Nip Tuck: Perfect Bodies over Fabulous Clothing

Last Tuesday night as I sat rummaging through my unread stacks of Glamour, Cosmopolitan, Self and Elle, a spring break issue of Los Angeles Confidential I had grabbed during a trip to Beverly Hills caught my eye. As I paged through the lesser-known magazine, I stumbled across a profile on one of my favorite designers: Alber Elbaz of Lanvin.

With his flowing, silk organza gowns, white linen pants and adorable ballet flats regulars on international runways, I immediately sat down to hear what he had to say, not about fashion, but about the female figure and it’s new direction.

Elbaz spoke about his experiences with models, high profile clients and the immerging difficulty with tighter, thinner, more sculpted physiques replacing real bodies.

“If you can get a boob job, back scoop, leg enhancement and butt lift, why would you want to be covering it up in thousands of dollars of designer clothing,” Elbaz said. “If you look perfect and spend an incredible amount of money getting there, you want to show off your best new accessories.”

Heidi Montage could be a prime example. After having 10 plastic surgery procedures in one day, the reality starlet found her new body was hard to dress in designer duds.

“I design for real women,” Elbaz said. “The ‘ideal body’ that’s trending in Hollywood today doesn’t look feminine and beautiful in my clothing.”

The fashion world is as extensive and unique as its intricate designs and quirky designers. Is it possible that iconic trendsetters like Karl Lagerfeld, Monique lhuillier, Christopher Bailey and Alber Elbaz will be replaced by high profile plastic surgeons in Los Angeles suburbs?

Learning to love your body is harder and harder these days. The title “role model” comes at a hefty price when the girl next door decides to get a lip plumping procedure and boob lift at age 23. At this point, who’s real and who isn’t? Will “perfect bodies” replace one-of-a-kind fashion?

Sex Sells: The Profiling of Female Athletes in Advertising

Gorgeous women raise sales in almost any arena of advertising, from runways and cosmetics to cars and trips to white sand beaches. A beautiful body brings in money.

New York Times writer James Vlahos exposes the overzealous hand of advertising in relation to female athletes in his article, Raising Her Profile By Showing Some Skin.

You may not have heard of Italian born Roberta Mancino, but try searching her on YouTube and you will be astonished.

Mancino is a professional skydiver. After her morning coffee run on a typical Monday, she heads to her office, which means jumping off sky-high cliff ridges and mountain tops.

Not only does Mancino have an appetite for a thrilling career, she is also a model. Armed with gorgeous gams and toned limbs from her hours of weekly training preparing for her dives, Mancano has perfected her body to succeed as an athlete as well as a fashion muse.

Yet although her double-trouble job combination may seem perfect to some, Mancino feels differently.

“I never wanted to be a model, it’s just a way to make money,” Mancino said when asked about her new role in the modeling industry.

Female athletes all over the world are struggling with the catch-22 of going pro: getting their dream job, but sacrificing financial success.

By now you may be thinking this is a false statement, “Wait, but female athletes make a lot of money.” They do, but it’s all from endorsement deals with clothing lines, sport specific gear distributors and magazine covers. Virtually none of the money they bring in is from that dream job.

Mancino is experiencing the downside of profiling her body in the advertising world. Last year she was a guest on Conon O’Brien after garnering the World’s Sexiest title from Men’s Fitness Magazine.

As she sat down to talk with O’Brien, he immediately cracked a joke, “I have dreams of you jumping out of an airplane naked.”

He managed to mesh her career with her sex appeal, causing some feminists to react in disappointment.

Mancino isn’t the only female forced to rely on endorsement deals to find financial success in their arenas. Halfpipe snowboarder Gretchen Bleiler and Alpine Skier Julia Mancuso have long struggled to bring recognition to predominately male-dominated sports, and when they do, it often means shedding their long underwear for a sexy swimsuit.

Women deserve the same athletic recognition men receive in the world of professional sports. Why is it that a woman’s body is synonymous with her success?

Move over Netflix, There’s a New Guy in Town

Warner Brothers made a bold move Wednesday in the social media world by becoming the first major media company to make a film available on Facebook.

New York Times authors Miguel Helft and Brooks Barnes report on the media giant’s big move in their article, Warner Tests Renting Film on Facebook for Web Cash.

Helft and Barnes speculate that Netflix and iTunes will soon feel financial heat from Hollywood, as big business cashes in on the social media phenomenon.

For their big Facebook debut, Warner Brothers chose no other than their blockbuster flick, The Dark Night, staring Heath Ledger. For the equivalent of three dollars, Facebookers can now purchase the film using Facebook’s currency called Credits.

Analysts are already seeing Warner Brother’s investment as a threat to movie mail giant Netflix. With Facebook Credits already proven successful through virtual goods on games like FarmVille, according to investors Netflix needs to hit the drawing board if they plan to be a competitor in the future movie market.

