Beauty_and_the_Barbie

8/7/2019 Beauty_and_the_Barbie

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/beautyandthebarbie 1/9

Reproduction or photocopying prohibited without express permission

www.mintel.com

Beauty and the Barbieby Samantha Capen MuldoonFebruary 09, 2011

Women have always complained about Barbiedolls: the unrealistic proportions, the lack of

ethnicity, the trampy outfits. Despite Mattel’songoing efforts to ‘freshen’ and update Barbie, anddespite her many careers (over 120!), she is stillprimarily a fashion icon. But still, every few years,

Barbie is usually back in the spotlight. Someoneargues about the evil that she represents, andusually someone else responds by saying “it’s just

a doll”.

Not just a doll

But in recent years, I’ve spotted an increasing

number of real-life, walking, talking, living Barbiedolls. Who are these women? Think of HollyMadison (of The Girls Next Door ), Rachel

Uchitel (Tiger Woods’s alleged mistress) andHeidi Montag (known more for getting 10 plasticsurgeries in one day than for her reality TV careeron The Hills ). And of course, the Real Housewives of...

The Barbie-esque aesthetic is not just seen

in Hollywood/Vegas; it is becoming prevalentin mainstream society, as more people pursuecosmetic ‘improvements’ in a quest for perfection:

» According to statistics released in April

2010 by the American Society of PlasticSurgeons (ASPS), 12.5 million cosmetic plasticsurgery procedures were performed in the

United States in 2009, down only 1% from2008 – despite it being a challenging yeareconomically. Said ASPS President Michael

McGuire, MD: "The current economic climate

will likely not have an impact on long-term growth.”

» In the UK, cosmetic enhancements were on therise in 2009, with 36,482 surgical procedures

carried out by BAAPS members, a 6.7%

increase from 32,187 in 2008, according tothe British Association of Aesthetic PlasticSurgeons (BAAPS).

Why are we seeing more of these ‘plastic’ women?Well, many reasons:

» more easily accessible plastic surgery

» increased use of non-invasive injectables thatlower financial and psychological hurdles tocosmetic enhancement

» the cult of Hollywood and growth of tabloidescapist culture

» a culture that focuses on looking young and

staying vibrant as we age without a focus onlooking your ‘real’ age.

The pressure of the personalbrand

Every day, many of us have hundreds of emailsin our inboxes, not to mention the constant stream

of Facebook status updates we can scroll through.It is often difficult to make sense of all theinformation, categorise people and products, sift

through it all; it is clear that standing out from thecrowd is critical for people as well as brands.




www.mintel.com

As early as 1997, Tom Peters exhorted us todefine ‘Brand You’ in Fast Company , where he

discussed the impossibility of standing out intoday’s world of information/messaging overload

without a personal branding strategy.

Since then, the development of personal brandscontinues to be a booming business. Folks like

Peter Arnell, author of Shift: How to Reinvent Your Business, Your Career, and Your Personal Brand (Crown Business, 2010) and Dan Schawbel,author of a guide to personal branding: Me, 2.0 (Kaplan Publishing, 2010) are leading experts inthe world of personal branding, helping consumersunderstand the importance of managing theirpresentation to the world.

Faced with the pressure of creating a personal

brand to cut through all the clutter, some turn toplastic surgery, hoping to present their ‘best’ faceto the world.

Will we all have the samepackaging?

But herein lies a problem. Most of the walking,

talking Barbie dolls look and act...the same. They

have the same long hair (Great Lengths), thesame foreheads (Botox), the same lips and cheeks(Restalyn) and the same breasts (inflated). They

spray on their tans (Mystic), and all their teeth arestraight (Invisalign) and gleaming (Zoom).

When we all start to look the same, how can westand out? Beauty used to be distinguishing, butwhen everyone can be (or buy) beautiful, what

does that mean? In this scenario, looking likeeveryone else is a problem.

Beauty obviously garners attention. It catches theeye, and gets noticed. It is easy to jump on theBeauty Bandwagon, and look and act like an ideal

version of everyone else. But just like a beautifulBarbie, it stops there. Boring but attractive photoswill get people's attention for a moment, but won’tkeep anyone’s attention for very long. We are

starting to realise that as individuals, we need to

present a more nuanced face to those around us

– and that we can stimulate sustained interest bybeing a bit quirky.

