the salon has since been vandalised by persons unknown- who have splashed the salon with purple paint as well as painting the slogans “this is art that is wrongly named violence, that was violence wrongly named art” to portray their disgust of the ad.

Cameron blamed the media for creating the controversy in the first place, believing it has been blown out of proportion and that the “media’s energy and time may be better spent otherwise”- but when  an ad attempts to normalise and glamourise domestic violence, it is not innocent, but a part of the problem which can turn life into a living hell for so many women.

When previously the codes linked to advertising or hard-to-win contests, the QR codes are now being used for special offers, discounts and extra content- for example Glamour used them to link to an exclusive interview with Rhianna.  If readers decide to go one step further and like the magazine or featured product’s page on Facebook- they can have deals directly delivered to their phones.

QR codes can work through photographing the code and sending it to the magazine, or alternatively if the reader has a smartphone, they can install an app that lets them instantly access content by hovering their phone over the image. The codes can also be linked to social media sites Twitter and Facebook- creating a ripple effect in the number of people accessing the extra content. As a result- Glamour saw an 18% rise in their number of Facebook friends in just one month after implementing the codes.

Currently, QR code use is low- with only 4% of magazine readers having used one, but after this big push in the quantity and the quality of the codes, many hope the numbers will grow- despite criticism that reading a magazine with one hand holding your phone is just too annoying.

Apparently, that’s exactly the idea- according to the group’s spokeswoman Lindsey Rajt, “we live in a 24-hour news cycle world and we learn the racy things we do are sometimes the most effective way that we can reach particular individuals”.

PETA have long been criticized for their use of sexually suggestive advertising material, which often features famous vegetarian women naked. They even had a commercial banned which was supposed to air during the Superbowl that featured women in bikinis having “fun” with vegetables such as carrots and zucchinis (yet on the other hand, the campaigns rarely feature naked men).

It is common knowledge that many porn stars are often heavily exploited-  and it seems that PETA is sacrificing women’s rights in order to promote those of animals.  A further criticism of the overtly sexual campaigns is that while they are attention-grabbing, and cause uproar in the media but are ineffectual. Instead of promoting awareness of animal rights issues- many claim the ads are turning women off, and turning men on, and not doing much else.

Ads for cleansing product “Summer’s Eve” which features hands cupped in the shape of vaginas talking have not only been criticised for being disturbing, but more so for being blatantly racist.

Aside from the discomfort of having a vagina-hand-puppet saying “hello from vagina land” and telling us to cleanse ‘down there’ more often, the ads were  accused of racism- after three ethnicities of hands (white, african-american and hispanic) portrayed tired racial stereotypes.

The black woman’s hand-vagina says that cleansing with Summer’s Eve before going to the club will be so “lady wowza” and the hispanic woman’s hand-vagina says “ay yi yi yi” before breaking out into a rant entirely in spanish, as well as telling her owner to “trash that tacky leopard thong”.

The ads have been so controversial that they were even taken down off youtube- and the whole debacle has highlighted the lack of ethnic diversity in advertising, so that often when minorities are represented, they come off as stereotypes.

And speaking of stereotypes…this ad for sanitary pad brand “Always” has raised eyebrows for its lack of understanding and misrepresentation of another minority- the drag and transgender community.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The video suggests that all drag queens wish they were women, clearly confusing them with transgender people, but furthermore ridicules them for wishing for something as horrible as a period.

Fortunately, U by Kotex’s breaking campaign is smart, cute and addresses a real concern many women have during their period- leakage.

Click here to view the embedded video.

U have done some great research in to what women really think about pads and tampons- not only in the spot above, but they have also revealed that 70% of women wear their ‘daggiest undies’ during their period, due to their lack of faith in the products they buy.

Summer’s Eve and Always should take note- innovation need not mean shock value.

Not only were complaints made against the overtly sexually degrading nature of the image, which gives the impression that the girl is some sort of love-slave, many critics were concerned with how young the model appears to be.  Although Roger David clarified that the model was indeed 18 at the time of shooting, the advertising standards board maintains that she is depicted to look inappropriately young- and combined with the model’s sexualisation, lead to the ban.

The clothing brand have further defended the image- saying that the ad was “ironic”, and that “New Love Club produced the image of the woman as a comment on youth and the national debt that now rests on their shoulders and as an ironic patriotic comment on capitalist recruitment and identity. Roger David believes that these same issues are relevant for young people in Australia, hence the use by Roger David of this image in its Australian marketing for the New Love Club brand of clothing.”

Somehow we are just not buying it.