Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------Return to article page To print: Select File and then Print from your browser's menu. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------This story was printed from FindArticles.com, located at http://www.findarticles.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------Sex Roles: A Journal of Research March, 2000 The Perpetuation of Subtle Prejudice: Race and Gender Imagery in 1990s Television Advertising. Author/s: Scott Coltrane Scott Coltrane [1] Scholars have long argued that popular consumer culture is both producer and product of social inequality, but few detailed empirical studies have explored the ways that advertising imagery simultaneously constructs stereotypes of race and gender. This article reports on a content analysis of television commercials (n = 1699) aired on programs with high ratings for specific target audiences from 1992 to 1994. Characters in the television commercials enjoy more prominence and exercise more authority if they are White or men. Logistic regression analyses indicate that images of romantic and domestic fulfillment also differ by race and gender, with women and Whites disproportionately shown in family settings and in cross-sex interactions. In general, 1990s television commercials tend to portray White men as powerful, white women as sex objects, African American men as aggressive, and African American women as inconsequential. The authors suggest that these commercial images contribute to the perpetuation of subt le prejudice against African Americans by exaggerating cultural differences and denying positive emotions. Results are discussed in relation to the segmentation of media markets and possibilities for social change. The history of media representations is not a progression from stereotypes to truth but a struggle to constantly articulate the meanings of people's identities and the ways they can live those cultural categories. Grossberg, Wartella, and Whitney 1998, p. 231 INTRODUCTION Do television images promote equality by leveling cultural and gender differences or do they promote inequality through exclusion and exaggeration of difference? Critical scholars suggest that commercial television does more to foster prejudice than to overcome it, but researchers differ in their evaluation of recent trends and future prospects (Gray, 1995; Hall, 1995; hooks, 1992; Lovdal, 1989; Wilson &
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (1 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

Gutierrez, 1995). Research from the 1970s and 1980s documented how print and broadcast media produced overt stereotypes of women and blacks, but studies failed to examine systematically how race and gender images were interrelated (Dines, 1995; Kellner 1995). In the 1990s, critics speculated about the potential influence of new marketing strategies on race relations, but few scholars conducted detailed studies of television advertising to explore how commercials might shape prejudicial attitudes. In this paper, we focus on the intersection of race and gender by examining which characters in mid-1990s television commercials exercised authority or fulfilled romantic and domestic fantasies. In so doing, we document how advertising and mass marketing might perpetuate newer, more subtle forms of prejudice against women and people of color. We also assess recent claims that advertising's segmentation of audiences by race and gender might reinforce social differences and limit opportunities for community building (Wilson & Gutierrez, 1995; Turow, 1997). Before presenting our study methods and results, we provide an historical overview of theories and empirical findings about the media's framing of race and gender. To highlight the interdisciplinary nature of our project and to demonstrate the significance of our specific research questions, we provide an extended review of literatures from several fields. Our intent is to demonstrate how research traditions in psychology, sociology, marketing, communication , media, and cultural studies can work together to promote a better understanding of the ways in which television imagery influences individual identities and shapes possibilities for social justice. Media Framing, Commercial Realism, and the Cultural Production of Selves Media analysts often use the concept of "frame" to explain how television imagery influences people (Entman, 1993; Gamson, Croteau, Hoynes, & Sasson, 1992; Gitlin, 1980; Goffman, 1974). Although recent audience studies reveal that viewers do not automatically mimic what they see on television, the imagery they observe facilitates specific forms of understanding, interpretation, and experience (Press, 1991). Media images provide a diffuse confirmation of one's world view, promote acceptance of current social arrangements, and reassure people that things are the way they ought to be. In social psychological terms, media images become incorporated into cognitive schema and heuristics, and are called up during processes of identity formation, self-evaluation, attribution, and social comparison. Television commercials, in particular, make race and gender stereotypes readily available. Stereotyped commercials are a resource that can automatically be drawn upon, especially when interacting with someone of a differe nt race, ethnicity, or gender. In so doing, commercials exaggerate any primacy effects that correspond to the televised stereotypes. Television is the most popular medium for advertising. Over 98% of American households have at least one television set, the average household has a television turned on for over 30 hr each week, and about one fifth of every broadcast hour consists of commercials (Bretl & Cantor, 1988; Kellner, 1990, Signorelli, 1991). Consequently, it is virtually impossible to avoid television's advertising imagery
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (2 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

(Barthel, 1988). According to market researchers, advertisers are aware of their potential impact on consumers as they consciously deploy symbols, signs, and frames to position their products and invoke specific "realities" (Baran, Mok, Land, & Kang 1989; p. 48). Most seek to sell some portion of the American Dream in an artistic style that Goffman (1979) labels "commercial realism" and Schudson (1984) calls "capitalist realism." Marketing theories suggest that this intentional commercial framing is intended to capture the symbolic significance of idealized rituals and allow consumers to place themselves in desi red social roles (Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982; Rook, 1985; Solomon, 1983). In attempting to invoke these "realities," advertising focuses on the visible and superficial, offering up perfect distilled images of beautiful people happily consuming products (Fowles, 1996). Besides being shown individuals with flawless faces and perfect bodies, television consumers are increasingly allowed surreptitiously to observe countless interpersonal experiences that have a fantastic or "magical" quality (Jhally, 1989, Williams, 1993; Williamson, 1978). Examples of these carefully crafted moments, or "mythologies" (Barthes, 1957/1973), include "the good old days," "the happy family," "fun-loving youth," and the ubiquitous romantic encounter (Tolson, 1996; p. 7). In the typical advertising image of romance -- purposely fuzzy around the edges -- beautiful people effortlessly fall in love and fulfill their deepest romantic longings. By vicariously enjoying such images, viewers step into a fantasy emotional experience and ostensibly ignore the sales pitch behind it (Illouz, 1996). While television imagery offers simple imaginary solutions to personal desires and family dilemmas (Taylor, 1989), the medium also tends to misrepresent social issues in the service of dominant ideologies and economic i nterests (Gitlin, 1983). Building on these insights, in this paper we explore how mass marketing, the commodification of identity, and unequal access to imaginary fulfillment might perpetuate subtle forms of racial prejudice. Media Imagery and Racial Prejudice According to Pettigrew and Mertens (1995), prejudiced attitudes form ideological clusters of belief that justify discrimination against outgroup members (see also Pettigrew, 1989). They identify two contrasting types of prejudice -- an older, blatant form and a more subtle, emergent variety: "Blatant prejudice is hot, close and direct. Subtle prejudice is cool, distant, and indirect" (Pettigrew & Mertens, 1995, p. 58). Blatant prejudice often includes feeling threatened by outgroup members and considering them to be genetically inferior, which explains away any outgroup disadvantage in the society, and thus denies that discrimination exists. Subtle prejudice, in contrast, exaggerates cultural differences and attributes outgroup disadvantage to these differences. Whereas blatant prejudice entails outright hostility and negative feelings toward the outgroup, subtle prejudice entails the withholding of negative emotions toward the outgroup, and a more positive emotional evaluation of the ingroup (Pettigrew & Mertens, 1995). In this analysis, we suggest that media imagery plays an important part in the construction of the newer and more subtle forms of prejudice described by
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (3 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

