As for ads "for people with a little less pocket change," what I see in ads for companies like American Eagle and Old Navy are teenagers or "normal-looking" people in everyday settings- at home, at work, out with friends. These ads always seem to be more realistic. When you look at these ads, you know what kind of audience these ads are targeting. American Eagle shoots for the younger middle class people- i think it is the more accessible alternative. Anyone could wear these clothes. With the Louis Vuitton ad, you know that the young, rich, possibly famous, and beautiful are being targeted- the people who can afford to spend hundreds of dollars on a purse. I think that says a lot about the types of lifestyles these different audiences lead as well. Thinking about it though, this high-end ad is in a teen magazine, where you'd expect to see more of those middle-class ads. Maybe it is targeting more of a richer young audience. Obviously teens can't afford really expensive things on their own.
I think classes are configured racially, but at the same time, I don't. There are the people that lump one "race" into the lower-classes and another to the higher-classes. But it never is quite as black and white as that though. It is difficult to say because there are different races in all these classes, but at the same time, you still see certain races dominating certain classes. As much as it sucks to say that, it is just true in some places.
No comments:
Post a Comment