Flufiy

JUST WHEN I thought it
was safe to watch television
commercials again ... some
advertiser shows me two lit-
tle girls pouting over who
has the fluffiest towels.

Catherine
Atyeo

JUST ADD WATER

This advertisement alone
justifies my highly sporadic view-
ing of the tube. The creative
director for this ad —- and the
term ‘‘creative”’ is used loosely
here — has managed to fall back
on the old sexual stereotypes and
exploit children at the same time.

The two little girls in the
Downy ad are barely old enough
to speak in sentences, but they're
already obsessed about towel fluf-
finess and freshness.

One little girl’s pile is uniortu-
nately flatter and lower than the
other little girl’s, and Little Miss
Loser gets into somebdody’s idea
of a stereotypical female snit. End
of an ad and, presumably, the
beginning of the little girls’ getting
their priorities in life straight.

At the most, this type of adver-
tising should be a momentary, sil-
ly image that occupies a creative
director’s brain for no more than
three seconds, As it is, thousands
of mothers (and let’s hore fathers,

towels ma

too) across Canada must now
assure their daughters that leading
a life of some value does not in-
clude attention to towel! fuffiness.

Another ad right up there for
the Tasteless Exploitation Award
is the Hyundai commercial that
somehow entwines the purchase of
a family car with the wife giving
birth.

Gee, I bet you didn’t know that
buying a hunk of steel to get you
from Point A to Poim B was
equal in significance to the most
important moment in a coupie’s
life.

The only thing that could have
made this ad more exploitive and
tasteless would have been to have
the car dealer in the delivery room
yelling: ‘‘Push! Push! Just one
more big push and you get to
drive home in your new car!”’

Talking to women about adver-
tising, one of the persistent irri-
tants is the continuing portrayal
of females as mindless playthings
in some ads.

One com:nercial of the Honda
Prelude, shot entirely in arty black

id white, is a series of quick
glimpses of Beautiful People.
What is striking about this ad is
that the men are all doing things
(jumping rope, driving a car, etc.)
and all the women (every one of
them in a tight mini) are hanging
on the men like ornaments.

The implication here is that
women are great at waiting
around for and admiring men,
but, heck, don’t expect them to
pass a driving test.

Even good ’ol Ray Charles who
can still sing like nobody's
business, stars in an ad where the
women appear only as excitable
bimbettes.

Ray is in something that looks
like a courtroom. A male inquisi-
tor.at the congressional-type hear-
ing asks Ray for the secret ingre-
dient of Dict Pepsi.

Suddenly Ray’s musical
response begins, and the females
in the courtroom start shedding
sombre clothing and end up in

skimpy gold-sequinned outfits. I
mean, when will women [earn to
keep their clothes on during
judicial proceedings?

When an ad does show women
with enough brainpower to choose
the right hair conditioner, they’re
always stunningly beautiful (in a
fashion model sense) as well as
brainy.

Thus we get Oi! of Olay’s ver-
sion of Top Gun, with the young
male flyer panting over the older
(but she doesn’t look it, thanks to
Oil of Olay) female pilot.

After watching television ads at
randoin one day this week, |
would say some progress has been
made in reducing sex stereotyping.

Something fishy going on

in cover up of salmon tumor

Dear Editor:

I think your readers might find
this story interesting.

I caught a 12 Ib. spring salmon
last November in the Sechelt area.
White cleaning the salmon I
noticed two large, greenish grey
tumors the size of ‘‘loonies’’
located on an enlarged, swollen
liver.

I phoned Terry Jacks of En-
vironmental Watch, who in turn
phoned Ross Squire of Federal
Fisheries in Madeira Park. Squire
stated the salmon should be
frozen immediately and brought
into his office. (Information on
the tumors would be available
within 10 days.)

The next morning, pictures of
the tumors were taken by Susan
Thorne of The Press newspaper
located in Sechelt. She said there
would be front page coverage and
promised me a set of prints. i
phoned Thorne a few days ater
and she said the pictures turned
out great.

1 anxiously awaited the results
from the Fisheries research lab in
‘Nanaimo. Two months later (not
within 10 days, as promised) Fish-
eries reported the salmon had not
been. presented in good shape
{even though it had and I had
followed their exact instructions
for freezing) and therefore they
could not satisfy me with a report.

They then said the salmon
shouldn’t have been frozen and

they also expressed a strange con-
cern about a rumor they’d heard,
that Terry Jacks was also anxious-
ly awaiting the !ab results.