Pettigrew and Mertens. Using television advertising as a test case, we explore whether race and gender imagery exaggerates differences between ingroups and outgroups. In addition, we build on Pettigrew and Mertens' formulation of denial of emotions by focusing on whether outgroup members are provided with equal access to the fantasy images of domestic and romantic consumption that are a staple of television advertising. We speculate that such imagery could encourage ingroup members to withhold positive evaluation of outgroup members and promote prejudicial attitudes. Before turning to that analysis, however, we review recent developments in the marketing of commercial television that hold significant potential for influencing race relations in North America. Advertising, Market Segmentation, and the Production of Difference Broadcast television receives virtually all its income from advertising. In 1993 (the middle year in our sample of commercials), advertisers spent about $26.6 billion in support of network and local television broadcasting, and another $2.5 billion on cable television. With the growth of cable, VCRs, and other new technologies in the 1980s and 1990s, a complex and shifting set of exchange relations developed among the advertising industry, television ratings firms, and broadcast and cable companies (Comstock, 1991; Jhally, 1987; Maxwell, 1991). Before the 1980s, most television advertising was mass marketed to a broadly diverse audience through a relatively small number of media outlets. Since then, advertisers and media firms have emphasized divisions between subpopulations, borrowing techniques from direct mailing, consumer tracking, and relationship marketing, leading to competing claims about the social impact of such practices. According to Turow (1997, p. 126), these developments in advertising and marketing led even the largest media companies to separate audiences into different worlds and to highlight distinctions that advertising agencies said would make people feel more comfortable. By partitioning consumers and speaking to them differently, advertisers hoped more efficiently to market their products. Products, in turn, began to take on a more direct association with what marketers like to call "lifestyle" differences. This new marketing strategy emphasized social class differences, as marketers eagerly subdivided groups of "upscale" consumers with substantial disposable income, but it also promoted differentiation on the basis of ethnic and cultural differences (Wilson & Gutierrez, 1995, p. 252). Although segmented markets can engender a tight sense of community among people who share similar backgrounds, such differentiation can also promote suspicion of others. Turow (1997, p. 199) blames such marketing strategies for incr easing racial tensions during the 1980s and 1990s, suggesting that by emphasizing "image tribes," advertisers heightened consumers' sense of social separation and encouraged them to label others as different. Similarly, Wilson & Gutierrez (1995, p. 261) suggest that whereas television once acted to bring people together, it now works to reinforce the differences that keep them apart. Other researchers argue that narrowcasting, niche marketing, and the emergence of independent affiliates leading up to the mid-1990s promoted more diversified images of African Americans on television (Gray, 1995). In part because Black
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (4 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

audiences watch more television and are more dependent on network programming than other audiences, networks in the late 1980s and early 1990s risked introducing new black situation comedies, entertainment/variety, and talk shows. These new programs (e.g., Cosby, Oprah, and shows on the Fox network), offered opportunities for more positive portrayals of African Americans, though critics disagree about whether they were just as likely to promote pejorative stereotypes as the earlier general-audience shows (Gray, 1995; hooks, 1992; Turow, 1997). In the following analysis, we evaluate claims about the possible effects of market segmentation advanced by Turow, Gray, and others, by documenting whether advertising images of race and gender differed according to target audience betw een 1992 and 1994. A focus on this time period is significant, in part, because recent commentary suggests that the proportion of minority characters on network television shows began dropping just after this time. Before presenting results of our own analysis, we establish baseline comparisons by summarizing results of past empirical studies on commercial television's portrayal of race/ethnicity and sex/gender. Media Portrayals of Race and Gender From historical research, we know that African Americans have often been portrayed in popular culture as inferior to Whites and subservient to them. More recent research shows that non-Whites continue to be underrepresented on television. In both television programming and commercials, studies show that less than 10% of human appearance time includes any non-Whites, and most of these are African Americans, leaving Latinos and Asian Americans almost invisible (Lichter, Lichter & Rothman 1994; Weigel, Loomis & Soja, 1980; Wilson & Gutierrez, 1995). Studies also show that images of nonwhite characters have changed considerably from older stereotypical depictions of Aunt Jemima or Amos and Andy, but researchers do not agree that current television images are more positive or realistic than their predecessors (Dennis & Pease, 1996; Frazer & Frazer, 1993; Kern-Foxworth, 1994). Critics contend that television portrayals of all non-Whites, but especially African Americans, have been characterized by trivialization a nd exaggeration. Some commentators suggest that Black male characters are disproportionately shown as buffoons, as menacing and unruly youths, or as hypermasculine thugs, and that Black female characters are typically shown as exotic and sexually available (Gray, 1995; hooks, 1992; Marable, 1996). Some claim that family life on television, the staple of prime time situation comedy, tends to be different for blacks than for whites. For example, Baptiste (1986) finds that African American families are pictured as dominated by women and that African American fathers are shown in derogatory fashion, frequently abdicating their paternal responsibilities. Other critics contend that even shows with seemingly positive depictions of Black families, such as The Cosby Show, ignore the most important social problems, pay little attention to racial issues, or reproduce gender stereotypes (Frazer & Frazer, 1993; Fuller, 1992; Gray, 1989).

