WANTED: The Few. The Proud.

Hayley Gustafson
Ms. Cook
Writing 122
1 March 2009


WANTED: The Few. The Proud.

Do you think as a woman you could teach a tough guy the fundamentals of being a U.S. Marine? Although a woman might not think the marines is a place to be, there are supposedly equally available leadership opportunities if she joins. According to the advertisement, the Marines offer opportunities for women to achieve leadership roles.
The product being offered for sale is a lifestyle of being able to reach a leadership or teaching position in an organization that has been traditionally for tough men. The objective appeal is that the advertisers would like you to sign up for the Marines.
The advertisement comes from a women’s fitness magazine where the principal subject is a young woman who is physically fit and appears to be in a leadership position in the Marine Corps. The woman’s persona projects leadership, strength, and toughness. She looks confidant, physically and mentally fit, and feels good about herself.
The ad itself appears to be in a military instructional setting. The way the woman is standing above the people she is instructing implies that she is qualified to instruct all the people around her. What really draws the eye in is the woman standing in a martial arts pose. The other thing that catches the eye is the boldface word ‘WANTED’. These elements of the advertisement are both meant to draw the reader in to take a closer look at what is happening with the rest of the ad.
The text of the advertisement reads, “There are no female Marines. Only Marines.” There is a perception that women who join the Marines would be on equal footing with male counterparts in this organization. It is debatable whether or not this is true. Of the 202,000 U.S. Marines, approximately 91% of those members are male while roughly 9% are female (United States Marine Corps). Since the U.S. Marine Corps is a predominately male field, it is difficult to argue there are truly equal opportunities for women. The major Marine Leaders are all men (U.S. Marine Corps).
According to this advertisement, as a woman, you can be strong and play on equal footing with men. In fine print, the ad includes this text:
“As a recruit, you’ll be pushed to your physical and mental limits. Only together, can you find what it takes to complete the journey and earn your place among the elite few.”
In other words, the opportunity is available to both men and women equally. The advertisement challenges you to become a member of the elite few. Regarding social status or class, the ad implies that if you are able to withstand the rigors of marine training, you will be empowered to lead other recruits.
The military has led the way in enabling minorities to achieve leadership positions. If an individual is able to endure the tough conditions of the physical and mental attitude required and is able to take on the responsibility of protecting their country, you are able to serve in the military and be a part of a unique organization.
The advertisement promotes the idea that not only a minority person but also a minority woman can reach a leadership position and achieve self-fulfillment. The suggestion of the ad is that a highly motivated young woman can aspire to not only be a peer but a leader and mentor.




Works Cited

Marines. The Few. The Proud.. U.S. Marine Corps, 2010. Web. 22 Feb. 2010. .

United States Marine Corps. Linkedin, 2010. Web. 22 Feb. 2010. .