Thorne had previously con-
tacted Jacks and he had told her
he wanted to see if there was any
similarity in the tumors on the
salmon and the cancerous tumors
taken from bottom fish near pulp
mills,

Just for the sake of interest,
Environment Canada reports
“30% of all bottom fish taken
near pulp mills have precancerous
tumors,”

Jeff Marliave (Vancouver
Aquarium scientist) says, “Of
three bottom trawls we conducted
in Howe Sound, the catch of am-
Phipods and other small crusta-
ceans was most prolific one
kilometre off Howe Sound Pulp
and Paper Ltd.’s Port Mellon
mill.”

Renate Kroesa (toxic research
director of Greenpeace) states:
“The significant warmer water
from the pulp mill effluent and
the presence of pulp mill nutrients
would likely account for their
abundance.’”’ Riarliave concluded
that these crustaceans were ‘‘great
salmon food.”’

The Department of Fisheries
and Oceans reports: ‘‘Crustaceans
taken in the vicinity of pulp mills
are contaminated with cancer-
causing chlorinated organics.’’ Lee
Straight (former Vancouver Sun

columnist and chinook salmon
expert) said: ‘‘Certain times of the
year spring salmon gorge
themselves primarily on am-
phipods and other small crusta-
ceans.”*

To return to my story, I went to
see Susan Thorne and informed
her of what Fisheries had.said to
me. She then informed me that
the pictures and negatives of
tumors had somehow mysteriously
disappeared from the office files.

In conclusion, I’d like to say
that my only intention in this
whole matter was to warn fish-
ermen of cancerous fish that are
out there and to make sure they
check them carefully before con-
sumption.

lam 72 years old, and after 41
years of fishing for a rapidly
disappearing species, I am now
totally disillusioned.

I no longer enjoy my favorite
pastime — fishing for the king of
all salmon, the once mighty
chinook.

if we are to continue to main-
tain this incredible coast of ours,
we have to deal with reality now!

We can no longer hide our en-
vironments} problems, for they
cannot wait any longer, and we
can no longer put up with bungles
and cover-ups from government
and industry and sometimes even
media.

John Strad
Halfmoon Bay

Friday, April 24, 1992 - North Shore News — 7

I consider most of the ads I saw
neutral! or inoffensive in terms of
stereotyping.

But some ads still protrude into
our living rooms like a Bud Man’s
southern appendage.

And while we're on the subject
of beer commercials, too many
beer companies are still blatantly
exploiting women by portraying
them as no more than sex objects
for men.

As Shari Graydon, regional
representative for Mediawatch
notes, there is no motivation to
change this strategy, since most
beer drinkers are men and sex
moves product.

These ads also perpetuate male

Headline

de by fluffy minds

(We INTERRUPT THIS
COMMERCIAL..FORA.

stereotypes. Every beer-drinking
male prefers a woman looking like
Vanna White over a female
“Jeopardy” champion.

As the resources of a non-
profit, mainly volunteer-run
organization like Mediawatch are
limited, Graydon suggests women
and men must write letters of
complaints about advertising:
“Consumers need to make
themselves heard. It's not enough
to compiain amongst ourselves.’’

Until we show zero-level toler-
ance for these ads, we'll see
preschoolers graduate from fluffy
towel fanatics to being Bud
Women — and others viewing this
as a worthwhile goal in life.

did harm

to reputation of
logging industry

Dear Editor:

Please tell your headline writer
(‘‘Hlegal logging probed,’
March 25) that chopping down
trees to improve somebody’s
view is not “‘logging.’’

Logging is an activity that
drives B.C. manufacturing,
trade and — most significantly
employment, and under
normal circumstances is strictly
supervised by the previncial
government.

Whoever chopped down the
hemiock and alder trees along
the Upper Levels Highway was
not interested in sawing the
trees into logs. Hlegal? Abso-

lutely, and it should be stop-
ped. But call it what it is.

While there may be no
distinction in your mind be-
tween what loggers do and the
actions of people who indis-
criminately chop down public
trees to improve their own
viewscapes, the headline
undeservedly harmed the repu-
tation of the men and women
who work conscientiously in
our forests.

It seems to me those folks
are suffering enough. ,
J.J. Munro
Chairman
Forest Alliance of B.C.

Law must be enforced

Dear Editor:

Thank you for publicizing the
desecration of Myrtle Park.

How can we alow these uncar-
ing and selfish culprits to get away
with cutting trees on park land?

Ron Myers’ statement which
indicates that it would be difficult
and costly to prcesecute the of-
fenders is hard to accept. It is a
clearly worded invitation jor ir-
responsible persons to ignore the
law. Our young people should not
be given this message.

If a public building were wilful-
ly damaged, law enforcement

agencies would immdediately react
to apprehend and prosecute the
offenders.

Our parks are public property
and should merit similar protec-
tion.

It is the responsibility of all of
us to preserve the environment,
and in North and West Vancouver
our trees are at the top of the list.

Surely it should not require a
genius to investigate this case, lay
charges and make them stick.

H. Cowan

’ Nosth Vancouver