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (5 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

Research on the content of television (and print) advertisements reveals similar tendencies, presumably because advertising revenues support the medium. In summary, non-Whites in advertisements tend to be shown (1) in the background, (2) associated with fast food, beer, or automobiles, or (3) as subservient to White authority figures (Humphrey & Schuman, 1984; Wilkes & Valencia, 1989). According to some, White beauty standards prevail because advertisers assume that White consumers will not buy a product if it is associated with non-Whites (Sheperd 1980), and industry publications indicate that advertisers have been reluctant to increase the number of non-White characters in their ads because they fear a potential loss of offended White customers (Kern-Foxworth, 1994, p. 38; Whittier, 1991). Consequently, women of color, in particular, have been less prevalent than White women in ads, and they are often pictured with light skin, straight hair, and other White features (Brown 1993). In spite of calls for more research into the topic, systematic studies of the portrayal of both race and gender in advertising are exceptionally rare (Lazier & Kendrick, 1993; McClelland, 1993). Research on gender imagery in television programming and advertising has been more prevalent than research on race or ethnicity, reflecting the medium's preoccupation with sex and female beauty (Jhally, 1987). Studies of both programs and commercials show that men characters are likely to be more developed and complex than their female counterparts, outnumbering them by two or three to one, with male voices narrating almost 10 times more frequently than female ones. In general, women characters have been more likely to be shown in the home, with men more likely to be shown outside or in occupational roles. Research consistently documents how television commercials present conventional gender stereotypes, with women shown as young, thin, sexy, smiling, acquiescent, provocative, and available. Men characters, in contrast, tend to be shown as knowledgeable, independent, powerful, successful, and tough (for reviews see Busby, 1985; Cantor, 1980; Courtney & Whipple, 1983; Davis 1990; Fejes, 1992; Fowles, 1996, So ley & Kurzbard, 1986). A few researchers suggest that commercial gender imagery became less sexist during the 1980s (e.g., Bretl & Cantor, 1988), whereas others suggest that conventional gender portrayals continued, albeit in slightly modified forms (e.g., Coltrane & Allan, 1994; Lazier & Kendrick, 1993; Lovdal, 1989). With the close correspondence between commercial imagery and program content, many researchers make the assumption that television advertising is representative of the stereotypes promoted by the medium. Putting aside questions about the extent of such correspondence, we suggest that because television advertising is so widespread, and because it pays for the production of programming, it deserves to be studied in its own right. As noted above, television advertising contributes to widespread social perceptions through its framing of fantasy romantic and domestic fulfillment. In the following analysis, we are interested in documenting the ways that this advertising imagery might shape taken-for-granted notions about the meaning of race and gender.

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (6 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

RESEARCH QUESTIONS In the present study, we investigate how commercial television imagery encodes cultural understandings of race and gender. Unlike most previous studies, we look at race, gender, and target audience simultaneously. Following the cultural studies tradition, we ask how images of product consumption depict sexuality, the exercise of authority, and possibilities for romantic or domestic fulfillment. In response to recent theorizing in media studies, we explore whether different images are directed toward specific target audiences as identified by marketing firms. Specifically, we ask: Are Whites portrayed more frequently and more prominently than non-Whites as characters in advertisements on highly rated television shows, and do they exercise more authority as measured by active/instrumental behavior, employment, and order-giving? Are African American men and women more likely to be shown as aggressive than passive and are they less likely to be portrayed in romantic and family scenes than their White counterparts? Turning to gender issues, we ask: Are men portrayed more frequently and more prominently than women, do they exercise more authority, and are they more aggressive? Are women portrayed as sex objects in the commercials, and are they regularly associated with romantic and domestic roles? Are White women shown as sex objects or family members more frequently than African American women? On average, how do race and gender imagery intersect, and to which audiences are various images shown? For example, are female audiences shown more passive or more active wome n characters? Do African American audiences tend to be shown more or fewer images of African American characters who are romantic, sexual, or family-oriented? And finally, do the occupational and family roles that characters play in the commercials determine their emotional. expressiveness and instrumental competence, or are these characteristics stereotypically associated with one sex or one race? Answering these questions will enable us to evaluate larger issues about media framing and audience segmentation. In particular, do the observed images promote a newer, subtle form of prejudice because they exaggerate differences and deny positive emotions to outgroup members? METHODS Sampling and Research Design We designed a sampling strategy for television commercials that included consideration of the programs on which they appeared and the popularity of those programs. Our intent was to select the highest rated regularly appearing shows in the mid-1990s for each of five audience segments, as defined by sex and age, that are commonly identified and tracked by marketing research firms. Subsequently, following Gray (1995), we also identified a subset of the commercials appearing on programs directed toward an African American audience (see below). Using published Arbitron ratings for a large viewing market in southern California, we selected the 20 television programs with the highest ratings during the last week of January and the first week of February in 1992, 1993, and 1994 for the
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (7 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

following audiences: all households, young viewers (age 12-24 years), older viewers (age 50+ years), women (age 25-49 years), working women (18+ years, employed 30+ hr/week), and men (age 25-49 years). We excluded daily news shows, movies, specials, and sporting events. We entered ratings, equal to the estimated percentage of all television viewers, for each specific target audience and performed a factor analysis to select only programs uniquely watched by each of the five target subgroups (100% of variance explained, 0.5 minimum eigenvalue, Kaiser-Meyer- Olkin measure of sampling adequacy = .988, .978, and .985). Programs with high initial ratings for multiple audiences (e.g., 60 Minutes, Cosby, Wonder Years) did not load heavily on any one audience factor, and were t hereby excluded from the sample. Programs that loaded heavily on one audience in one year and on a different audience in a subsequent year were also excluded (e.g., In Living Color -- youth/women; Cheers -- working women/women; Married With Children -- youth/men). While overlap between audience categories is a topic worthy of further serious study, in this project we sought to identify highly rated programs with distinct audience profiles. Because the initial factor analysis indicated that only one of the highly rated programs (Star Trek) was watched predominantly by men, we modified the sampling design to include the highest rated sports program for that time of year (and the one with the highest cost per commercial of any television program) -- the Superbowl. As expected, subsequent factor analyses demonstrated that the Superbowls were watched significantly more by men than the other audience groups, allowing us to constitute a sample of advertisements aired on programs watched by five relatively distinct audiences (younger viewers, older viewers, men, women, and working women). In each of the 3 years, during the 2-week sampling period, we tape recorded the top programs in each audience category until we had 1/2 hr of programming for each. We then selected approximately equal numbers of commercials from each category, beginning with the most popular shows and working our way down each list. This sampling strategy generated a distinctive representative sample of commercials for each target audience and a combined sample of 1699 commercials for the 3 years. Examples of sampled programs by target audience include: older viewers -- Wheel of Fortune, Matlock, younger viewers -- Beverly Hills 90210, Simpsons; men -- The Superbowl, Star Trek; women -- All My Children, Roseanne; working women -- Murphy Brown, Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman. Because neither the Arbitron nor the Nielsen published ratings included categories for race/ethnicity, after we collected our initial sample of programs, we identified a subset of the commercials shown on programs we had already sampled that were targeted to African Ame rican audiences (as indicated by Gray, 1995). These included all commercials shown on the sampled episodes of Roc, Fresh Prince, Martin, Oprah, True Colors, and A Different World. We developed a content analysis coding scheme using commercials from the 1980s. Research assistants were trained in the coding procedures and coded a subset of commercials independently, and the second author tested intercoder
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (8 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