Alex Rampell, who works as a chief executive for TrialPay, an advertising company that offers Facebook Credits for its customers, said he felt like the addition of pay wall movies on Facebook was a logical and intelligent move for the social media site.

Although investors say it is too early to determine if Facebook has what takes to move to the top of online movie viewing, given the buzz surrounding the partnership between Warner Brothers and Facebook, do you think social media sites can stay afloat among the likes of iTunes and Netflix?

How do you feel about social media’s move into the entertainment industry?

Competition Between Social Media Outlets: #Twitter or #Blogging?

As a newcomer to the blogging world, creating my personal brand site was both exciting and daunting. I had things to say, so establishing my voice on a blog seemed like the next logical step.

Easier said than done.

I spent weeks petitioning family members and friends to check out my new blog and write comments to get my social media ball rolling. Yet after my fourth post my comments tab was still bare. What was I doing wrong?

As I posted new pieces week after week, I began to tweet a link to my site hoping to generate conversation.

It worked.

It seemed my Twitter account had more credibility when it came to my thoughts and opinions. I felt as though my blog served to present my opinions in a more polished and professional light, where my Twitter account was a place to share random, lighthearted extensions of my life.  Yet it seemed I only mattered when I popped up on a Twitter feed.

New York Times author Verne Kopytoff addresses this very issue in his article titled,  Blogs Wane as the Young Drift to Sites Like Twitter.

“Blogs were once the outlet of choice for people who wanted to express themselves online,” Kopytoff writes. “But with the rise of sites like Facebook and Twitter, they are losing their allure for many people-particularly the younger generation.”

Young adults are becoming frustrated with the lack of traffic to their blogs. With the expectation that a blog post should be well thought out, sourced, attributed, and substantial, one as to wonder; are the time and resources dedicated to its production worthwhile?

Twitter undoubtedly is more efficient, easier, more public and less premeditated than a personal blog, but is the content enriching the lives of family, friends and the community?

It seems as though my relationship with my personal brand site has achieved a status of love-hate. While I may be committed to fueling my blogs long-term success, other aspiring journalists may not have the same verve.

Do you see the future of the blogging empire murky and uncertain? Do you think blogs have the staying power to compete with Twitter’s ease and popularity?

The Academy Awards: The New Power PR Player

As an avid movie watcher, I was especially pleased with the pack of star-studded flicks this year, many of which were fortunate enough to be nominated at the Academy Awards.

Yet the suspense seems to dwindle more and more each year, and it’s the fault of social media.

With speculation and leaked results flooding blog posts, Twitter accounts and Facebook statuses, where has the suspense gone?

Journalist Dani Garavelli addresses this very issue in his article, “Are the Oscars Losing their Stardust?“

Dani suggests that the Academy Awards are fueled by social media, and sites like Twitter and Facebook are the new PR imports of Hollywood, and with this new internet exposure, the spoiled surprises inevitably follow. 

Personal blogs, Twitter and Facebook accounts are the new outlets for brand building, and ultimately the sites that propel individuals to the theater. Word of mouth over the internet is the film industry’s best kept secret.

Dani writes, “The Oscars may still be the biggest gong show on Earth, but these days the eventual results owe as much to the gargantuan brand-building exercise that precedes them as to the individual performances.”

The dresses, jewelry, hair and hookups may be the highlight of red carpet conversations, but the real players behind the stars are the emerging empires of internet PR.

What’s your take on this new internet phenomenon in Hollywood? Will you still eagerly await the Academy Awards, or do you think awards season is losing its stardust?

American Soldiers and Communication: Is Staying in Touch a Bad Thing?

As I sat in bed paging through Thursday’s New York Times, an article titled, “Staying in Touch With Home, for Better or Worse” caught my eye.

Author James Dao exposes the Achilles heel of contemporary communication in the life of an American soldier.

As iPhones, Facebook, MySpace and Skype have made communication more accessible, this new availability has come with a hefty social price for American soldiers.

“There is a drawback,” Dao writes. “They can no longer tune out problems like faulty dishwashers and unpaid electric bills, wayward children and failing relationships, as they once could.”

While one marine texts his wife, “all is well” during a break from firing bullets against insurgents, another mentally escapes from his post in Iraq thinking about some difficult news from a buddy back home about his girl who was seen out and about with another guy.

However, social media has fueled positive communication for many overseas. Skype has allowed mothers and fathers to be a part of births, first birthday parties and everyday moments that may help soldiers get through the day-to-day grind.

Yet officers worry that soldiers may not have their heads in the game. Col. Chris Philbrick, director of the of the Army’s suicide prevention task force spoke about his stance on the new availability of communication,

“It’s powerful for good, but it can also be powerful for bad when you’re hearing near real-time about problems at home,” Philbrick said. ”It forces you to literally keep you head in two games at one time when your head should be in just one game, in Iraq or Afghanistan.”