Nike ad

Jake Graham
Nancy Cook
writing 122
February 15, 2010

A fit woman wearing a pink work out shirt with headphones around her shoulders turns her computer on and looks at the Nike webpage. There is a running contest world wide that any one can join, to determine if men or women are in better shape. She looks at her boy friend, who is sleeping on the couch, and says to her self women are way more athletic. She takes off running downtown where she speeds past a group of guys on the side walk. While running through the park, underneath the bright green trees, a bunch of women join her. The women come across a group of guys coming straight at them on the same trail. As they meet, the guys are forced off the trail as the women run by. The website shows that the women and men are now tied. Five girls give a disgusted look to a guy in an elevator. When the doors open they all take off sprinting as the camera zooms in on all of their Nike running shoes. One of the men runners sees a women jogging and sprints past her waving his hand at her. The stats show the men have passed the women. A Women running down the street sees the words “go men” written on the back of a mini van so she changes it to “go woman”. The Women speeds past a guy who stops on a hill for a break, he waves his arms at her in disbelief that the hill doesn’t phase her speed at all. Tony Parker (NBA player) looks for his shoes in his house as his wife is throwing them off the balcony. His wife laughs, knowing he won’t be able to run without his Nike’s. The ad shows the guy that was sleeping on the couch running and meeting up with his girl friend. They race each other while the score is tied and the street that their on is lined with people cheering. His girl friend pushes him out of the way so she can pull ahead of him. Tony Parker is now back at his house throwing all of his wife’s shoes off the balcony. The ad ends with the score being tied and writing that says join the men vs. women challenge at NikePlus.com. Nike does a great job marketing their shoes in this ad by promoting exercise, competition, and empowering women, although they don’t always empower the women who make their products.
Nike uses many different ways in this unique commercial to get people to buy their products. The ad is about the men vs, women running competition that Nike puts on. Nike makes running in this competition look like a fun event so people will join. The people who do enter the race will need to buy running shoes if they don’t have any. Most people will buy Nike’s since that’s who is putting on the race. Nike is also a very popular brand throughout they world. The ad is targeting women more than men even though both sexes are being promoted in the race. It shows women being empowered by the way they scowl at the guy sleeping on the couch and when they give the guy in the elevator a disgusted look. They also show them being empowered when the women meet the men on the trail and the guys are the ones jumping off the trail to get out of the way of the women. Nike just doesn’t target men and women athletes in the U.S. but all around the world to join this race of the sexes. This will broaden their popularity and help them sell more shoes. People watching this ad will see that all of the people running have outstanding athletic bodies. This will further encourage people to enter the race so that they can get their bodies looking like the athletes in the ad.It also encourages people to become healthier and exercise more. The ad includes many international athletes so people, all over the world, will recognize the athletes that all wear Nike shoes. The music plays a role in the ad because it’s upbeat and makes you motivated to get up and run.
Even though Nike targets women in this ad by showing them to be empowered this isn’t always the case with some of Nike’s female employees. Nike has sweatshops in many countries including Vietnam, China, and Indonesia (Lormand). Ninety percent of Nike’s employees in sweatshops are young uneducated women (Lormand). “A sweatshop is a work place, often a factory, in which employees work long hours at low wages under poor conditions” (Women and Sweatshops). Women sweatshop workers only get paid around ten to twenty cents an hour (Women and Sweatshops). Sweatshops don’t pay their employees overtime in fact some workers don’t get paid at all. Sweat shop factories and living quarters are normally filthy and unsafe (Women and Sweatshops). In Vietnam and China 77% of the workers have respiratory problems from chemicals (Lormand). Many women are sexually abused for false promises of better jobs (Woman and Sweatshops). Managers threaten and punish their employees so they become to scared to stand up for them selves. Some factories have barbed wire fences and armed guards surrounding them just like a prison (Woman and Sweatshops). However, Nike does many good things even though they use sweatshops.
When we shop for shoes, should we not buy from Nike because some of their shoes were made in sweatshops? It’s hard not to buy products that have been made in sweatshops since so many companies use them. These companies include: Phillips-Van Heusen, Disney, Guess?, The Gap, Banana Republic, Old Navy, Tommy Hilfiger, Reebok, Levi Straus, Liz Caliborne, Ralph Lauren, Mattel, Wal-Mart, Roohsing, and Kohl's (MacNevin). If it was a perfect world everyone would make good money and be happy, but it’s not. Sweatshop employee’s usually live in such poverty that without that job they may starve to death. Many companies, such as Nike, don’t actually own the factories where their products are produced so Nike is not totally responsible for the existence of sweatshops. The government that allows these factories should make them illegal, set a decent minimum wage, and have better regulated working conditions. Nike promotes women to be competitive with men by showing them to be just as good as men in their ad. If the women, who work in sweatshops, become empowered then hopefully some of them won’t get stuck in sweatshops.
Nike is a very successful company that promotes positive and unfortunately some negative aspects of life. Most of the public in our country would strongly disapprove of the use of sweatshops but they also continue to buy their products. The fact that so many companies use sweatshops makes it hard not to buy from them. Nike provides America with a huge selection of athletic gear that generally makes their consumers happy. At least Nike promotes women and men to be equal with healthy competition, and for everyone to get up and exercise so that they can be a healthier person.

Works Cited

Lormand, Eric. Facts and Faqs about Nikes labor abusers. Web. 21 Feb. 2010. .
"Women and Sweatshops." Woman and Global Human Rights. Web. 21 Feb. 2010
.
MacNevin, Suzanne. Fashionistas Against Sweatshops . Web. 21 Feb. 2010. .