reliability by coding a 15% subsample of commercials. All major variables yielded an acceptable level of agreement among coders, even after adjusting for chance agreement (median percentage agreement for all variables = 90.5, range = 74.4-99.7; median Cohen's K = .64). The primary unit of analysis for this investigation was the character. Any human or animated character who had a speaking part, held or used the advertised product, was on camera for 5 sec, or engaged in verbal or nonverbal interaction with another main character was considered a main character. Non-speaking people pictured in the background and/or not directly interacting with main characters were coded as secondary characters. If a group of secondary characters was pictured doing the same thing, the entire group was co ded as one character. A total of 2641 characters (2030 individuals and 611 groups) were rated by coders according to prominence, age, sex, race, occupation, setting, family relationships, and interaction style (with n reduced because of missing or ambiguous data for some variables, see Tables I-V). In addition, each commercial was coded according to program, genre, target audience, product, voiceover, and number of characters. Variables Based on visual and audio content of commercials, characters were coded according to the dichotomous variables sex, spouse, parent, child, home setting, cross-sex interaction, work status (worker vs. nonworker, excluding athletes and performers), and job authority (order-givers vs. ordertakers). Indices of stereotypic "masculine" and "feminine" behaviors were based on previous studies (Bem, 1974; Bretl & Cantor, 1988; Busby 1975) and used to code for the presence or absence of active/instrumental and passive/emotional styles of interaction. The five active/instrumental behavior characteristics included: (1) leader -- authoritative, dominant, directive, instructs; passes judgement, gives punishment or approval (e.g., a tank commander barking orders, a white-coated physician offering medical advice); (2) respected -- one with high status, honor, admiration, gets special treatment (e.g., suited driver of a luxury sedan has door opened by a valet); (3) independent -- autonomous, self-directed, secure, separate, decisi ve, self-confident, assertive (e.g., smiling, speedy athlete defies gravity, tuxedo-clad man walks down marble steps with aplomb); (4) aggressive -- bold, forceful, competitive, boastful, antagonistic, angry, rough, possessive (e.g., rough play on the basketball court; cowboy ropes steer); (5) instrumental -- calculating, cold, unemotional, self-serving, selfish, rational, goal-oriented (e.g., fast-talking shipping clerk with staccato delivery) [for active instrumental behavior, KR-20 = .64 (the Kuder-Richardson 20 coefficient was used to measure internal consistency instead of Cronbach's alpha since it is more appropriate for scales and indices incorporating dichotomous items, see Magnusson, 1966)]. The five passive emotional behavior characteristics included: (1) follower -- takes orders, receives advice, asks questions, follows instructions, listens to authority (e.g., person with head cold plaintively asks doctor what to take); (2) deferential -- submissive, shows deference and respect (e.g., server brings food, bows, averts eyes); (3) dependent -- other-directed, insecure, indecisive, needs support, confirmation, or encouragement (e.g., person trying unsuccessfully to clean bathtub stains gives up
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (9 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

and pleads for help); (4) passive -- gentle, kind, loving, merciful, nonaggressive, peaceful, negotiator (e.g., parent stares admiringly at sleeping child); (5) emotional -- sensitive, cries easily, shows feelings, verbal self-disclosure, expressive (e.g., tears well up in the eyes of a long-distance telephone caller chatting with a family member on a special holiday) (passive/emotional behavior KR-20 = .52). Characters were coded as an object of another's sexual gaze (e.g., men office workers use binoculars to watch a woman drip burger sauce on her dress; women office workers congregate by the window to admire construction workers drinking soda on their lunch break), as the object of self-gaze (e.g., after eating cereal, woman examines tight-fitting dress in mirror and runs hand over buttocks), or the presence or absence of alluring behavior such as flirting, winking, puckering, batting eyelashes, or sexual teasing (e.g., woman in short, tight dress crosses legs and dangles high-heel shoe on toes while sitting at a bar); provocative attire, including nakedness, half dress, tight fitting or low-cut clothes (e.g., beer commercial with closeup of bikini-clad woman running toward camera on the beach); and for explicit beauty concerns such as characters concerned with enhancing or portraying beauty, and with making themselves more attractive, younger looking, or thinner (e.g., models in various poses testifying that a product enhanced their hair, skin, body, etc.). A dichotomous measure of "sex object" was constructed if any of the above traits was coded as present (KR-20 = .73). Analysis Analyses of all major variables were conducted for four ethnic groups (white, African American, Latino/a, Asian American; see Table I), for White and African American characters by gender (see Table II), and for target audience by gender (see Table III). Multivariate models were estimated predicting the effects of race (White vs. African American), gender, family roles, employment, and target audience on different outcome variables (see Tables IV and V). We used logistic regression techniques to avoid problems associated with nonlinearity of the dichotomous variables and those related to violation of other underlying ordinary least squares assumptions. For each model in Tables IV and V, the dependent variable is the logarithm of the odds that a character will be pictured in a particular way, divided by the odds that the character will not be pictured that way. The comparison group is the modal category (e.g., White male characters shown to a target audience of men), and the effect of each independent variabl e is expressed in terms of the impact of a one-unit change in the independent variable on the log odds of the dependent variable. An alternative interpretation of the maximum likelihood coefficients is presented in the tables as the odds ratio (OR, see Menard, 1995). FINDINGS Statistical analyses reveal that television commercial images continue to offer different portrayals depending on the race/ethnicity and gender of the character. Table I shows that 2058 of 2394 characters (86%) are White, 257 (11%) are
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (10 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

