The News of the World may be gone forever, but the public shaming of Rupert Murdoch and his cronies continues to gather momentum.
Now, a sexy German lingerie brand has used the scandal surrounding the Murdoch media empire to its own advantage, with a marketing campaign that taunts Murdoch, his son James and former NOTW editor Rebekah Brooks.
Blush-Berlin and its ad agency Glow Berlin created a mock-tabloid look for the campaign, which invites Murdoch to “look at our little secrets”. The print and billboard campaign isn’t shy about naming names from the phone-hacking scandal, copping the old NOTW logo, and even using a Rebekah Brooks look-alike model (admit it, she is kind of hot, in a Cruella de Vil sort of way.)
The clever campaign is also timed to introduce the label’s Fall-Winter collection of see-through babydolls and other revealing goodies.
No word yet on what Rupert Murdoch thinks now that the bra, so to speak, is on the other foot, but you can bet they’re having a few chuckles on Fleet Street today.
So, some words to live by: Always wear clean underwear, and try to lead your life with enough decency that you don’t become the target of a mocking lingerie ad!
The inaugural UK Lingerie Awards seemed like a timely idea when they were announced a couple of months ago. There’s been a tremendous explosion of creativity in the British lingerie industry over the past decade, fueled by an intensely competitive market and college programs that routinely turn out skilled and ambitious graduates. The big high street brands keep refreshing and expanding their offerings, and a vast number of fashion-forward indies and luxury labels are setting style trends around the world.
In short, there’s a lot to celebrate and a deep pool of talent in Britain worthy of recognition.
Imagine our surprise, then, when the short list for the Ukies was announced last week, identifying three finalists in each of 19 categories. Fully one-third of the finalists are non-British brands or multi-nationals with headquarters abroad, while a huge number of Britain’s most celebrated brands (and individuals) were simply shut out. (Here’s the list.)
According to Lingerie Insight, the magazine that created the awards, they are “the most important annual event in the British intimate apparel industry … [and] recognize the achievements of the companies and individuals that have excelled over the past 12 months in this most glamorous part of the fashion business.”
The awards, they say, will showcase “the leading lights from the British lingerie industry, including designers, wholesalers, agents, department store and web site buyers, and the best independent and nationwide retailers in the country.”
But when the Ukies (what else should we call them — the Brundies?) are handed out at a glamorous bunfest in September, don’t be surprised to see names like Calvin Klein, Maidenform, Armani and even Spanx walking off with the hardware for their contributions to “British” lingerie.
Even the top prize, Lingerie Brand of the Year, has German-based megabrand Triumph going up against Italian luxe label La Perla, with Curvy Kate as the only UK label on the list to act as defender of the realm.
And that’s only one of many problems with this initiative. The UK Lingerie Awards are deeply flawed, with its apparent good intentions undercut by disingenuous media hype, goofy eligibility rules, and some glaring conflict of interest.
Let’s break down the issues that should cause people to scratch their heads — and ask some tough questions:
The reason so many offshore brands are competing for British recognition is that the rules allow it. You don’t have to be British to be eligible for the Ukies, you just have to sell to the Brits through a “retail channel”. Anyone with a store, a website or a distribution channel qualifies. This policy undermines the awards’ goal of celebrating unique British talent, and it handicaps “local” labels that suddenly find themselves competing with the likes of La Perla and Lise Charmel for a homegrown prize.
In fact, given the mystifying eligibility criteria for the Ukies, we have to wonder why there aren’t more foreign brands on the short list, since you can buy just about anything in London. If Triumph made the list, why not Etam or Pleasure State or Simone Perele or Eres or Ritratti — all of which have “retail channels” there?
This paradox will prove even more interesting next year, when big-spending outsiders like Victoria’s Secret and Baci come to England and, thus, give British labels more to worry about and compete against.
Another major flaw in the awards setup is the process used to choose the finalists, which was, in a word, deceitful. Lingerie Insight published numerous articles encouraging readers to nominate or vote for their favorite brands, and urged British brands to launch social media campaigns to drum up popular support. (My Facebook news feed and Twitter feed was flooded last month with well-meaning UK labels asking me to “vote” for them.)
Unfortunately, the votes don’t really count. Both the short list of finalists and the eventual winners are hand-picked by the 7-member judging panel alone. Results of the “fan vote” campaign (which drew 5,000 entries) were shown to the judges who, in the words of the organizers, “may use [them] to see if the strength of public opinion chimes with their own views.”
Yikes! That’s like saying Simon Cowell will “consider” the fan voting on X Factor — and then pick the winner himself. After all, he’s the expert, right?