Cindy's Is There Still Time to Apologize?

As I drive down Highway 30, my eyes scan the landscape. The remnants of the December 2007 storm still linger. Fallen trees litter the hillsides like giant pick up sticks. Mud flats three feet high replace the plush green lawns that spring usually brings. A small house now resembling an upturned pyramid sits uninhabited. It has become visibly apparent that Mother Nature is changing. After centuries of human assault she has found the courage to seek her revenge.
Why would our beautiful earth cause all of us such loss and devastation? Human beings have ravaged earth’s forests. We have removed much-needed trees, weakening the soil on cliff sides causing landslides. The skies have been poisoned by car exhaust and factory smoke stacks, which has caused a multitude of issues. The most significant problem we have caused is global warming.
Global warming will potentially wreak havoc on human life. As we have seen with the 2007 storm and the surge of devastating hurricanes like Katrina, global warming is affecting our weather. “Floods caused more property damage and fatalities than any other natural disaster in the United States in the twentieth century.” (Environmental Defense Fund) With the higher threat of flooding, comes the risk of crop losses and water-borne diseases. The number of forest fires and drought are also likely to increase. Our earth is becoming not so human friendly.
How can we help this problem? The possible solutions are endless. The first step is admitting there is a problem. Next, each of us needs to take a look at our homes. “Most emissions from homes are from the fossil fuels burned to generate electricity and heat.”(An Inconvenient Truth 2) Most of us are probably guilty of leaving lights on in rooms we are no longer in, or leaving the television on over night. Simply turning off electronics after use can reduce thousands of pounds of carbon dioxide a year. (An Inconvenient Truth 2) Not only is this better for the environment, but it is also good for the pocket book. Another easy act is to wash clothes in cold water instead of hot, and hang laundry to dry whenever possible. Recycling is a good way to help. It’s an easy task and can eliminate about 2,400 pounds of CO2 a year. (An Inconvenient Truth 3) These solutions are easy for anyone to do. They are a good way for just one person to make a difference.
We only have one planet. If the human race is to continue to inhabit it, we have to make a change. With this being a global issue, it is hard to imagine that one person can help anything. Hopefully, with education and word of mouth, one person doing these simple tasks can encourage at least one more to do the same. Mother earth has taken care of us; it’s time that we return the favor.

Alicia Posts Laughing At the Marlboro Man

An Anti-smoking ad found on the website blog.miragestudio7.com depicts a close up picture of the Marlboro man. He is standing in the desert with his head down looking at his dead horse sadly. Right above the horse are bright bold white letters spelling out “SECOND HAND SMOKE KILLS”. The letters stand out dramatically because of the orange desert sand and the blue sky. The ad is attempting to grab the reader’s attention by using humor which doesn’t necessarily leave them thinking about the dangers of second hand smoke.

This ad’s target audience is current smokers. They use a mascot from a familiar brand of cigarette without actually stating that it is him. The Marlboro brand uses a cowboy for their advertisements so this is an unstated assumption. The ad is attempting to make the audience feel bad for the death of the horse by implying that second hand smoke has killed the horse. It is relating the Marlboro man directly to them and by doing that it is using pathos.

This ad is telling smokers that second hand smoke kills by providing part of a fictional story about the Marlboro man that they all know. They are using the audiences’ knowledge of the brand to have them create the rest of the story in their own minds. It is playing off of the guilt and pity that the audience feels after seeing the ad. They have accomplished this by making smokers feel bad for the deceased horse at the same time as feel guilty by silently accusing them of contributing to people’s death by smoking around them (Pathos). They have also used emotional and factual appeals by using the horse for emotional appeal and the words for factual appeal.

The ad’s claim that second hand smoke kills people is true. More than 40,000 people a year die in the U.S alone from second hand smoke; that’s more than illegal drugs and car accidents (Bloomberg). Cigarettes contain more than 4000 chemicals and 40 of them are known to cause cancer (Bloomberg). The concentration of those carcinogenic chemicals is higher in second hand smoke than it is when inhaled directly by the smoker (Bloomberg). Second hand smoke doesn’t always kill but just 30 minutes of exposure to second hand smoke can cause some of the same physical reactions that would occur with long-term smoking (Bloomberg). It also is responsible for over 26,000 new cases of asthma each year, 2.2 million ear infections, and up to 2,700 deaths from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (Bloomberg). Sadly second hand smoke causes 3000 lung cancer deaths a year to non-smokers in the U.S (Bloomberg).