African American, 50 (2%) are Asian American, and just 29 (1%) are Latino. Not only are Whites portrayed more frequently than non-Whites in the commercials, but they also tend to be featured more prominently and are more likely to be shown exercising authority. Table I shows that over 67% of Whites compared to 63% of African Americans, 55% of Latinos, and 50% of Asians are shown as main characters. The difference in being featured as a main character between Whites and the combined non-White group is statistically significant (see Table I). Women characters, whether main or secondary, constitute 45% of all characters in the commercials, a higher proportion than reported in earlier studies. Unlike character representation, voiceovers remain overwhelmingly male, with men constituting 85.9% of the off-screen narration. The portrayal of women also varies by race/ethnicity. Two of three Latino/a characters are women, over one half of Asian American characters are women, but fewer than one half of White or African American characters are women (see Table I). Asian Americans are most likely to be shown in occupational roles, with minimal differences between other groups. If shown on the job, however, Whites are over twice as likely as African Americans to be giving orders or exercising authority, with no recorded cases of Latinos or Asians acting as a boss in the commercials. Turning to family roles in the four race/ethnic groups, we see in Table I that White characters are more likely than non-White characters to be shown as parents. Compared to Whites, Asian characters are significantly more likely to be shown as children, with African Americans least likely to be pictured this way. Finally, White characters are significantly more likely to be shown as spouses than non-Whites. The bottom half of Table I shows that most of the White-non-White differences in observed behaviors or interaction style are the result of comparisons between White and African American characters. Compared to Whites, African American characters are more likely to be shown as aggressive and as active/instrumental. In contrast, African Americans are significantly less likely to be shown as engaged in cross-sex interaction, as sex objects, or as passive/ emotional. In part because of small cell sizes, the differences in style of interaction between Whites and Latinos, or Whites and Asians, did not reach st atistical significance. Since only 29 Latino characters and 50 Asian characters were in the sample, multivariate analyses of gender stereotypes and family relationships were analyzed by comparing White versus African American characters (see Tables II, IV, and V), though results using a White-non-White comparison are similar (results not shown).

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (11 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

Table II presents findings so that the impacts of race and gender can be observed simultaneously. Among men, Whites are significantly less likely than African Americans to be shown as active/instrumental or aggressive, and significantly more likely to be shown engaged in cross-sex interaction, in a home setting, as spouses, or as order givers (see Table II for proportions and significance levels). Among women, Whites are significantly more likely than African Americans to be shown as passive/emotional, in cross-sex interaction, as sex objects, as spouses, or in a home setting. Turning to within-race comparisons, among Whites, men are significantly less likely than women to be shown as sex objects, engaged in cross-sex interaction, in a home setting, or as parents, and significantly more likely than women to be shown as aggressive, active/instrumental, employed, and as order-givers. Among African Americans, men are significantly less likely than women to be shown in a home setting, and significantly more like ly than women to be shown as aggressive or active/instrumental. The largest differences in patterns of portrayal for men characters include the tendency for White men to be shown as order givers and African American men to be shown as aggressive. Table II shows that White men, if shown as employed, are twice as likely to be pictured as order-givers as African American men. In contrast, African-American men characters are almost three times as likely as White men characters to be shown as aggressive. African American women characters are unlikely to be depicted in these stereotypical "masculine" ways. Some of the largest observed differences are in the area of heterosexual relations, with White women more than twice as likely as African American women, and over three times as likely as men, to be shown as sex objects. In addition, Whites are significantly more likely than African Americans to be pictured in cross-sex interaction or in a home setting, with some significant differences by gender. Over 70% of White women are pictured interacting with men, compared to one hal f of African American women. Almost 40% of White women and 30% of African American women are shown in home settings, compared to 26% of White men and only 13% of African American men. Whites are two or three times more likely to be shown as spouses than are African Americans (see Table II). Table III shows that after controlling for sex, character portrayals vary according to target audience about one third of the time. Men audiences are shown men characters who are more likely to be aggressive and active/instrumental, but less likely to be parents, spouses, or engaged in cross-sex interaction. Men audiences are also shown women characters who are more active/instrumental and more likely to be engaged in cross-sex interaction. Contrary to most hypotheses, African American audiences are unlikely to have character portrayals that diverge significantly from the mean for other audiences. African Americans are shown men characters who are somewhat less likely to be passive/emotional, and women characters who are less active/instrumental, less passive/emotional, and less likely to be engaged in cross-sex interaction.

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (12 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

The older target audience is most likely to be shown domestic scenes and family characters. Compared to other audiences, older viewers are shown men characters who are less aggressive, less active/instrumental, and less passive/emotional, but more likely to be spouses, parents, in a home setting, or engaged in cross-sex interaction (see Table III). Older audiences are also shown women characters who are less likely to be active/instrumental, and more likely to be a spouse, to be in a home setting, and to be in cross-sex interaction. In contrast to the older audience, the younger audience has few differences with mean character portrayals and is mostly shown nondomestic characters. Younger audiences are shown men characters and women characters who are less likely to be in a home setting, and women characters who are more likely to be aggressive, active/instrumental, and sex objects. The findings for the women and working women audiences reveal interesting differences. Working women audiences have few differences from other audiences, with men and women characters both more likely to be passive/emotional. In contrast, the general women audience is shown men and women characters who are less passive/emotional. The general women audience is also shown men characters who are less likely aggressive, active/instrumental, or employed, and more likely to be in a home setting. Women audiences are also likely to be shown women characters who are less aggressive, active/instrumental, or employed than others (see Table III). Logistic regression analyses demonstrate that opportunities for domestic and romantic fulfillment are influenced by the race and gender of the character, even when controlling for target audience. Table IV shows that African Americans are significantly less likely to be portrayed in cross-sex interactions, as spouses, or in a home setting. In contrast, women are significantly more likely to be shown in cross-sex interactions, in a home setting, or as parents. Turning to the influence of target audience, Table IV shows that commercials shown to African American audiences are significantly less likely to display cross-sex interaction or home settings. Commercials shown to older audiences are most likely to include domestic imagery, including cross-sex interaction, spouses, home settings, and parents. Similarly, commercials on programs directed toward women (both working and general) are likely to include spouses, home settings, and parents. Adding interaction terms to the multivariate models in Table IV did no t increase the "explained variance" analogue, so were dropped. Table V presents results of multivariate logistic regressions predicting how character type and target audience will effect the likelihood that a character will be shown exhibiting stereotypically "masculine" or "feminine" interaction traits. Following the bivariate results, but after controlling for the simultaneous statistical effects of race, gender, employment, family role, and target audience, we see that African American characters are more likely to be shown as active/instrumental and aggressive (see Table V). Women characters are less likely to be shown as active/instrumental and aggressive, and more likely to be shown as a sex object. The interaction term for Woman*Non-White is significant in all models of Table
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (13 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

V, indicating that African American women are least likely to be shown as active/instrumental, aggressive, passive/emotional, or sex objects. Characters who are spouses are significantly less likely to be active/instrumental and more likely to be shown as sex objects. Characters who are pare nts are similarly significantly less likely to be shown as active/instrumental or aggressive, but are also marginally less likely (p[less than] .10) to be shown as passive/emotional or sex objects. Employed characters are more likely to be active/instrumental and less likely to be sex objects. African American audiences are less likely to be shown passive/emotional characters. Older target audiences are less likely to be shown active/instrumental or aggressive characters, as are general women target audiences. Working women are more likely to be shown passive/emotional characters, and younger target audiences are less likely to be shown active/instrumental characters (see Table V). Placing the Findings in Context As a measure of the continuing symbolic power of men in popular cultural representations, the overwhelming majority of the commercials we studied used male voiceovers. Nevertheless, we discovered that women are not as absent from television commercials as they once were, representing almost one half of the main and secondary characters. Not surprisingly, the presence of women varies by race/ethnicity, with the least pictured ethnic groups -- Latino and Asian -- having the highest proportion of women. Similarly, Asians and Latinas are most likely to be shown as children, further suggesting a marginalized or low-power status in commercial imagery for these groups. As discussed below, the ways women and men are pictured has changed less than their numerical representation, but there is significant variation by race/ethnicity. Eighty-six percent of the characters in the commercials are White. Finding a preponderance of whites in television commercials replicates previous results, though the proportion of African Americans (11%) is higher in this study than in many earlier ones (Weigel et al., 1980). The percentage of African American characters in the advertisements is not significantly different from population estimates for Blacks in the region, but the proportions of Asian Americans (2%) and Latinos (1%) are well below their representation in the television market area (combined estimates put the Latino/Asian proportion of the total market population in the sampled southern California market area at approximately one third, ten times greater than their representation in the commercials; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1997). Even if we compare the preponderance of these groups in the commercials to their lower representation in the entire U.S. population, they are still significantly underrepresented. Taken as a group, non-Whites con tinue to be relatively absent from these advertisements (and, presumably, from the television programming they underwrite). Though African American characters are more prominent than other minorities, and according to this analysis more common than they once were, we find evidence that pejorative stereotypes of Blacks are still common. Both underrepresentation (or near invisibility in the case of Latinos and Asians) and stereotyped portrayal (in the case of African American men and
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (14 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

women) can have important consequences, for it suggests that ethnic minorities lack equal access to the symbolic cultural resources routinely available to Whites. Results from this study confirm that gender and race are inseparably linked within the symbol system of commercial television. Men are significantly more likely to display active/instrumental behavior than other characters, and African American men are most likely to be shown as aggressive. This study thus provides empirical support for recent claims that African American men tend to be depicted in the popular media as hypermasculine or menacing (e.g., Gray, 1995; hooks, 1992). We also find that opportunities for domestic and romantic fulfillment are similarly shaped by race and gender. White men and White women are twice as likely to be shown as spouses as their African American counterparts, and white women are most likely to be shown as parents. Similar findings obtain whether characters are pictured at home, with African American men least likely to be at home, followed by White men and African American women. White women, in contrast, are shown in the home more frequently than anywhere else. Thus, in sp ite of some changes in the relative mix of characters, commercials continue to associate White women with parenting and domestic settings and tend to exclude African Americans from these settings. Since fantasy images of happy parents, well-scrubbed children, and sparkling homes constitute advertising's view of the American Dream, it is significant that it is mostly Whites who populate such scenes. A similar confluence of race and gender is evident in the portrayal of possibilities for achieving romantic or sexual fulfillment. A large majority of White women characters are shown in cross-sex interaction. In addition, White women are routinely and explicitly used as sex objects: 1 in four is shown in provocative pose or attire, compared to about 1 in 10 African American women and just 1 in 14 men. In short, White women continue to be used to sell products on television by linking them to images of love, sex, marriage, and domestic fulfillment. These results hold after controlling for the effects of other demographic, situational, and audience variables. Again, we can see the utility of analyzing race and gender simultaneously: It is White women who are pictured predominately as sex objects. A lack of such exploitive imagery for African American women could be considered positive, except for the fact that it is part of a larger pattern of excluding African American women from images of fantasy consumptio n and personal fulfillment. Over a decade ago, some journalists announced that men were becoming "the ad world's new bimbos" (Newsweek, 1988). Our results provide little support for this claim. As noted above, regardless of race or ethnicity, women continue to be much more likely than men to be shown as sex objects, but it is White women who are singled out as icons of beauty. In television commercials, White women are routinely shown being "checked out" by a man, inspecting themselves, flirting, trying to look pretty, or wearing something revealing. Such poses are almost twice as frequent for White women as those in which they are pictured on the job. In contrast, African American women are more likely to be shown on the job than
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (15 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

they are to be shown as sex objects. When coding sexual gazers along with sexual objects (results not shown in tables), White men and White women in the commercials are equally likely to be pictured as inspecting another in an erotic manner. African Americans, on the other hand, are rarely pictured this way. Whites, it seems, are granted more sexual license than non-Whites in television commercials, both as sexual initiators and as recipients of erotic attention. This finding contradicts assertions by some scholars (e.g., hooks, 1992), that Black women are typically shown as exotic and sexually available. Supporting the claims of some media critics (e.g., Gray, 1995; hooks, 1992), access to sexual and domestic fulfillment in the commercials is strongly shaped by the gender and race of characters. Contrary to predictions based on market fragmentation, the pattern of access to domestic and romantic fulfillment varies only slightly according to the show on which the advertisements appear. Our analysis does demonstrate, however, that images of romantic and family roles are shown most frequently to older viewers, women, and working women, and least frequently to African Americans. Not surprisingly, older viewers and women are also shown fewer active/instrumental or aggressive characters. One unanticipated finding is that after controlling for a host of other variables, the target audience of working women is shown significantly more images of passive/emotional behavior (by both men and women). Though these results should be interpreted cautiously, we speculate that advertising images directed toward different grou ps of women may symbolically resolve contradictions in their lives. Although employed women are frequently characterized as acting more assertively and exercising more authority in their everyday lives than nonemployed women, they are most likely to be shown television images of feminine deference and emotionality. Similarly, they are about as likely as others to be shown images of women as sex objects. Employed women are thus viewing fantasy images that might be designed to reassure them they can be, or should be, conventionally feminine. On the daytime and early evening shows watched more often by stay-at-home mothers, commercials display fewer women on the job, but women characters are less likely to reflect conventional feminine emotionality and dependence. Marketers may be directing these counterstereotypical images to subgroups of women in order to raise emotional insecurities or to symbolically resolve normative tensions. Such questions deserve attention in future studies.

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (16 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

CONCLUSION In today's mass-mediated consumer society, popular cultural artifacts like television play an increasingly important role in the construction of reality and the maintenance of social hierarchy. Consciously and unconsciously, people rely on television imagery to interpret and understand their everyday lives. Even when we try to ignore television commercials, they make available a set of cognitive stereotypes that are called into play during routine interaction. We suggest that television commercials do more than offer people images of selves defined through the consumption of products. In addition, they shape images of others and sustain group boundaries that come to be taken for granted. Feelings of entitlement, subtle forms of prejudice, and institutional racism are thus reproduced in and through commercial television imagery. Although television was attempting to be racially inclusive during the early 1990s, its commercials reproduced many stereotypes of race and gender. Although we find that African Americans and women are more plentiful in TV advertisements than they were in earlier decades, the ways that they are represented reinforce many existing prejudices. At the same time, and contrary to predictions about targeted marketing leading to insular communities, we find that racist and sexist stereotypes cut across all audiences. Commercials targeted to African Americans contain about as many racial stereotypes as those directed toward Whites. Similarly, commercials targeted to women have about as many gender stereotypes as those directed to other audiences. In contrast to earlier studies, we find that African American men are often portrayed as independent or respected. Nevertheless, we also find much to worry about in contemporary advertising imagery. Black men are routinely shown as aggressive, and Latinos, soon to be the largest ethnic minority in the nation, remain virtually invisible. Although African American men on television seem to have gained symbolic access to some of the instrumental benefits of masculinity (primarily through sports), they are simultaneously constrained by stereotyped images of take-charge manhood that allow them little symbolic room for experiencing reciprocal romance, gentleness, or domestic fulfillment. Similarly, women of color are portrayed in contradictory and confining ways on commercial television. Although they are less overtly exploited as sex objects than White women, their beauty is less revered, and they are not granted symbolic access to romantic and family relationships. Although not typically represented according to older stereotypes of hypersexuality or as domestics, African American women are rarely pictured enjoying the romance and domestic good life that are so common in television commercials. And although African American men enjoy some constrained symbolic authority in ads, their female counterparts are rarely pictured exercising authority or even showing emotion. In the fantasy lexicon of commercial television, African American women barely exist. Like Latinos, Latinas, and Asian Americans, their symbolic presence in network television is hardly noticeable.
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (17 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

By simultaneously considering race and gender in television imagery, we have been able to move a little closer to understanding the popular cultural milieu and the part it plays in reproducing contemporary stereotypes. Although we lament marketers' promotion of insularity among consumer oriented "lifestyle communities," we find little evidence that advertising imagery became any more or less racist or sexist because of it. In fact, our most important finding is that while different audiences receive slightly different images, most commercial advertising continues to perpetuate narrow stereotypes, thus contributing to subtle forms of prejudice. Exclusion of Asians and Latinos, and denial of romantic and domestic fulfillment to African Americans, encourages viewers of television commercials in all audience categories to withhold positive emotions toward outgroup members. We reject the premise that the recent turn toward targeted marketing is a prime cause of social inequality, because virtually all forms of television marketing perpetuate images of White hegemonic masculinity and White feminine romantic fulfillment. Our results show that we have moved beyond the simple homogeneous mass marketing that was common to television in the 1950s and 1960s. Nevertheless, our results also show that there has been no fundamental change in the ways that television marketing tends to essentialize gender and race/ethnic differences. Neither a return to universal mass marketing and programming nor a further move toward targeted advertisements and programs will fundamentally alter the impact of commercial television on social relations. The medium under both types of marketing promises fulfillment to individuals by offering stereotyped fantasy images of perfect people consuming supposedly indispensable products. We suggest that these patterns of representation frame perceptions of social op portunities for women and people of color that reinscribe difference, promote prejudiced attitudes, and set cognitive limits on the potential for social change. As the opening quote suggests, it is less important that television imagery match any particular demographic profile than that it provide a range of symbolic resources for negotiating equitable interactions among diverse peoples. Contrary to conventional advertising mythology, modern consumers cannot have it all. By inundating people with images of race and gender that presuppose differential access to authority, romance, sex, and domestic fulfillment, commercial television promotes and protects existing social hierarchies. Until we are exposed to more egalitarian images in the mass media, it will be difficult for the majority of Americans to imagine a world in which men and women of all ethnic groups can be truly equal. To the extent that other social sources of support for identity and meaning are lacking, television and its superficial materialist imagery will continue to hold sway over our lives. Unless and until television programming can be produced by and for a wider range of people, we will be unwitting victims to the superficial racist and sexist imagery that permeates our popular culture. The sad part is that even though more people seem to be viewing television with a critical eye, the cognitive and emotional symbolism that undergirds it continues to shape our perceptions and promote the maintenance of subtle prejudice against women and
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (18 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

people of color. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank Michele Adams, Kenneth Allan, Roderick Ferguson, and Latrice Jones for excellent research assistance, and the referees for constructive suggestions. This project was supported by research grants from the University of California, Riverside. (1.) To whom correspondence should be addressed at Department of Sociology, University of California, Riverside, California 92521-0419; e-mail: coltrane@ucr.edu. REFERENCES Bagdikian, B. (1987). The media monopoly (3rd ed.). Boston: Beacon. Baptiste, D. A. (1986). The image of the Black family portrayed by television: A critical comment. Marriage and Family Review, 10, 41-63. Baran, S., Mok, J., Land, M., & Kang, T. (1989). You are what you buy: Mass-mediated judgments of people's worth. Journal of Communication, 39, 46-54. Barthel, D. (1988). Putting on appearances. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Barthes, R. (1957/1973). Mythologies. London: Paladin. Bem, S. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162. Bretl, D. J., & Cantor, J. (1988). The portrayal of men and women in U.S. television commercials. Sex Roles, 18, 595-609. Brown, J. C. (1993, February 1). Which black is beautiful? Advertising Age, 1993(February 1), 19. Browne, B. (1998). Gender stereotypes in advertising on children's television in the 1990s. Journal of Advertising, 27, 83-97. Busby, L. (1975). Sex-role research on the mass media.Journal of Communication, 25,107-131. Busby, L. (1985). The mass media and sex-role socialization. In J. Dominick and J. Fletcher (Eds.), Broadcasting research methods (pp. 267-95). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Cantor, M. (1980). Prime time television. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Coltrane, S., & Allan, K. (1994). "New" fathers and old stereotypes. Masculinities, 2, 43-66. Comstock, G. (1991). Television in America. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (19 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

Courtney, A., & Whipple, T. (1983). Sex stereotyping in advertising. Lexington, MA: Heath. Davis, D. M. (1990). Portrayals of women in prime-time network television. Sex Roles, 23, 325-322. Dennis, E. E., & Pease, E. C. (1996). The media in black and white. New Brunswick; NJ: Transaction. Dines, G. (1995). Class, gender, and race in North American media studies. Race, Gender, & Class, 3, 97-112. Eutman, R. (1993). Framing. Journal of Communication, 43, 51-58. Ewen, S. (1976). Captains of consciousness: Advertising and the social roots of consumer culture. New York: McGraw-Hill. Fejes, F. (1992). Masculinity as fact. In S. Craig (Ed.), Men, masculinity, and the media (pp. 9-22). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Fowles, J. (1996). Advertising and popular culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Frazer, J., & Frazer, T. (1993). Father Knows Best and The Cosby Show: Nostalgia and the sitcom tradition. Journal of Popular Culture, 27, 163-172. Fuller, L. K. (1992). The Cosby Show: Audiences, impact, and implication. Westport, CT: Greenwood. Gamson, W., Croteau, D., Hoynes, W., & Sasson, T. (1992). Media images and the social construction of reality. Annual Review of Sociology, 18, 373-393. Gerbner, G. (1995). The hidden message in anti-violence public service announcements. Harvard Educational Review, 65, 92-98. Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Gitlin, T. (1983). Inside prime time. New York: Pantheon. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis. New York: Harper. Goffman, E. (1979). Gender advertisements. New York: Harper Colophon. Goldman, R. (1992). Reading ads socially. New York: Routledge. Goldman, R., Heath, D., and Smith, S. (1991). Commodity feminism. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 8, 333-351. Gray, H. (1989). Television, Black Americans and the American dream. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 6, 376-87. Gray, H. (1995). Watching race: Television and the struggle for "Blackness." Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Grossberg, L., Wartella, E., & Whitney, D. C. (1998). Media Making: Mass media
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (20 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

in a popular culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hall, S. (1995). The whites of their eyes: Racist ideologies and the media. In G. Dines and J. Humez (Eds.), Gender, race and class in media (pp. 18-22). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hirschman, E., & Holbrook, M. (1982). Hedonic consumption. Journal of Marketing 46, 92-101. hooks, b. (1992). Black looks: Race and representation. Boston: South End Press. Humphrey, R., & Schuman, H. (1984). The portrayal of Blacks in magazine advertisements: 1950-1982. Public Opinion Quarterly, 48, 551-563. Illouz, E. (1996). Consuming the romantic utopia: Love and the cultural contradictions of capitalism. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Jhally, S. (1987). The codes of advertising: Fetishism and the political economy of meaning in the consumer society. New York: St. Martin's Press. Kellner, D. (1990). Television and the crisis of democracy. Boulder, CO: Westview. Kellner, D. (1995). Cultural studies, multiculturalism and media culture. In G. Dines and J. Humez (Eds.), Gender, race and class in media (pp. 5-17). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kern-Foxworth, M. (1994) Aunt Jemima, Uncle Ben, and Rastus. Blacks in advertising. Westport, CT: Greenwood. Lazier, L., & Kendrick, A. (1993). Women in advertisements: Sizing up the images, roles, and functions. In P. Creedon (Ed.), Women in mass communication (pp. 199-219). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Lichter, R., Lichter, L., & Rothman, S. (1994). Prime time. Washington, DC: Regnery. Lovdal, L. T. (1989). Sex role messages in television commercials. Sex Roles, 21, 715-724. Magnusson, D. (1966). Test theory. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (21 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

Marable, M. (1996). Reconciling race and reality. In E. Dennis and E. Pease (Eds.), The media in black and white (pp. 11-17). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Maxwell, R. (1991). The image is gold: Value, the audience commodity, and fetishism. Journal of Film and Video, 43, 29-45. McClelland, J. R. (1993). Visual images and re-imaging. In P. Creedon (Ed.), Women in mass communication (pp. 220-234). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Menard, S. W. (1995). Applied logistic regression analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Newsweek, 25 January 1988, "The ad world's new bimbos." Pettigrew, T. F. (1989). The nature of modern racism in the United States. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 39, 291-303. Pettigrew, T. F. & Mertens, R. W. (1995). Subtle and blatant prejudice in Western Europe. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 57-75. Press, A. (1991). Women watching television: Gender, class, and generation in the American television experience. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Rook, D. W. (1985). The ritual dimension of consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 251-264. Schudson, M. (1984). Advertising, the uneasy persuasion. New York: Basic Books. Schudson, M. (1989). How culture works. Theory and Society, 18, 153-180. Sheperd, J. M. (1980). The portrayal of Black women in the ads of popular magazines. Western Journal of Black Studies, 4, 179-182. Signorelli, N. (1991). A sourcebook on children and television. New York: Greenwood. Soley, L., & Kurzbard, G. (1986). Sex in advertising: A comparison of 1964 and 1984. Journal of Advertising, 15, 46-55. Solomon, M. R. (1983). The role of products as social stimuli: A symbolic interactionist perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 319-329. Taylor, E. (1989). Prime time families: Television culture in postwar America. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Tolson, A. (1996). Mediations: Text and discourse in media studies. London: Arnold. Turow, J. (1997). Breaking up America: Advertisers and the new media world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (22 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]

Sex Roles: A Journal of Research:

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1997). Statistical abstract of the United States. (117th ed.). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Weigel, R., Loomis, J., & Soja, M. (1980). Race relations on prime time television. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 884-893. Whittler, T. E. (1991). The effects of actors' race in commercial advertising. Journal of Advertising, 20, 54-60. Wilkes, R. E., & Valencia H. (1989). Hispanics and Blacks in television commercials. Journal of Advertising, 18, 19-25. Williams, R. (1993). Advertising: The magic system. In S. During (Ed.), The cultural studies reader (pp. 320-338). New York: Routledge. Williamson, J. (1978). Decoding advertisements. London: Marion Boyars. Wilson, C. C., II, & Gutierrez, F. (1995). Race, multiculturalism, and the media. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------COPYRIGHT 2000 Plenum Publishing Corporation in association with The Gale Group and LookSmart. COPYRIGHT 2000 Gale Group -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2294/2000_March/63993940/print.jhtml (23 of 23) [7/15/2001 8:47:44 PM]