Highlight uniquenessDating website OkCupid captured this insight in itsdatabase. It analysed the metrics/response ratesof over 5,000 of its users, and posted the resultsin its blog The Mathematics of Beauty. The results

were intriguing: The more that men disagreedabout a woman’s looks in her profile photo (i.e.,the more polarising her looks were, based on

results of their attractiveness rating scale), themore messages that woman got. In other words,when choosing someone to actually message/

contact on a dating site (something that couldbe compared to moving beyond product interestto initial product ‘trial’?), people chose the moreinteresting, less predictably beautiful choices.

Tattoo aficionados have instinctively understoodthis dynamic for a long time. They show off what

makes them different with their piercings or bodypaintings. True, they offend some; on the flip side,they seriously intrigue others.

Ian Schrager, the Morgans Hotel Group hotelier,also understood this strategy. Instead of providing

bland, traditional luxury hotel rooms, he went theother direction – no overstuffed chintz for him. Hishotels featured chairs shaped like gold teeth (St.Martin’s Lane Hotel, London), giant walls covered

in single rose blooms (The Royalton, New YorkCity) and other offbeat design elements. True,some people hated his hotels. But those wholiked them, loved them. And the hotels were wildly

popular as a result.

Beauty redefined

Recently, Rumer Willis was chosen by Badgley

Mischka to be the new ‘face’ of its brandfor spring 2011. Press releases with photosof the ingénue and socialite were plastered

around the web. Reactions were mixed – manyof the original articles were peppered with

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/the-mathematics-of-beauty/

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/the-mathematics-of-beauty/

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/10/brandyou.html




www.mintel.com

inflammatory statements (“unfortunate looking”

and “ugly duckling”).

Ms. Willis, who is the daughter of Hollywood

legends Demi Moore and Bruce Willis, is clearly

not your average-looking young lady. With alarge jaw (even she has compared herself to

Jay Leno) and an angular face, she defiesconventional beauty standards. Her skin isgenerally acknowledged to be exquisite, and sheis by all accounts a very nice person, popular in

the ‘in’ crowd of young Hollywood. But there aremany nice young ladies out there – why is SHE theface of Badgley Mischka, many asked?

Maybe the folks at Badgley Mischka don’t wanttheir brand to be just about one definition of

beauty. Maybe they want to be interesting, withlayers that keep us watching. And of course, theywant to stand out from the crowd. (I will not creditthem with Dove-like sensibilities that “we are all

beautiful”, because I really don’t think they meantthat in this oh-so-glamorous campaign for coutureclothing.)

I would argue that Badgley Mischka’s choice isa shrewd reaction to what I call the “blanding

down” of our beauty standards. That beyond

just grabbing our attention, Badgley Mischka hastapped into a nascent idea in the world of beauty

– NO MORE BARBIES.

Forgo perfect ‘packaging’

So – what does this mean for marketers? Well,what is true for individuals is often true for

brands. As social networking grows in importance,both individuals and companies need to movebeyond ‘expected’ beauty, expected benefits,

perfect packaging.

There needs to be depth, and something slightly

different about a brand, to keep consumers reallyinterested. Interesting brands (just like interestingpeople) garner engagement.

Marketers need to consider the alternative route:taking what makes the brand different, unique and

quirky and considering that it might be the brand’s

strength. Shout it from the rooftops. Embrace it.Some old school brands understood this:

» Listerine Mouthwash – it tastes horrible.

» Volkswagen Bug – it looks funny.

» Smucker's Jam – it sounds funny.

Rumer Willis (and the people at Badgley Mischka)understood the marketplace. Megan Fox orScarlett Johansson might be more traditionally

attractive, and they might be more ‘typical’ choicesfor a fashion brand. And they might even lookbetter in the clothes. But they aren’t interesting

choices. And by choosing Rumer Willis, thefashion house is claiming unconventional andinteresting as its defining brand attributes.

It is clear that fashion is not the only categorythat has to consider the impact of ‘bland’ ontheir brand. The beauty category faces the same

challenge, as do media brands, automobile brandsand any other category where the emphasis on theaesthetic is crucial.