The argument that second hand smoke is true, but is using humor the right way to go about it? It may not be a laughing matter but it is a topic that needs people’s attention. Humor is a very affective tactic to grab attention what matters isn’t the humor it’s the message coming from it. People will remember this ad because it made them laugh and then when they think of the ad they will see the bright white letters so affectively used say “SECOND HAND SMOKE KILLS”.


Works Cited
Thomas R. Frieden, Michael R. Bloomberg. "Second Hand Smoke Kills ." 29 August 2002. NYC Health. 24 February 2008 .

RN writes about deforestation

The Negative Consequences of Deforestation for Global Warming

This headline from the front page of the December 12, 2007, edition of The Clatskanie Chief, describes the devastation that clear cutting forests can cause. “Tons of water, mud and logs broke through an old dirt “fill” and roared down the Eilertson Creek Valley at the rural community of Woodson, Oregon on Tuesday, December 11, 2007” (Hazen 1). Highway 30 was closed for several days as a result of the mudslide, which covered the road with tons of mud, logs and a mobile home. Initially, most people thought the mudslides were caused by heavy rains, but OSU forestry officials concluded the 2004 clear cutting of trees on a nearby 2,440-acre tract of land contributed to the flooding and subsequent landslides. Slowing deforestation is essential to avoid dangerous global warming because it will reduce dangerous emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Global warming is the increase of average world temperatures as a result of what is known as the greenhouse effect--Certain gases in the atmosphere act like the glass on a greenhouse, allowing sunlight through to heat the earth’s surface while trapping the heat as it radiates back into space. As the gases build up in the atmosphere, the earth gets hotter. According to a panel of researchers, global greenhouse gas emissions have increased 70% between 1970 and 2004 (IPCC 3). If no action is taken, the greenhouse effect could lead to a rise in average global temperature of between 1.5-4.5 degrees Celsius as early as the year 2030-making the world hotter than it has been for more than 100,000 years (YPTE 2). Storms and hurricanes will become more frequent and stronger as the oceans heat up, causing more water to evaporate and more droughts to occur in the heartlands. In addition, rising sea levels will cause increased flooding as polar ice caps continue to melt (YPTE 1).

Like the clear cut in Clatskanie, deforestation also has global effects. Trees are natural consumers of carbon dioxide (CO2), which is one of the main greenhouse gases. As trees grow, they absorb CO2. This is called the “carbon sink” effect. Trees are 50% carbon, and when a tree is felled or burned, the CO2 it stores is returned to the atmosphere. Tropical deforestation accounts for about twenty percent of heat-trapping gas emissions worldwide, however every forest matters. We must stop destroying forests and start replanting trees. More than 80% of the earth’s natural forests already have been destroyed (YPTE 1). Brazil and Indonesia have the two largest remaining rain forests, which are being stripped at an alarming rate by logging, fires, and land-clearing for agriculture and cattle-grazing.

Other consequences of deforestation include disruption of the water cycle: Trees draw water up through their roots and release it into the atmosphere. With removal of a forest, the region cannot hold as much water, which may cause a drier climate. With the loss of a protective cover of vegetation, more soil is lost, and silting of water courses and lakes occurs as a result of soil erosion.

Part of the solution to decrease global warming is to increase agricultural productivity so there is less demand to convert forests into farmland. Developing countries need financial assistance from more developed countries to do the job. Incentives could come in the form of carbon credits and bilateral agreements between donors and developing countries to support country-wide forest conservation projects (UCS). Selective logging and reforestation could be implemented to preserve forests, clear-cutting and burning should be outlawed both here in the northwest and around the world.

Due to the “carbon sink” effect, tropical deforestation is the largest source of emissions for many developing countries. Reducing deforestation in all areas is essential to avoid dangerous global warming. The United States and other industrialized nations must support developing countries in their efforts to limit their emissions from deforestation, and more importantly, they must reduce their own emissions and lead efforts to avert dangerous climate change (UCS 1). We all live on planet Earth, and in order to survive, we must take steps to protect Mother Nature. The devastation from clear cutting that occurred recently in Woodson, Oregon, is a reality check. Global warming affects everybody, and we must act now! Tomorrow may be too late!