The Ukies are not, as Lingerie Insight says, “the Oscars of the British lingerie industry.” At the Oscars, the votes count.
(In comparison, the winner of the “fan vote” for the recent Triumph Inspiration Award earned a bonus point that was applied to her final judges’ score.)
The culprit responsible for all these problems is the awards organizer, Lingerie Insight, which has turned the event into a self-serving marketing platform designed to a) manufacture some “exclusive” news content; b) curry favor with their advertisers; c) inflate their own credentials (yes, they are on the judging panel); and d) breathlessly proclaim their dominance over their competitors, most notably Lingerie Buyer, the other lingerie industry magazine in the UK.
But sponsors, brands and industry people attending the Ukies gala in September might want to ask their host why other media outlets that focus on lingerie have been excluded from the promotional run-up to the event. Despite LI’s boast that “a PR campaign will make the UK Lingerie Awards a major event for consumer as well as trade press,” I’m still waiting for their first press release.
LI’s own website says the Ukies will be “a world-wide media event” with a publicity machine that encompasses the vast media landscape represented by Lingerie Insight magazine, LingerieInsight.com, the Lingerie Insight Daily News Alert, the Lingerie Insight Twitter account, and the Lingerie Insight Facebook page. In other words, you should expect to read about this branded marketing campaign in one place only.
The short list of finalists for the UK Lingerie Awards includes a lot of very deserving, and very British, labels. Who can argue with nominations for Bordelle, Lascivious, Atsuko Kudo and terrific newcomers like Obey My Demand and Nicole Gill? Likewise, the judging panel includes many of the British lingerie industry’s most esteemed names whose credentials (despite the ethical problem of nominating themselves) are beyond reproach.
But none of this is enough to give the Ukies true authenticity. These awards are in serious need of a reboot, and desperately need an arms-length organizing body that won’t turn the whole thing into one big self-serving advertorial.
Finally, one of the judges was quoted as saying that the UK Lingerie Awards are intended to “increase competitiveness” among British labels and thereby improve quality across the industry. But that seems unlikely in a market that is already ferociously competitive and marked by exceptional creativity.
Instead, the worst thing about the Ukies is that they could become a divisive element in an industry that is also known for the high degree of mutual support, admiration and collaboration among its workers and owners. Almost everyone in the industry has worked for other brands in the past, and retains loyalties and friendships that rise above the daily combat of the marketplace.
The first Ukie awards, which favor a select few and exclude many, can only tarnish that reputation.
The image above is the winning entry in the 2011 Love Your Body poster contest held by the National Organization for Women. It was created by college student Kyla Hollis of Colorado, and will be used in the NOW Foundation’s Love Your Body campaign to promote self-esteem in school-age girls.
The image below, which uses the same empowering, feel-good language, is something altogether different. It’s part of a summer marketing campaign by Victoria’s Secret to sell push-up bras.
In fact, there’s a sly double meaning in the VS campaign: the “body” in the slogan isn’t just your body, it’s their Body by Victoria® brand of bras. If you click the button that says “I ♥ My Body”, you’re telling the world you love VS too.
The NOW project, which we’ve written about before, is an important educational effort but it can appear puny in comparison to the unrelenting parade of advertising messages that girls are exposed to daily, and which can breed lifelong body-image issues, eating disorders and health problems. And ironically, despite the similarities in these two slogans, the NOW campaign was set up to counter the influence of brands like Victoria’s Secret, which promote highly idealized, and largely unattainable, standards of beauty to their eager customers.
If you take a closer look at the VS “I ♥ My Body” campaign, you’ll see there’s not really much to it. You click the Facebook button (and allow VS to post advertising messages on your wall!), then you are asked to browse through their Body collection of lingerie. There’s a contest you can enter to win a spa trip and, if you feel like it, you can post a comment on the VS wall to “tell the world” how you “love your body”. About 500 people have done so, with varying degrees of lucidity, occasional crudeness and a few self-loathing grumbles. That’s 500 out of Victoria’s Secret’s nearly 15 million FB followers.
Has Victoria’s Secret done anything wrong here? Not at all; it’s just a harmless marketing campaign. And that’s the problem.
At its best, it’s a feeble and perfunctory effort to promote a self-esteem message. At its worst, it’s a mildly cynical attempt to use self-empowerment language to piggyback on the more socially responsible efforts of health agencies, educators and other corporate citizens to promote healthier body image perspectives for women.