As our world becomes more immersed in FB,

LinkedIn and reality TV, people are startingto understand the opportunities in developingtheir own brand. And marketers are faced witha crowded marketplace, with ever-increasing

competition. Standing out for a moment based onbeauty isn’t enough.

Attention based on beauty – it is fleeting.Engagement based on depth and a littlecontroversy – it is complex, nuanced and longlasting.

Note: Full disclosure – I played with Barbie dolls as a girl (the plane! the camper!), and my daughter has a small but much-loved collection of her own (including the pink convertible). I’m not anti-Barbie dolls… I just like to keep them in the toy box.




www.mintel.com

Related Trends

I-Sculpting

What's It About?

Everything about us can now be changed with thehelp of science.

What We've Seen

The rise of what famed psychologist Maslow would

have put at the top of his triangle is indisputable.Call it self-actualisation, 'potentialistion', or justpampering, pleasure and indulgence, we have thedesire and now - for the first time - we have thescience.

The consumer dream has proffered manyaspirations and dreams, but the ability to

completely remodel ourselves has always been upthere at the top.

Many commentators have argued that the quest of

marketing is (or should be) “to provide dreams forthe tribes of the world”.

The authors of Karaoke Capitalism refer to LeonNordin’s 5 Human Dreams:

» eternal life;

» youth;

» riches;

» virility;

» happiness.

So the ability to re-create your face must tick off anumber of them...

There is no denying the influence of our looks, andthe effect they have on carrying our personalityand identity. Writers and playwrights have had fun

with this from Shakespeare onwards.

The 1997 John Woo movie Face-Off explored

how a revolutionary technique might allow an

undercover agent, played by John Travolta, toassume the physical appearance of a criminal(Nicolas Cage): the same plot device was used in

Nip/Tuck , the TV series about two Miami plasticsurgeons.

The series and other real life programmes haveaccompanied a massive leap in the acceptabilityand take-up of cosmetic surgery in general.

Specifics

In the summer of 2006, science caught up with art:the world's first face transplant was carried out.

Scientists hailed the work as a milestone, even

though they did warn that an immune attack couldhave devastating effects.

» Frenchwoman Isabelle Dinoire received thetransplant after she had been mauled by her

dog. She received tissues, muscles, arteriesand veins, taken from a brain-dead donor.

» And an even more extraordinary operationwas carried out in Beijing - Chinese surgeons

carried out the world's first penis transplant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Maslow




www.mintel.com

Implications

The impact of science on our characters, lives,desires and imaginations is now almost beyond

out own imaginations. Shows like Nip/Tuck explore the tensions between how important ourlooks are to us compared to the 'inner I'.

The psychological consequences, though, are notso simple. Ms Dinoire has had to learn new ways of

breathing; the recipient of the new penis ultimatelyrejected it for psychological (not physiological)reasons.

The Frankenstein myth is still a powerful one,and science will never be an incorrigibly perfectsolution to all of our questions and dreams.

Technology and science will have to receive helpfrom marketing and communications at the edgeof what is promised.

» Will we just naturally evolve to crave more andmore extreme forms of bodily change?

» Where else can we expect to see scienceallowing us to create or re-engineer our ownface, body, skin and physique?

» More skingestibles which allow us to playsquash longer and faster, run marathonswithout hitting the wall, or help our looksrecover from the after-effects of a long night’sindulgence?

» What will be the lasting effects of the Dove

campaign and its Pro-Ageing stance: that weshould worry less about Mother Nature andenjoy ourselves as we are (with especialreference to the self-image of teenage girls)?

Perfecting the Details

What's It About?

From the trivial to the fantastical, science is solvingproblems we didn’t even know we had.

What We've SeenThe gap between science fiction and science factis shrinking by the minute. From humanoid robotsto invisibility cloaks to emotionally responsive T-

shirts, the line between what we conceive andwhat can be achieved is blurring.

But amid those grand endeavours, hard sciencehas been increasingly used to improve the moremundane aspects of our lives – to build us theperfectly balanced nutrition bar or the toaster that

never burns our bread. And as the limits of whathuman intelligence can achieve seem to extendever outwards, consumers are coming to expect

smarter versions of everything from thermostats totyres. We may be so spoiled by science that it’sled to a sense of entitlement: If I can dream it, whycan’t I have it?