Works Cited

Hazen, Deborah. "Woodson Landslide Causes Damage." The Clatskanie Chief (2007): 1
IPCC. "Summary for Policymakers." Climate Change 2007 2007: 3.
YPTE, "Global Warming." Fact Sheet. ypte.org. 8Mar 2008 .
Union of Concerned Scientists, "Tropical Deforestation and Climate Change." Global Warming 18 May 2007 1-2. 08 March 2008 <http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions>.

Gunnar: Trees

Trees: Guardians of the Earth

A clean and healthy life is something every living human being should strive for. In doing so, a conscious effort in doing ones part in preventing further global warming should be a high priority on everybody’s list. The old saying, “Life is what you make it”, comes into play here as the quality of life for everyone is at stake with the global warming controversy. It is time to face reality, because we are all at risk in losing the security and comfort of our daily lives. A perfect example of this would be the storm of last December 03, 2007 here in Astoria. We local residents witnessed a severe weather pattern that is fast becoming a trend due to the Earth’s rising temperature, caused by carbon dioxide trapped in the Earth’s atmosphere. A simple and inexpensive step to mitigate the damage would be and I propose this; to plant a tree, because trees absorb the deadly carbon dioxide pollutant from the air.

Besides conserving energy, recycling, and using fossil fuels responsibly, meaning driving less, planting a tree is an effective way to reduce global warming. One might argue that not everyone can do this because it takes land to perform this task. However, true that may be, if one does not have their own land, perhaps land can be available through friends and family for planting this valuable renewable resource. Everybody knows somebody that would enjoy the beauty, shade and the filtering of air that a tree would provide. My girlfriend Karen is taking full advantage of this in our backyard. Recently she has joined the Arbor Day Foundation, who in promoting cleaner air quality, has given her a complimentary ten small trees for planting. These trees will not only enhance the beauty and habitat of our lot, they will improve the air quality of our community. NASA Scientist Christopher Potter reaffirms this with, “Planting trees on marginal agricultural lands could sequester carbon and offset at least one-fifth of the annual fossil fuel emission of carbon in the United States” (Potter 1).

Though they absorb carbon dioxide, planting trees is not the total solution of global warming. During the fall and winter seasons trees drop their leaves which contain the pollutant and the further decay of the leaves adds carbon dioxide back into the environment. Planting trees is only an important step in reducing carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere. Planting trees is not a substitute for cutting down on fossil fuel emissions and conserving energy, people’s contributions, no matter how big or small are. Large companies and business alike are going green by changing the production processes and using energy conservation. As individuals, people can support the solution of global warming by taking action and thinking green on their own terms and on their own scale.

With the increased level of carbon dioxide in the air and the Earth’s atmosphere, trees are needed for their carbon dioxide absorbing properties. Forestry Specialist Michael Kuhns explains, “All plants make food out of carbon dioxide from the air, water, and solar energy through the process of photosynthesis” (Kuhns 2). He also tells us that, “Since this wood is mainly made of carbon from carbon dioxide, tree stems and roots are good, long-term storage places for carbon” (Kuhns 3). Planting trees is an investment of air quality for ones self and for future generations. It also can be a fun way to teach a child the responsibility of preventing further global warming.

If people continue to disregard this global issue by not taking the necessary steps to decrease pollutions and make small changes, our quality of life will be threatened. It has been proven through science that our repeated careless actions including pollutants from our cars and large refineries, has caused this problem over a period of time. It is up to us to mitigate the damage and to dig ourselves out of this hole. It takes everybody actively living up to this challenge, and requires doing their part in saving our way of life. Planting a tree is an inexpensive way to help fight pollution. Programs like the Arbor Day Foundation and many others, are giving away trees to promote clean air and inspire people to execute exactly what it is that I am proposing. Trees if purchased cost as little as ten dollars up to a hundred dollars at most nurseries. It is up to each individual regarding a trees price and its species to take a stand on this issue. We cannot afford to ignore global warming any longer! Thus, planting a tree would be an inexpensive response.

