Scatter Brain says:
While recently contemplating possible topics to write about concerning advertising, marketing and the beauty industry it occurred to me that these businesses are strikingly similar in that they are all businesses of “perception.”
Perception is reality
Just as different cultures and different periods in history have dictated our discernment of beauty, advertising has encouraged us to embrace certain trends simply by taking advantage of perceptions attached to carefully selected words and ideas. In fact, William Shakespeare hit the proverbial nail on the head centuries ago when he penned the lines, “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” Or very bluntly (and not nearly as poetically)…what matters most is to ascertain what something is, not be influenced by what it is called or the words used to describe it.
Since this is a website run by cosmetic chemists, let’s put on our lab coats, our thinking caps and stick a couple of popular cosmetic advertising buzzwords under the microscope and see what we can uncover. I’ll give you a hint. We’re looking for perceptions regarding these words or more accurately I suppose…misconceptions.
Word play
The two words I currently find the most innocently misleading in cosmetic advertising are “chemical” and “natural.” Both of these words are presently in vogue and are used repeatedly in the push to sell beauty products. But, in today’s beauty lexicon, “chemical” is something of a pariah while “natural” is what we aspire to.
Unfortunately, the word “chemical” needs a good press agent. The word tends to conjure up images of sulfur stinking labs where radioactive and toxic substances are born in beakers and test tubes.
Chemical stuff
So what is the real deal behind this word “chemical?” Well the simple answer is this…chemistry is the study of matter and how it interacts with other matter. Guess what? Anything made of matter (which all things are) is a chemical. Water is a chemical. Yep, simple H2O. There is nothing more basic and nothing more innate to our daily lives than this little molecule made up of hydrogen and oxygen. Water is the epitome of “natural” but we bathe in and drink this “chemical” daily.
Unlike “chemical,” “natural” makes us think of vibrant green leaves, fluffy clouds, cleansing rain and Mother Nature enveloping us in her largesse and love.
Natural stuff
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge fan of “natural.” I’m always looking for products that are environmentally green and physically wholesome. However, just because “chemical” is perceived as bad and “natural” is identified as good doesn’t necessarily make it so. This is why you need to be careful when evaluating beauty claims to make sure you aren’t fooled by the perception certain words like “chemical” and “natural” bring to the table
As another example, think of a poisonous plant. Plants are natural are they not? Yet, I’d hazard a guess that not a single reader here would want the “natural” components found in poison ivy to show up in their face cream.
The Beauty Brains bottom line
To further untangle perception from reality, look at it this way…you could be putting something chemical on your skin that’s as natural as water or something natural on your skin that’s as dangerous as poison ivy. But, many beauty ads today would have you believe that anything “chemical” is destructive while products that are “natural” are healthy and helpful. It’s not that the words are wrong or even wrongly used. It’s just that our perceptions of the ideas behind these words help shape our understanding of their use and sometimes this understanding is skewed.
So, the next time you hear a product touted as “all natural and chemical free” realize that while this sounds incredible, you might need to dig a bit deeper to see if there is a real positive benefit to these claims or if clever marketers and copywriters are using words with certain perceptions to encourage you to buy the product. Simply put, be careful not to always believe what you initially perceive. And don’t forget to smell the roses.
By the way, if you have an idea or topic you’d like me to investigate, I’d love to have your input and ideas.
Scatter Brain is a real-life copywriter for hire. If you’re interested in contacting her with business opportunities, please write to “Scatter Brain” care of thebeautybrains@gmail.com.
Loading ...
{ 1 trackback }
{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }
Great stuff – might be the most succinct formulation of the silly chemical/natural business yet. And don’t get me started on mineral oil … grrr.
Could we have a post on silica and silicones at some point?
Like with chemical/natural, the rhetoric is all over the place and obfuscating actual meaning; confusing for the non-chemist, hence easy for consumers to be led astray by various competing ideological camps and their commercial wings.
.. Wow, that myspace picture up there is kind of obnoxious. I was liking the blog without pictures of tween girls sticking out their tongues and making faces.. oh well.
Good article though.
Wow, I was just thinking yesterday that you all should do a post on the word “chemical”!
I’m sooooo sick and tired of seeing ads for “chemical-free” products! How is that even allowed?
Sometimes people will then add, “Well, I mean not man-made chemicals!” but they forget that some of the chemicals that they use are still man-made even if we call them by their common names instead of those scary sounding “chemical” names.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a bit of an all-natural, green freak myself. But I want to know about what goes into the products I use, regardless of whether they’re “natural” or not.
When has being “green” ever meant that we should throw out everything we learned in Chemistry 101?
Oh wait… I forget that chemistry classes are going the way of the dodo since they aren’t on all those standardized tests. *Smacks head*
I am certainly glad that I didn’t buy into the whole “natural” craze. Chemicals can be good for you. Where would we be today without chemicals? Hasn’t anyone learned anything from Ochem?