In a war zone, how much communication can be considered “healthy” communication?

Dao profiles a young soldier, Chancellor Keesling. Keesling was having a tense conversation with his girlfriend back home, when in the heat of the moment they broke things off.

Moments after their conversation he shot himself. Half an hour later his girlfriend sent him an e-mail asking to make-up.

Although Keesing’s case may be considered an extreme example, do you think social media is fueling beneficial means of communication, or rather bringing more stress to war zones?

Social Media Influence Scores: Our Worth in “Likes” and Followers

I recently read an article in The Wall Street Journal that revealed the emerging glamour of social media. As it turns out, according to author Jessica Vascellaro, with enough Twitter followers and a devoted Facebook commenting crowd, you too can become the toast of the town overnight. Literally.

Vascellaro profiles 25-year-old account executive Katie Miller who took a trip to Las Vegas in November and tweeted about the extravagant town during her stay.

As it turned out, Miller had quite a Twitter following. After she returned home, Miller got an invitation to a lavish party on Manhattan’s West Side. Intrigued, Miller read on to find out she had been pegged by influence media company Klout, as a “high-level” influencer.

Apparently, while Miller tweeted during her Las Vegas trip about the trendy hotels and chic restaurants, her twitter followers were living every moment with her.

Every Twitter user has a Klout Score. A Klout Score measures your online influence. It ranges from 1 to 100, with the possibility of going higher if you have a stronger, broader online influence.

Reading Miller’s story prompted me to start taking Twitter and social media seriously. I mean, who can complain about being wined and dined at a $30,000 New York City soiree?

The next generation of strategic communicators needs to make room on their resumes for categories including blogs, Twitter accounts, LinkedIn profiles and Facebook pages.

As Vascellaro says, influence is now the word of the day. If you can bring to the table the ability to sway fellow consumers one way or another, you’re golden.

Singing Justin Bieber’s praises is not something you’ll find me doing often, however his greater-than-life celebrity persona has catapulted him to the top of the Klout spectrum. With an influence score of 100, he is the most notable individual who has reached such an elite level. Not even Lady Gaga or Barrack Obama can touch him.

However, it didn’t take long for competition to plague the path of the Kout Score. Vascellaro reports that individuals have adopted a new method of achieving Twitter stardom. This new practice, cleverly coined, “the one-night stand”, works to quickly boost Klout Scores.  

By following a large number of tweeters on Twitter, a one-night stander hopes that those he follows will return the favor, thus boosting his Klout score overnight.

To all you tweeters out there, do you value your level of influence on others? How do you feel about  social media’s new direction? Are any of you guilty of a Twitter one-night stand?

Article: Check out the Wall Street Journal article: http://on.wsj.com/hC3uh7

Klout Score: http://klout.com/kscore

WikiLeaks: Knowledge is Power

Yesterday I attended a WikiLeaks event here at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Three prominent figures on our campus:  Anne McClintock (English), Lew Friedland (Journalism and Mass Communication), and Rob Glenn Howard (Communication Arts) debated the tangled legal situation WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange finds himself in after 28-year-old United States soldier Bradley Manning posted classified documents to the site revealing US military war crimes.

Manning, now a victim of the United States’ new method of achieving a confession, touchless torture, finds himself in a white room, no windows, a bed and two blankets. The lights are always on. He is not allowed to exercise for 23 hours of the day, save for a small amount of time each day where he walks in figure eights. He is prohibited from doing push ups in his cell and is checked on every five minutes by a guard.

McClintock labeled Assange and Wikileaks as a “dropbox of information”. She felt that the site served as medium between the individual who submits information and news outlets. Assange did not expose anyone, that was left to ex-hacker Adrien Lamo, the individual whom Bradley confided in for his decision to expose the government’s war crimes.

Now it seems everyone is cashing in on the WikiLeaks debacle. The organization’s top defector,  Daniel Domscheit-Berg, has written a revealing novel about Assange and the supposed wrong doing of keeping such powerful secrets.

American is built upon our right to due process. Yet this is exactly what Manning is being denied. Yes, he broke the military’s code of conduct by releasing classified documents to an outside source that then made the information available to The New York Times. Yet he was acting by his conscience, the very idea of which is ingrained into the framework of our democracy.  The documents Manning came across were available to 500,000 people. Is that what our government considers classified? Manning saw immorality and blatant war crimes against humanity. What he saw was not what he had signed up for. Instead taking the weight of this horrible truth upon his own shoulders he did something about it, and now we deny him the most basic American right, due process of law.

What would you do? Follow your conscience or follow your orders? Do you think investigative journalism overstepped its jurisdiction in this case?

Check out this article for a bit of background information

http://bit.ly/ddNoMr