Supermarket Sweep Tesco Value Milk Chocolate V's Tesco Finest Milk Chocolate

The aim of Supermarket Sweep was to buy two of the same products from different ranges, value and finest. The aim was to then analyse the products using semiotic analysis and finding the social differences that are created from them. I chose Chocolate.

TESCO VALUE MILK CHOCOLATE
The cost of this product was just 30p for a 100g bar. This would be attractive to younger buyers as the quantity of the chocolate for the price would make them think they are getting a bargain.



– PACKAGING
The packaging of this product is very plain and simple. It has limited colouring (blue and white) and Cleary shows that it is a cheaper product, by the large labelling of the ‘Tesco Value’ logo. The description of the bar being just ‘milk chocolate’. The wrapping is quite thin and shiny with a large image of the chocolate on the front. This is a good plus point as shoppers can see the product that they are buying. Another plus point to the packaging being plain and simple is that the GDA (guideline daily amount) is easy to see for people who like to see the amounts of calories etc that they are eating.



The back of the packaging again is quite plain and simple just informing the consumers of the product with the nutrition of the chocolate, allergy advice and suitability for vegetarians. A good thing about this chocolate is the fact that it is suitable for vegetarians and the lesser packaging is good for the environment. The packaging has only 1 layer and is easy to open and as it is foiled it keeps the chocolate fresh.


-LOOK OF CHOCOLATE

The look of the chocolate again emphasises the ‘cheapness’ as although the chocolate is shiny and look appetising, the mould and shape of the chocolate is quite plain and simple. The shape is a scalloped effect which defines the 10 sections of chocolate. As a pattern on top of the chocolate it is again very simple with 4 indented horizontal lines. The chocolate itself however, is quite thick and chunky.

-SMELL
The smell of the chocolate is quite bitter, sour and almost smells of plastic, not very appetising and off putting.

-TASTE
The texture of the chocolate is quite soft and creamy. However, it kind of left a bitter, stale after taste that wasn’t very pleasant. The price of the chocolate defiantly was reflected in the lack of quality and taste of the chocolate. After trying half a square, I would imagine that a whole bar would be extremely sickly.
After giving some chocolate to family members a couple were:


"It’s horrible, it leaves a nasty after taste”
“It’s rank, tasteless and is poor quality. Not even worth 30p”
However, one member had a different opinion and described it as:
"it’s sweet. I like it”
The calories for this bar were quite high, being 130 calories per quarter, as were the fat and sugar being 7.9g (fat) and 12.7g (sugar). The saturated fat was 3.9g.


TESCO FINEST MILK CHOCOLATE
The cost of this product was £1.29 for 100g bar. This would be attractive to chocolate lovers who don’t mind paying a bit more for a good quality bar of chocolate.


-PACKAGING

The packaging of this product looks more expensive as it is classier looking with the colour scheme blue, black and silver. However, again it is still not very colourful to stand out against other chocolate bars to buyers. The logo of the bar is ‘Tesco Finest’ and is described as ‘Organic Ecuadorian 39% milk chocolate’ and on the front it also claims to be creamy and smooth, so that the buyers know what to expect. The packaging is a nice quality thick glossy paper with an image of someone holding coco bean plants. This portrays the image of quality chocolate and higher coco content. The front packaging also has a ‘Which Best Buy’ logo for Organic/Fairtrade Milk Chocolate March 2010, as well as the fairtrade logo itself. The fact that the chocolate is branded as fairtrade would attract buyers as it makes them feel that they are helping a cause at the same as indulging themselves with a bar of chocolate. The GDA is also shown on the front of the packaging; however, it is smaller and less obvious to see. The back of packaging is more detailed and has a blurb explaining about fair trade and how it works in Ecuadorian farms, as well ‘tasting notes’.

“Our chocolatiers have created this recipe using single origin Ecuadorian Arriba beans with characteristically sweet taste which develops into a smooth, fruity, flowery flavour”

It also shows the basic nutrition, ingredients and allergy advice and again the fact that it is suitable for vegetarians.
The packaging is doubled layered, with the chocolate itself being wrapped in a shiny foil wrapping for freshness. This in itself shows that the chocolate is higher quality, but also adds itself to the cost and how muc consumers pay.




