Plus Size Beauty: Lane Bryant’s Lingerie Commercial
Three weeks ago, the popular plus-size clothing designer Lane Bryant published a blog post in respond to ABC & Fox’s decisions to restrict airtime for Cacique, a new lingerie line. The controversy began 
when ABC took a stance against airing the commercial during Dancing with the Stars and when Fox demanded extensive editing before the network reluctantly agreed to show the ad.
According to Lane Bryant’s blog:
ABC refused to show the commercial during “Dancing with the Stars” without restricting our airtime to the final moments of the show. Fox demanded excessive re-edits and rebuffed it three times before relenting to air it during the final 10 minutes of “American Idol,” but only after we threatened to pull the ad buy.
Yes, these are the same networks that have scantily-clad housewives so desperate they seduce every man on the block, and don’t forget Bart Simpson, who has shown us the moon more often than NASA, all during what they call “prime time.”
Even though Fox & ABC regularly air Victoria’s Secret commercials, the networks proclaimed that Lane Bryant’s model, 22 year old and size 16 Ashley Graham, was showing too much cleavage.
[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]
[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]
The news of this “banned” commercial sparked uproar in communities of women of all sizes. Browsing comments sections and articles in popular blogs, I saw that many women described the Lane Bryant commercial with words such as “sultry” and “sophisticated.” The words used to describe comparable Victoria’s Secret commercials weren’t at all the same with words like “prancing” and “leaving little to the imagination.”
At first, I was skeptical of the whole controversy. That’s my natural instinct, to try to take a step back and avoid forming judgments since it’s impossible to know everything about the entire story. Then I look a look at the Lane Bryant ad and the Victoria’s Secret ad and was a little surprised.
As a consumer, from an economical and psychological standpoint, I think that the Lane Bryant ad is a better selling tool. Honestly, the Victoria’s Secret commercial freaks me out a bit. I’m a huge fan of Victoria’s Secret, but really? The oversexed imagery in that ad can hurt any woman’s self esteem – whoo hoo ladies, let’s go buy some underwear because we feel bad about ourselves (great sell, huh?).
In the Lane Bryant ad, I saw personality, confidence, and class. In the Victoria’s Secret ad, I saw some gorgeous girls under the cloak of sex, sex, and more sex. Not that there’s anything wrong with sex and beautiful women – but I’m more likely to be sold by a commercial that’s a little more creative.
My judgments aside – what do you think? Keep in mind that Lane Bryant and Victoria’s Secret were owned by the same parent company until 2002. Victoria’s Secret is owned by Limited Brands, and Lane Bryant is now a division of Charming Shoppes.
Related posts:
Other Related Posts:
