Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Foxy Ladies -- Why one network applies so much makeup [View all]CatWoman
(80,288 posts)22. from the article:
Of course, TV news shows have always put a premium on appearance, more so for women than for men. And its hardly a revelation that some networks place more pressure on women than do others: C-SPAN has no makeup room at all, just a collection of powder compacts that guests can use if they are so inclined. At MSNBC, Rachel Maddow is known to prefer minimal makeup, while other anchors want more, and the artists oblige with a range of choices, from neutral tones to berry hues. Bloomberg TV tends toward the corporate aesthetic; CNN favors a professional style that makes women and men look crisp, as if they have been ironed. As for Fox, suffice it to say that there is a YouTube montage devoted to leg shots of Fox anchors, who are often outfitted in body-hugging dresses of vibrant red and turquoise, their eyes enhanced by not only liner and shadow but also false lashes. A Fox regular once commented to me that she gets more calls from network management about her hair, clothes, and makeup than about what she says. I just think of it as a uniform, she said of her getup.
it certainly appears that it "is" unique to Fox....
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
90 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I think in this case, it's making them look as different from men and normal women as possible
ehrnst
Dec 2012
#6
RW men aren't going to pay attention to an average looking woman on TV, especially if she's angry
ehrnst
Dec 2012
#8
i will wait for our men at du that promote this shit, to tell us how it is.... nt
seabeyond
Dec 2012
#10
and how hotness is this emo-lutionary NEED and women should just accept it?
Care Acutely
Dec 2012
#74
Salt/Pepper-Haired Middle Age uncle type paired with a young-ish buxom female!
HughBeaumont
Dec 2012
#11
Sex sells, especially to the ignorant trash that comprise the vast majority of the Fox audience. n/t
RomneyLies
Dec 2012
#12
Firstly, none of these women, on Fox or any other network, qualify for those slurs.
PavePusher
Dec 2012
#40
seriously -- we're now the ones labelling some women as looking like "sluts" based on their clothing
onenote
Dec 2012
#43
I'm sorry but whenever I see Ann Coulter in one of those tiny, ill-fitting dresses
CatWoman
Dec 2012
#48
CNN right now, presenter in tight bright red dress, mid-thigh length, knee-high boots...
PavePusher
Dec 2012
#50
This "stuff" also comes from Rupert Murdoch and his use of page 3 girls @ The Sun ....
Botany
Dec 2012
#18
Not mad in the slightest. It's just that "makeup = pornstar" is an unusual attitude
Nye Bevan
Dec 2012
#71
Is this article suggesting that they're made up to look like trophy wives?
Baitball Blogger
Dec 2012
#30
That goes to one of the points of the essay -- "rich older men" (looks don't matter) +
Nay
Dec 2012
#41