-LOOK OF THE CHOCOLATE






The chocolate looks quite posh and is less shiny ‘plastic’ looking and looks more smooth and creamy making it more desirable. The chocolate is divided into smaller pieces, which is a plus point if you are sharing the bar. Each section is stamped with an image of a coca bean which mirrors the image on the external packaging and again creating the illusion of better quality. The chocolate is again thick and chunky but is a flat surface.

-SMELL
The smell of the chocolate is quite rich and gives off a strong aroma of cocoa, which is very mouth-watering and tempting.

-TASTE
The texture of the chocolate is creamy and smooth, however the smell of the chocolate smells nothing like it tastes. The taste of the chocolate is very strong and almost tasted like it had alcohol in it, due to the high content of cocoa however, this could be desirable to some consumers who may like the richer taste or even like dark chocolate. The price of the product is reflected in the packaging and even smell, however the taste is quite selective as shown is some family comments:

“Too strong taste. Too much like Dark chocolate”
“Really nice, it’ nice quality and a good price. I’d eat the whole bar”
“Err horrible. Tastes like alcohol”
The calories for this bar were 115 per 6 chunks, fat was 7.5g and sugar 8.1g. The saturated fat was 4.4g.


-COMPARRISON
In comparison, the Value chocolate was good for its price as there was a lot of chocolate and would appeal to a different kind of consumer, compared to the higher quality, higher priced, finest bar which was also good for its price for the quality of chocolate, but was quite an acquired taste. In terms of packaging the finest bar would be more wanted as it looks a better quality, which is empathised through the ‘which best buy’ and ‘fairtrade’ logo. The 30p Tesco value chocolate bars however, maybe suffice for those who just want to cheaply settle their sweet tooth craving. Also in comparison the finest bar had fewer calories than the value chocolate, however, the value chocolate was less in saturated fat.
Buying a value bar of chocolate compared to a finest bar of chocolate, could also show a difference in class, as the 'value' range could be shown as a class of foods that people buy if they are poor, compared to those who can splash out on more for finest food products.
As a personal opinion I would buy neither bar again as I didn’t like the taste of either. I would stick to a well known and widely advertised bar that I know I like such as Cadbury. For me, it’s not about the price of the packaging; it’s all about the taste!


YAY CADBURY!!

These are my own personal opinions on the products :)

Avon Representative!

Just thought I would share that I have recently become an Avon Rep. Its a really easy way of making a little bit of money. The good thing about it is that you can do it in your spare time, deliver books when you have a free half hour.
You work on commission, which is 20% and this goes up to 25% on orders over £148. My first campaign went really well, collecting an order of around £270! Was very happy!

Feminism, Femininity, and the "Beauty" Dilemma

As one of my favourite topics within the media course is gender (partically post-feminism and feminism) I enjoy watching the ITV program Loose Women. This is a lunchtime type of chat show where four women talk about a range of issues such as daily topics that arise in the media, sexism and interview a wide range of celebrities.
One particular episode which caught my attention, was on the topic 'How Much Pain Would You Endure For Beauty?' (May 10th 2010). This caught my eye, as I have previously looked at how much women change themselves for the view of men. This linking to the theorist Laura Mulvey. I have also looked at how men barely do anything for the view of women in comparrison, linking to the theorsist Susan Brownmiller. Along with having a keen interest in beauty it got me thinking how much I actually do myself to be part of the society and view of how women are 'meant' to look.



After watching this and doing some reading about on the topic, I came across and article by Steve Craig, from the University of North Texas called;
Feminism, Femininity, and the "Beauty" Dilemma: How Advertising Co-opted the Women's Movement
where he opened the article with an apt quote from Susan Brownmillar.

"As a matter of principle I stopped shaving my legs and under my arms several years ago . . . but I look at my legs and know they are no longer attractive, not even to me. . . . To ease my dilemma, in the summertime I bleach my leg hair to a golden fuzz, a compromise that enables me to avoid looking peculiar at the beach. Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only woman in the world who puts color into the hair on her head while she takes color out of the hair on her legs in order to appear feminine enough for convention."

Susan Brownmiller's experience summarizes the dilemma that many feminists in the 1970s faced when they were forced to confront the conflict between a feminist ideology that rejected sexual objectification and the deeply- ingrained American cultural definition of femininity denoted as a particular kind of commercialized feminine beauty. This paper explores that dilemma and how it was exploited by the beauty industry to turn feminism to its own commercial ends.