Manufacturers have been listening. Over the last

decade or so we’ve seen an explosion of ‘smart’consumer technologies that utilise everything frombrainwaves to motion detection to biostatistics

to churn out a more perfect and personalisedalternative to our everyday goods.

The downside to all this innovation is that

consumers have grown less patient when thingsdon’t work perfectly. Indeed, this mindset posesboth an opportunity and a threat for marketers:

Consumers are hungrier for innovation than ever




www.mintel.com

before – but they have no appetite for that which

doesn’t meet their expectations.

What’s more, as we surrender ourselves to

technology we don’t necessarily understand, or

whose long-term impact isn’t fully known (Botox,anyone?), we may find the negative repercussions

rear their head when it's already too late.

Specifics

Today’s fantasy is tomorrow’s reality.

» Face transplants saw Isabelle Dinoire actingas guinea pig for the procedure, but werepredicted and presaged by the movie Face Off .

» Researchers at Carnegie Mellon Universitydeveloped voice recognition software that

translates facial movements into words,relayed by a synthetic voice in the newlanguage. The inspiration? Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy ’s Babel Fish.

» New 'metamaterials' demonstrate that if an

object can be hidden from microwaves, it canbe hidden from radar. Scientists believe thatthis technology might be able to envelope and

conceal a plane or tank, just likeHarry Potter

’sinvisibility cloak.

But intrepid innovation is affecting consumers onthe ‘ground level’ too.

Scientists have been tinkering with foodstuff foryears, leading to the explosion in functional foodsin the latter half of the 2000s, as well as some

pretty innovative solutions to finding the perfecttexture, consistency or temperature.

» In 2006 Lion Quality Eggs developed a heat-sensitive ink that turns black once an egg has

reached the preferred soft, medium or hard-boiled consistency.

» In 2007, food scientists at Texas A&MUniversity announced they’d created the

perfect beef jerky with a completely uniform

consistency, described by thrillist.com as the

“Unified Theory of Meat available by the ½- pound bag” .

» More recently, scientists at Top Institute Food

and Nutrition in the Netherlands developed a“smart salt distribution” technology that does

not require the addition of sodium substitutes,taste or aroma additives. It works by blendinga high salt fraction with a low salt fraction,creating different layers with different salt

content.

But it’s not enough for innovation to perfect – it alsohas to personalise. And what better than our ownbiology to find the perfect fit?

» GenePartner is a Swiss company that pairs

potential partners according to complementarygenetic make-ups.

» In Japan, blood type is used as a factorin match making as well as the formulationof products such as Okuda Pharmaceutical's

AB&O shampoo and conditioner (see 'Are You My Type?' ).

» MP3 player BODiBeat syncs up with a person's

heart rate to provide the appropriate music fortheir workout.

Speaking of our bodies, plastic surgery has

simultaneously gone mass – as in, accessible tothe masses – and niche – as in, tending to the mostminor minutia of our bodies.

» According to our Cosmetic Surgery UK June2010 report, 48% of adults would like to havecosmetic surgery. And it’s not just women:the number of British men who’ve undergone

cosmetic surgery increased by more than aquarter between April 2008 and April 2009 (see'Malleable Males' ).

» Nips and tucks are for kids too: Accordingto the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic

Surgery, 160,283 children aged 18 and under




www.mintel.com

had cosmetic surgery in 2008 (see 'Plastic Surgery for Kids…Even in a Recession? ').

» Meanwhile, the procedures are getting morebizarre: The Cinderella Procedure trims toes

that hang over the edge of sandals while theFoot-Tuck Fat Pad Augmentation injects fat into

the balls of the feet in order to provide extracushioning (see 'Designing the Perfect Foot' ).

That said, consumers aren’t entirely willing to trusttheir bodies or their dollars to science, nor dothey believe that scientific claims are always as

legitimate as they seem.

» Our Cosmetic Surgery UK June 2010 report

found that 18% don’t have surgery becausethey believe it won’t last forever.

» 72% of U.S. consumers say they want a label

to tell them exactly how the product achieves aclaim like “lowers cholesterol”, according to ourThe Influence of Labels on Consumer ChoiceU.S. May 2010 report.

The takeaway: Science drives innovation, but

proof drives sales.

