It's really shocking to me that during a period of incredible turmoil in Libya, the media would have the audacity to put aside the real issues, and instead reflect on Muammar Qaddafi's fashion sense throughout the years. The Atlantic reported in a recent article, "How the Media's Covered Qaddafi's Clothing Through the Years," that ABC already put together a slide show of his fashion mishaps throughout the years. Time Magazine named Qaddafi one of worst dressed leaders.
Here's an example of a Qaddafi fashion show with commentary from NBC's Nancy Foreman (video from The Atlantic article): http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5orKHwtEZsI
We discussed in our last class the media's obsession with political scandal, and gave numerous examples for types of scandals, from bribes, to affairs, to fashion. I can understand why the public would be interested in knowing whether its leader was engaging in illegal activity, since that act is simply an example of his or her general behavior. But to focus on their dress, as though it defines who they are, I say: seriously?
I completely agree. That was possibly one of the most ridiculous movies I have ever watched. I think female presidential and VP candidates suffer more from this, but I wonder if it is completely baseless. Clothes matter. I noticed the first shot in the film of Qaddafi in the military whites. It says a lot about the message he wants to send his people - one of brilliance and splendor, but military control. Maybe I am starting to sound like those magazines, but I think I am simply noticing that media reporting of leaders clothing is not completely ridiculous?
ReplyDeleteAs usual, the media is reporting to the lowest common denominator - they think this sort of thing sells.
ReplyDelete