To read more click the link below.

http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/fashion/The-Beauty-Dilemma.html

How the familiar star/celebrity persona can be perpetuated or reconstructed within advertising

Here is a sample of an assignment I have done, looking at stars and how they are either perpetuated or reconstructed within advertising. I decided to also combine the difference in the types of products advertised, as well as the binary opposition presented of two different types of masculinity. The essay showed the advertising differences of two sport stars: Wayne Rooney vs. David Beckham.

Wayne Rooney is an English football player who plays for Manchester United. In the past couple of years his popularity has grown and due to this, so has is use in advertisements. However, because Rooney represents a certain type of male; the masculine hegemonic male, his use in advertisements seems to be limited to just sport related and hence, Rooney’s talent is the main selling point of the products. This is important to not only audiences who have certain expectations of him, but for Rooney himself who’s image he wants to portray is the ultimate powerful male on and off screen, on the pitch and in advertisements. Rooney has a “stylised repetition of acts” (Butler in Fuss, 1991, p140)
His star image is seen as stereotypically masculine because of his rugged look, beard, very hairy torso and tattoos, but also his masculine, almost ill mannered way in which he speaks.
“Masculinity is produced in actions and signs which connote ways of performing powerfully” (Macdonald, 1997, p283)



The first example is of Wayne Rooney advertising ‘Nike’ notably the sponsor of his team Manchester United for the promotion of the Euro cup 2008 (Web –reference 1).
On the pitch Rooney is known to be brutal and forceful and so this image plays on that, standing out to audiences as quite a savage picture. Rooney is featured sodden in a blood-red paint contrasting to the white of the background and white of his skin, portraying the England flag. Rooney’s expression is a big part of the advertisement, his screaming war cry and tightly clenched fists shows the emotion he holds for football. This pose also resembles Wayne Rooney’s celebration goal gesture that he shows on the pitch, again using repetition of the familiar.
This image also cries masculinity as not only is he promoting what is seen as a masculine brand related to sport, he is also topless and isn’t afraid to get dirty. His persona in this advertisement is shown as being aggressive, which can be related to his persona on the pitch (repetitive stardom), but also passionate about his job.
“Men are usually shown as being dominant, active, aggressive and authoritive” (Strinati, 2000, p184)

However, although Rooney himself is almost promoted as the saviour of England’s World Cup campaign, the image caused a lot of controversy. The image was condemned as:

“'offensive', 'exploitative' and 'tacky' by MPs and church groups” (daily mail, 2006)
The image was seen as being religiously offensive, as Rooney is stood in a Christ-like pose and therefore brought resemblance to crucifixion.
“Labour MP Stephen Pound said the advert was truly horrible.”
“This is such a horrible image and is so horribly war-like that it can only be described as Nike being crass, offensive and insensitive as they try to hitch poor old Rooney to their commercial band-wagon.”(Daily Mail, 2006)

Nike however, stressed that the image was not meant to cause offence. This type of miss-interpretation of the image could have caused great harm to Rooney’s star persona and cause fame damage, as these mistakes get as much attention as their celebrity status.
“Negative discourses- from failure, death, mental illness and notoriety, to ‘hate’ for celebrities” (Holmes, Redmond, 2006, p287)
This shows how being controlled by media industries can affect how a star is being portrayed. However, within this advertisement Rooney was seen as the victim, as MP Stephen Pound suggested “hitch poor old Rooney to their commercial band-wagon”.

David Beckham is an English footballer who currently plays for Milan and was one of the most popular soccer stars in the late 1990s and the early 2000’s. However, in contrast to Wayne Rooney, as Beckham proposes the metro-sexuality male who takes more care, time and money on his lifestyle and his appearance. This type of male challenges a theory put forward by Brownmiller (1974):

“The truth is men have barely tampered with their bodies at all, historically, to make themselves more appealing to women under the masculine theory that real men do not trick themselves out to be pleasing (they have better ways to prove their self-worth)” (Brownmiller, 1974, cited in Tyler, 2003, p8)

With his good looks, higher pitch more effeminate voice, different hairstyles, such as using a stereotypically girly hair band, wearing nail varnish, his different and ever changing fashion and most notably his sarong wearing stage (web-reference 5), Beckham has become a global lifestyle icon.