Mother Nature is a fickle creature, yet she is a beautiful one. She flexes her muscle from time to time with destructive storms and severe weather. This causes great alarm in our lives. She also enhances our lives daily with her gifts of wonder and purity that are Gods creations. Global warming is the man made evil that disrupts this beauty. Together, we can all make a difference that counts. Simply planting a tree is an easy place to start.

RN writes about Dove pro-age campaign

Does Beauty Have an Age Limit?

In 2006, Dove came out with a campaign for Real Beauty: pro-age; pro-age advertisements showcase women age fifty and over. Dove is a leading brand in beauty care products and is challenging the “only young-is beautiful” stereotype. This particular ad for Dove pro-age beauty body lotion is located in the January 2008 issue of Better Homes and Gardens, a magazine which focuses on middle-aged women’s interests regarding homes, cooking, healthy living and decorating. The Dove pro-age website can be accessed at doveproage.com to view ad in its entirety. The magazine advertisement depicts a woman who looks closer to thirty three than fifty; however, this photograph appears air brushed, implying that Dove is not being completely honest in their advertising campaign. The model looks much older on the video website, (Dove Pro-Age ad – AOL Video), with saggy skin and wrinkles. In the magazine advertisement, she appears confident and aware of her sexuality. Her skin is clear and smooth, without wrinkles or age spots and she has nicely manicured nails and a wide smile with dazzling white teeth. Her entire body (olive skin) is the focal point for the advertisement. She is clearly a great advertisement for pro-age because she is ageless, living proof that women are genuinely stunning at any age. Cosmetic companies are going to have to change their tactics and use older women to model their beauty products because many of their best customers are entering middle age.

Women born between 1946 and 1964 are called baby boomers and make up a large part of the population. Many baby boomers are pushing sixty but refuse to admit their age; they don’t want to be younger, just look younger. In the beauty industry, young models are used to sell products, even those aimed at older women (Herman 1). In order to appeal to an aging population, beauty companies must hire real women that middle aged women can relate to. Advertisers focus their marketing on younger women, not realizing that sixty-five to seventy-four-year-old consumers outspend their counter-parts in the thirty-five to forty-four-year-old categories. Youth, beauty, and vitality are highly valued by Americans (Monsees 2).

The term ageism refers to a deep prejudice against elderly; people stereotype others based on old age. One stereotype is that old people are ugly.
Beauty is associated with youth, and women fear the loss of their beauty as they age. Some other cultures admire the characteristics of old age. In Japan, silver hair and wrinkles are often admired as signs of wisdom, maturity, and long years of service. (Palmore 12)
Cosmetic companies are often afraid to hire middle aged women because they are “over the hill” and fear that sales will decline if a young and beautiful woman isn’t marketing their product; however, the fifty plus generation is expected to grow from eighty nine million to 111 million in the next decade and they are spending more money than their younger counterparts. It is more realistic to have a fifty plus woman advertising an anti-aging product than a twenty year old. Smart companies who have older women sell their products will notice a huge increase in sales volume.

“Pro-active” or “pro-age” are words that are used frequently in contemporary advertising. Pro-active skin care is aimed at the teenage and early twenties population and has been around for at least ten years. The Dove pro-age campaign is adding a new spin to the word proactive, targeting older populations; “pro” is a positive word, making the aging process more palatable. Iam’s dog food recently introduced a new formula for older dogs, called proactive dog food. Proactive dog food supposedly keeps dogs healthy longer and extends their lifespan.

Kudos to Dove for going out on a limb and reaching out to middle aged women. Several other major cosmetic companies, including Revlon, are hopping on the bandwagon after seeing the success that Dove has achieved. Dove’s marketing approach continues to differ from the norm because it doesn’t hire celebrities for the pro-age campaign. Ordinary women over fifty try out for the ad campaign and are hired based on their honest, real beauty. The only change Dove needs to make in its advertising campaign is to cut out the air brushing; show the complete woman in her own skin. Companies like L’Oreal and Dior are forking out millions of dollars for natural-looking celebrities; for example, Jane Fonda and Sharon Stone have signed contracts to promote beauty products for older women.