Critical Autonomy

CenturyLink ad

Alltel ad

After watching these ads and analyzing the accompanying deconstructions, I have to say that I agree with them for the most part. In both the CenturyLink and Alltel ads, we see mostly middle-class individuals, nicely dressed, in fancy office buildings in large cities or suburban areas with attractive homes. The folks that fall into this category and have achieved these sorts of status levels are clearly the targeted audience. In the CenturyLink ad, the message that the viewer is supposed to take away is that by using their products and services, everyone of various ethnicities from different places all around the world can easily stay connected, therefore simplifying your life. However, what is being portrayed is that as long as you live in an urban or suburban area you can use these services, but no rural areas are ever shown in this ad. And for good reason, considering CenturyLink's history of less than desirable service in such states as Kentucky and West Virginia, where a large portion of the population lives in a rural setting. It is evident to me that this company is more concerned with profitability and marketing to potential new customers than with the satisfaction of their existing customers. In the Alltel ad, the text is that if you use any other cell phone carrier except Alltel, you will be unable to afford it and have to resort to putting up renters in your home for extra income. But with Alltel, you can kick those dancing ethnic men with their loud instruments and pet chicken to the curb. The subtext portrays these dancing men (meant to represent immigrants) as lower class citizens who are not well-off like the white suburban family, so they can't afford things like cell phone plans or even their own room in an apartment. I believe this ad does contain elements of racism.

I came across this ad for Daddy's Money shoes on the Media Literacy Project website (medialiteracyproject.org). What is being shown are three happy teenage girls, who are excited about their vibrantly-colored new shoes that they clearly purchased using their father's earnings. They don't have a care in the world, and if you use "Daddy's money" to buy yourself a pair, you can be happy and fashionable too. The bright colors and animal print used as the backdrop for the ad represent youth and style. The dollar sign in place of the "S" is just another way to show the reader that they can achieve this look with a little pocket change from Dad. What the ad fails to mention is just how much of Daddy's money will be needed to purchase a pair of these shoes. This implies that daddy's little girl can have anything she wants from her father, regardless of the price, and that she isn't expected to do anything to earn these shoes for herself. This also implies that men are the ones going to work, not women, as the company doesn't mention anything about mothers purchasing these shoes for their children. The girls featured in this ad are white, thin, scantily-clad, with dark hair, flawless skin, and long tan legs. The target audience of this ad are teenage girls, and the message being sent to them is that they are entitled to the money their fathers work for, and they should spend that money on a pair of these very ugly fashionable shoes. I had a strong reaction to this ad, because I feel that it's important to empower girls and teach them that they can be or do anything in the world that they wish. They do not need to rely on anyone else for things that they want. Ads like this are harmful to girls and young women in my opinion, because it teaches them that instead of working for something, they can just rely on their looks or the fact that they are female to obtain things from males.