“Beckham is the über-metrosexual, because he is a sportsman, a man of substance--a "real" man--who wishes to disappear into surfaceness in order to become ubiquitous--to become media. Becks is The One, and better looking than Keanu--but, be warned, he's working for the Matrix” (Mark Simpson, independent, 1994)
Not only does Beckham advertise his own brand of clothes and fragrances (worth millions) making himself a brand name he also endorsed other brands such as Pepsi, Adidas, Brylcream, Armani, Vodaphone (his voice was used in vodaphones voicemail), sharpie markers, Gillette and Marks and Spencer. This shows that Beckham’s use in advertisements goes beyond the football and how he is used to promote products and create large profits for media industries.

“Celebrities are brand names as well as cultural icons or identities; they operate as marketing tools as well as sites where the agency of the audience is clearly evident; and they represent the achievement of individualism- the triumph of the human and the familiar- as well as its commodfication and commercialisations (2000, p13)


The first example is of David Beckham posing for Emporio Armani underwear.

As soon as this advertisement aired Emporio Armani’s profits immediately rose by 15% (Web- reference 6) This advertisement will not only win Beckham fans, women and men arguing that Beckham is put in Laura Mulvey’s ‘Male Gaze’ but also challenging it as women are looking at him ‘Female Gaze’, but also he knows he is being looked at, but also gives men a false hope and ideology that buying these underwear (consumerism) will not only make them look as good as he does, but also get them a woman as attractive as Victoria Beckham. Beckham within this advertisement has become so popular and well-known; he has become the face of Armani.
Although in comparison to Rooney, Beckham is seen as the metro-sexuality male, this picture of his ripped, tattooed body, groomed but masculine hair style and stubble shows otherwise. The fact the picture is also in black and white, gives the image a more bachelor feel to it, making it quite masculine. The image also shows a great deal about Beckham, it shows that he is happy with his sexuality and type of masculinity and isn’t afraid to pose in skimpy underwear, a shot you wouldn’t see Wayne Rooney doing as he would be afraid of how he is portrayed. However, this image also caused controversy and wasn’t seen as a bid to show Beckham being comfortable with his type of masculinity:

"It demeans him, and it demeans soccer. What it's saying to children is that talent is not enough, you also have to sell your body, and sell it in a sexual way” (Michelle Elliot, 2007)

David Beckham represents a notion of modern masculinity and although it is different from the type of masculinity Rooney shows, Beckham’s fans are always behind him and continue to support and admire him through many of his metro-sexuality acts.
"I'm sure they will once again rise to the challenge of defending David Beckham's fearless championing of England's masculinity." (Mark Perriman, 2007)


In conclusion it is apparent that celebrity star personas are perpetuated through the different types of advertising. In the case of Wayne Rooney, his masculinity is also maintained throughout his endorsements and his advertisements are limited to his ‘talent’ all about him being on the field. As with David Beckham his celebrity star persona and metro-sexuality is not perpetuated as much as he is a global lifestyle icon and has a variety of endorsements, portraying him in a range of different ways in order to make the product sellable to a wide range of audiences.


Within the Media studies course I really enjoy analysing film/advertising etc from the gender view. I love looking into post feminist and feminist views i.e Laura Mulveys 'Male Gaze'. During this particular assignment, I also really became interested in looking at the male gender view and also the 'other' or metro sexuality. I also went on to look into 'metro-sexuality' Hegemonic male vs. Effeminate male (The other) the notion of the 'other' in an assignment focussing on a personal favourite figure of mine Gok Wan.


Gok Wan himself imposes a binary opposition. Gok is not seen as a Hegemonic male as he is not white and he is also gay. Gok shows feminine behaviour by knowing all about fashion, working to style women and enjoying shopping. He also calls himself ‘Aunty Gok’ implying that he knows he’s feminine and plays up to this. However, Gok seems to have his foot in both camps as although he has feminine traits, he still dresses as a hegemonic male which eliminates this binary. Gok’s most known style is his suit. A suit is generally related to a hegemonic male, who is powerful and of high status however, Gok sometimes feminizes his look by wearing a low cut t-shirt underneath. The colours of his suits are also mostly black, which is quite a boring and miserable colour and is not normally related to a gay or camp male. Lots of colour and drama is normally the stereotypical view of a homosexual male.
Through Gok Wans series of ‘How to look good naked’ it is shown that women accept to be told what to wear, be touched and helped get dressed by Gok as he is gay and so it is seen acceptable and not in a sexual way. However, if it was a heterosexual male this would be seen as unacceptable and for the pleasure of the male, constructing a clear binary between them.