Thanks for this post, I loved it. I’m glad that I’m not the only one peeved by the proliferation of “natural” and “chemical-free” claims.
I read something in Skeptic magazine that was helpful is the idea that all-natural is not necessarily better. The concentrations of active chemicals in herbs can vary based on conditions like sun and rainfall. The dosage is really hard to standardize. Also, herbs can have hitchhikers like fungi and bacteria. Would anyone choose digitalis over modern heart medication?
A more accurate way that naturally based companies might describe their products would be “low synthetic”. I agree that “chemical-free” is completely inaccurate. But companies are going to choose to speak about their products in a way that their target audience will respond. Generally the key to an effective message is to keep things simple.
And yes, most people are frighteningly uneducated about ingredients. But with millions of people in the world and only a small percentage with chemistry knowledge you are never going to be able to speak to just the elite and educated.
“Better” is also a relative term. Better means different things to everyone. To some people buying a $1200 jar of La Prairie Platinum Rare cream is “Better” because they are proving to their friends that they are rich enough to afford it. “Better” to someone else means that a product smells the way they like. To another person it might mean it is a product they can afford sold at a Walgreens that is conveniently located to them. To people focused on natural lifestyle “Better” generally means that the formulation avoids certain ingredients that they either believe to be irritating or know to be irritating to them personally.
Quite frankly I don’t believe that there is a problem with reasonable variances in natural ingredients. You don’t expect every tomato to taste the same do you? Do you analyze every carrot you eat to determine if it has more or less nutrients depending on whether it was a winter carrot, summer carrot, or was grown in a draught? I’m pretty sure the answer is no. The key with natural ingredients, like pharmaceutical ingredients, is care in “manufacturing” (in this case, growing), handling, processing, and storage. If you screw up any of the steps then the ingredient can be compromised. I personally make sure to purchase from suppliers that disclose growing locations for plant ingredients, have standards for storage and processing that retain more of the plant’s vital chemistry, and that our production methods also work with those medicinal constituents. It doesn’t do any good to try and extract a water soluble chemical with oil. (duh) So all that has to be taken into account when formulating.
There are very few product lines that take all these kinds of things into account, and are truly “natural” or as natural as possible about their formulations.
The only 2 companies that I know of that are as close to synthetic-free as possible are Grateful Body and Terressentials. But even they use alcohol, which is produced by a chemical reaction of yeast with sugar. It is a common reaction, mind you, but a reaction that produces a substance that didn’t exist to begin with. Unless you are just dousing yourself with sunflower oil after a bath, or making a fresh face mask out of a banana everyone is in a gray area. Even Pangea Organics uses Glyceryl Stearate and Sucrose Stearate to create their emulsions. Are those harmful substances? Not in my opinion, but they are synthetic. Even “naturally occuring” substances like MSM are not used in cosmetics from natural sources. Some ingredients just can’t be harvested or extracted, or not in the quantities required. So despite the fact that it is a “natural” substance what you are actually putting on your face is synthetically made.
Only people that have done a LOT, and I mean a LOT, of reading on these types of subjects would know these sorts of things at all. And the average consumer’s eyes would get glassy and dazed if a skincare salesperson even began to try and explain this to everyone all the time. Unless that shopper spends all their time thinking about skincare some of this is just going to fly right by them. It is hard to blame companies for going for a simplified message when the issues are this complex.
A blog like this does a lot to get more information out there, but ultimately people are going to have to make up their minds themselves about what products really suit their bodies and their lifestyle. If you get your jollies applying “Yes to Carrots” or “Oil of Olay” to your face then fine, lovely. Personally I wouldn’t get near that stuff again. There are also many “naturals” brands that I wouldn’t use either based on the fact that they are full of junk and are no better.
If you want a decent list of recommendations on lines that are “fake” and “real” natural and organic then check out this list and discussion on Huddler.
http://greenhome.huddler.com/forum/thread/121/my-list-of-fakers-and-not-fakers
It is well put together and I agree with what is said by the article writer, which is rare as there are a lot of confused people out there.
Happy reading!
Nice article…companies market products this way to make people cognizant of buzzwords. Great writing, I enjoyed it.
@ Julie: Yeah, I don’t expect every carrot I eat to be identical. I wouldn’t want them to be identical. The article I read actually referred to the use of herbal medication. Conditions matter when dosing something like digitalis. But there’s probably more leeway for ingredients for a facial masque.
LOL!
I also using the poisonous plant as an argument that not all natural thing are good.
I agree with your post 100%. I don’t agree with the statement that natural is always better – a lot of people seem to possess that mentality. Both unnatural (for lack of a better word) AND natural products can harm and hurt you.
Excellent post, I myself stick to nothing but all natural beauty products. I am also very aware of the foods I eat as this is one of the main causes of bad health and most skin and odor issues.