The even darker side of ‘science as salvation’ is

the fact that we don’t always understand or trustwhat we’re getting ourselves into.

» Our Technology – Who is in Control? UK

August 2008 report showed that 27% felt“overwhelmed by the speed of new thingscoming to market” while 25% weren’t convincedthat manufacturers were spending enough time

testing new technology.

As Carl Sagan lamented: “We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology,in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology.”

Will a lazy trust in science instead of ourselvesto solve physical, emotional and social problems

become damaging – and eventually lead to a

backlash?

Implications

How many more everyday aspects of our life can

science help us (re)solve? The opportunities areessentially infinite. Consumer patience, far lessso.

Start by listening. What do consumers want to seeimproved? What daily irritants could be remedied

via innovation or new technology? Check out siteslike Consumerist or even mine Amazon reviewsto get a feel for consumer frustrations. Identify theneed then go from there.

Rife for improvement: the ‘necessary evils’category, like scrubbing the toilet or waking up to a

buzzing alarm clock. Instead of trying to re-inventthe wheel, brands can focus on torquing the mostirritating element of these tasks.

All perfection is personal. Consumers willincreasingly come to expect not just the best, but

the best for me . This suggests that the marketfor products, services or regimens customisedaround an individual’s unique emotional or

physical needs will only grow.

Finally, it’s worth remembering that every trend

has a counter trend, and in this case, the madpursuit of bigger, faster, stronger, better maywell result in a burnout. We may start to seeconsumers reject ‘golden bullet’ solutions that

negate personal responsibility, such as gastricband surgery, leading to a resurgence in natural,traditional or old-fashioned products, services and

solutions to our problems.




www.mintel.com

Cult of the Celebrity

What's It About?

Creative, if not necessarily talented, consumers

can attain attention like never before.

What We've Seen

In the wake of reality television, YouTube, Twitter,

MySpace and all the other platforms amateurs canuse to attract an audience, it sometimes seemslike celebrity has become so ubiquitous it no

longer has meaning.

Whether or not self-manufactured fame is

legitimate is beside the point. The moreprovocative issue is the way consumers areaspiring not only to get the public’s attention, but

to cash in on it.

In other words, fame is not necessarily seen as an

end in itself. Even those who are ‘famous just forbeing famous’ tend to parlay their fame into otherventures rather than simply basking in it – thinkParis Hilton’s footwear and perfume lines; Katie

Price (aka Jordan)’s novels and albums.

Perhaps more attractive than fame, then, is theprospect of building a ‘personal brand’ à la MarthaStewart or Donald Trump. The notion that an

individual can have the same commercial equity

as Nike is not necessarily new – indeed, bothTrump and Stewart have been in the businessworld for decades. But where Trump and Stewartbuilt their empires first, personas second, the next

generation of personal branders tend to look at itthe other way around: build the identity first (Heylook at me! I’m interesting and have something to

say!); the business ventures second.

Do the majority of consumers aspire to celebrity?

No. Are a significant proportion of those whodo likely to attain it? Absolutely not. But thistrend isn’t about celebrities (or pseudo-celebrities)themselves. It’s about the nature of image and

influence: who earns it, who controls it – and what

it means for brands.

Specifics

Decades into the dawn of reality television, theconcept remains supremely popular, constantlyreformatted and repackaged in new guises – from

The Hills to I’m a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here! toJersey Shore to X-Factor – much to the chagrin ofthose who predicted its demise. But television isfar from the only platform for attention. The internet

provides an even more accessible stage for self-promotion.

# Our Media Consumption Amongst Over-55s UKAugust 2010 report noted that 47% of adults watchreality TV, rising to 63% of 16-24s.

# Our Digital Entertainment: Streaming Video U.S.January 2010 report shows that 29% of adults

with a PC have viewed “user-generated (amateur)videos, such as those posted on youtube.com” inthe past month.

While reality TV was originally grounded primarilyin exhibitionism, it’s now more closely tied with

career aspiration. America's Next Top Model hasa job at the end of each season. The stars of

The Real Housewives series use the limelight todraw attention to their business endeavours, from

albums to skincare lines to parenting books.

http://www.youtube.com/

http://www.youtube.com/



Documents

Beauty_and_the_Barbie