“The potential of environmental communication in womens magazines to be a site of politically motivated behavior seems to have been wholly subsumed by the ecofetish.” (Alexandra Nutter Smith 2010)
This week I finished reading Alexandra Nutter Smiths’ “The Ecofetish” a 2010 analytical article that examined the presence of greenwashed marketing and ecofetishism in four different magazines marketed towards women. The magazines in question were Vanity Fair, Glamor, Marie Claire, and Self, and the article specifically examined 2009 articles from each surrounding Earth Day to see what kind of information and marketing was being presented to women.
In week 5 I focused heavily on the introductory sections that gave some context to the exploratory questions and ideas of the article and some past findings. This week I finished the article and got into the heavier analysis section. The last time I was on this reading I write about using voter engagement rhetoric for climate policy engagement and action, based on the idea that voter engagement rhetorics are based on the idea of personal narrative. This time I picked up on a similar idea, which is that personal narrative is already being used by large corporations for the opposite purpose, by shifting the blame of the climate crisis onto consumers, specifically women, they are creating a personal narrative that stirs emotions and creates a sense of personal responsibility. I am now even more curious about the roots of voter engagement and civic engagement rhetoric and its applications t the creation of personal narrative.
I also picked up on some very Betty Crocker-like themes, first with the description of the average reader “Readers of all four magazines are likely to be in their mid-to late thirties, to be college educated, and to have a yearly household income around or slightly above seventy thousand dollars” which feels eerily similar to to the way General Mills listed the qualities of America’s favorite housewife. Another was the way in which the personal shopping choices of the woman were made to be moral choices she was making for herself and her household, as well as an answer to many of the worlds environmental issues.
The analysis found that, out of the four magazines, only Vanity Fair had published an article relevant to Earth Day that wouldn’t be classified as ecofetished. Articles published were often glorified shopping lists, further encouraging consumerism, but with a steeper price point. In fact, It’s noted in reference to a guest editor for Glamour
“Referring to the significant price tag attached to some of the items, the tagline proclaims,’Good-for-the-planet stuff is a fine reason to spend more,’ again associating a readiness to spend money with environmental concern “
I also really enjoyed the author’s comment “In other words, the prestige of buying expensive and trendy green products does not require a political investment (i.e., substantive knowledge or commitment to a cause). Rather, green purchasing can simply be part of a prestige cycle.” In context to the idea that we do not need to consume differently as these magazines are pushing us to do, it is that we need to consume less. But I believe that without that personal narrative aspect we will not achieve a level of commitment from society as a whole to make this change.
Next week I will be starting Skim, Dive, Surface: Teaching Digital Reading by Jenea Cohn, which I anticipate to be my last reading of the quarter due to the length of the chapters. I am not entirely sure how far I will get but as I plan to continue the digital reading aspect for a good while, I am hoping to carry this book forward with me. I will also in the next week be proposing my ILC for next quarter so I will post some pre-information about that when it’s ready!