Say It Ain't So, Dove

I am stunned. I feel cheated. I am mad. Damn mad!

For several years I have been touting Dove’s Real Beauty campaign as a high-minded example of authenticity in consumer marketing. Imagine my dismay, then, when I discovered in the May 12 issue of The New Yorker that the real beauties in Dove’s Real Beauty campaign are not real.

The success of the Real Beauty campaign still validates my original points:

• Being honest in today’s markets can pay off big
• The zeitgeist has shifted from an emphasis on idealization to an emphasis on reality

No need existed for Dove to hire the world’s reputed best pixalist, Pascal Dangin, to digitally turn “ordinary” women into – well – ordinary women. There is no lack of doughy-fleshed women.

Remember Jamie Lee Curtis’s famous full-page pose in the September 2002 issue of More? She agreed to be that issue’s cover story subject if More would show her as she is in a sports halter and shorts shot – billowing love handles and all, with no makeup, no special photographer’s lighting and no air brushing or its contemporary equivalent, pixel manipulation.

Thankfully, More had the good sense to agree with Ms. Curtis. It was rewarded for its wisdom by the greatest positive reader reaction in the history of the magazine that translated into a huge bump in audited readership.

For the most part, the mind of the market today wants the unvarnished truth. It is beyond the contrived world of youth where appearances count for more than substance. Be honest or be gone, it says. Because Dove doesn’t understand this I now have to spend a good chunk of my valuable time changing a series of PowerPoint slides and altering a heretofore important slice of content in many of my presentations on today’s markets.

 

Comments

[Michele Miller]

David - I, too, will be heartbroken if all of this news about Dove turns out to be true. I'm just waiting for the dust to settle before making a statement, mostly because all of this is based on one remark made by the subject of The New Yorker piece.

I'd like to know exactly which campaigns he worked on, and exactly what he means by doing a lot of retouching. If, as Ogilvy stated, it's about a hair out of place or minor lighting, then I'm cool with it. But if it turns out to be as major as is being claimed, then I'll be the first to put ketchup on my crow before eating it.

Sigh.

[Mike Santoro]

I've heard that the retouching was just to clear dust and other small touchups to the photo, so we should hold judgement until we figure out what happened.

But even if it turns out these models were in some way manipulated, does it hurt what they were doing? I get the fun in saying that these women "weren't real", but isn't it still a big deal that they didn't go with the typical thin glamour model?

I'd argue that while it definetely hurts the credibility of the campaign, that the message still remains and the importance of using real women still resonates.

[Gay Gooen]

Too sad, AND too real -- I think this happens all the time. As a OD consultant who believes in the value of truth in marketing, I am not at all surprised. It's just another example of using women to exploit the marketing/advertising process in ways that are inappropriate and deceitful. If this is true, let's mainstream it so people know the truth, and choose not to patronize Dove products.

[A Doughy Real Woman]

I agree with Miller's comments. Hold off on the Power Point changes, David until the unretouched dust settles.

Dove, Dangin, and Leibowitz all state that Dangin was not involved in the "Real Beauty" campaign, but in an earlier campaign. It seems to me that the "New Yorker" used their own "blur tool" to get create a different image for, go figure, of all things, perhaps their own marketing purposes?

How often has the media been known to distort comments? Certainly with the same frequency that visual images are "enhanced." I cannot think of a single publication that does not practice "retouching" of words to sell a story.

The "real" picture may be as simple as this: Controversy sells better than plain, ordinary facts; word retouchers, "heal thyself!"

[Mary]

Wow - This is almost like the Coke Zero Blog fakery or some such - It would have been interesting if Dove had left well enough alone - I would have had a lot more respect for the campaign. It seems cheapened a bit now.

[the marketing mix]

very informative keep on writing

[Marney Lewis]

Very Interesting Post, Very sad if it is true with Dove unfortunatly, Great use of media, makes things more personal. Thanks , and keep up the good work.

[Michael]

Whether the images were authentic or not, I think the Dove campaign was a step (as small as it might be) in the right direction. Similarly, the campaign was a bold but ultimately successful example of non-traditional marketing.

[Joel "Cheaters Guide to Marketing" Gutierrez]

I like the fact that dove is using reverse psychology against the other marketing out there...they show the truth vs. what's made up.

I have a friend with a 16 year old daughter who cakes the makeup on and I honestly think her acne problem stems from all that freaking makeup!

Seriously, people just need to learn that beauty is in the heart...not the outside...