My question is, why isn’t Victoria’s Secret leading that campaign instead of coasting along in its wake? They have enormous resources, an incalculable influence on the lives of young women, and a tremendous vested interest in promoting healthy life choices among its consumer base.
And there are many, many precedents of similar companies that used their profile and riches to promote social change. Who can forget Anita Roddick and her Body Shop‘s aggressive campaigns against domestic violence? Or the soap company Dove‘s exceptional and inspiring “Campaign for Real Beauty”?
Of course, I should point out that Limited Brands, which owns Victoria’s Secret, is a generous corporation that plows millions into charities and community projects, and it has earned the respect and gratitude that comes with such exceptional philanthropy. But I’m not talking about giving, I’m talking about leadership. There’s a broader, more important role that Victoria’s Secret can play which, if pursued with the right amount of commitment, could literally change lives.
The “love your body” message is more than just a slogan or a marketing tie-in. It’s a critical issue affecting the lives of all young women today. With their appropriation of this message, Victoria’s Secret missed a golden opportunity to assert itself as a pro-active force in educating their customers.
It’s not asking too much to ask them to do more.
If you’re heading to Lollapalooza or, better yet, the Pitchfork festival in Chicago this month, you’ll want to take a brief detour up Michigan Avenue to gape at the city’s newest — and cheesiest — tourist attraction.
A city realty company on Friday unveiled its 26-foot-high statue of Marilyn Monroe that replicates the famous billowy skirt scene from The Seven Year Itch. Unlike the movie version, however, the statue in Pioneer Court puts Marilyn’s lacey granny panties on display for everyone to see.
As you can see from the images below, the creation by artist Seward Johnson brings out the juvenile voyeur in spectators young and old. Seward’s Marilyn is almost certain to become the most photographed (and most frequently vandalized) public landmark in the windy city since that big shiny jellybean was installed over a decade ago.
The piece has taken a beating, however, from both art critics and social commentators who argue that giving folks (including children – see below) a chance to look up a woman’s dress is not healthy public policy, and not what was intended by the creation of the Magnificent Mile strip of public art installations.
Andrew Ritchie, in a widely circulated post from the Chicago Art Blog, had this to say:
“It’s creepy schlock from a fifth-rate sculptor that blights a first-rate public art collection. … Sadly, the reduction of Monroe to a mere sexual object is exactly what may have contributed to her suicide. Johnson seems not to realize this.”
Spokesmen for Zeller Realty, which owns and commissioned the statue, have been quoted as saying the Marilyn statue is “art that makes people think”, although there’s more giggling than thinking going on in the photos below.
If you absolutely MUST get a photo of yourself licking Marilyn’s legs or peeking up her dress, you’d better act fast. It’s inconceivable that this monstrosity will last very long before Rahm Emanuel or someone at city hall orders it removed. At the very least, someone will eventually realize that Marilyn’s iconic “subway moment” was shot in New York, and has no connection with Windy City at all.
Your outfit is modeled by Lily Cole and photographed by Ellen von Unwerth. You land a job with a leading international fashion brand, which sells your first piece in boutiques around the world. And you start off with an extra €15,000 in your bank account.
Not a bad way to start your career as a lingerie designer, huh?
That’s what awaits Boglárka (Bogi) Bódis, a Hungarian design student who was named the winner tonight of the fourth annual Triumph Inspiration Award at a gala ceremony in Berlin.
Bodis’ entry (above), called Les Fleurs du Mal after the Beaudelaire poem of the same name, was chosen from national finalists representing 37 countries around the world.
And it marks another coup for design students from Eastern Europe: last year, Bulgaria’s entry won the TIA competition, while Turkey and Romania placed second and third, respectively, this year.
Bodis said in her submission to the TIA panel that her string-and-fringe bodysuit was meant to celebrate “the eternal beauty and sensuality of the female body.”
Contestants were asked to base their submissions on the general theme, “125 years of Celebrating Women”, an acknowledgment of Triumph’s 125 years in the business. A six-member jury that included German photography legend Von Unwerth, UK actress Lily Cole, supermodel Helena Christensen, Chinese pop star Coco Lee, Triumph’s creative director Jos Berry, and Anita Tillmann, founder of the Berlin Fashion Fair “Premium”.
The 37 finalists, which we previewed earlier, showed a remarkable range of visions from today’s young lingerie designers. The second-place winner, Nurten Yuksel of Turkey, named her winged creation Hezarfen after legendary 17th Century Turkish aviator as a way of inspiring women.
The third-place winner, Diana Bobina of Romania, created a unique geometric body inspired by Romanian religious paintings and decorated with interchangeable triangles to allow the wear to create their own pattern.