(This article
by Anna M.M. Vetticad first appeared in The New Indian Express in June 2011)
VANITY FAIR
Fairness cream
brand ambassadors strive to balance the opposing pulls of lucrative brand
endorsements and the socially conscious personal image they’re keen to project
By Anna MM Vetticad
“Sach bolne waale fairness creams… so rare na?” says Genelia D’Souza in the Garnier Light ad.
Fairness
creams that speak the truth… rare, aren’t they? And what about fairness cream
ads? In an India where the educated classes are increasingly demanding a social
conscience and accountability from their stars, celebrities these days face an
interesting dilemma when they agree to be the face of a fairness product. After
all, it’s not easy trying to position yourself as a sensitive and liberal star
when the product you endorse cashes in on the widely prevalent prejudice against
dark skin in our country.
That
should explain why it took a half-hour conversation and persistent questions to
get Genelia to even partially acknowledge that she’s endorsing a fairness cream
for Garnier.
Question:
If a consumer asks you if your product is a fairness cream, what would you say?
Answer: “I’d say exactly what I say in my ad.”
In
your ad you say: Sach bolne waale fairness
creams, so rare na? “But where am I
saying that you are dark so use this and you are gonna get light?”
But
if you call it a fairness cream, what else will the consumer understand from
the ad? “There are certain things that advertising does and you can decide
saying you’re doing something wrong and you’re doing something right...”
Who
said you are doing something wrong or right? But is your product a fairness
cream? “I don’t know. You will have to speak to the agency.”
Can’t
you tell us: is Garnier Light a fairness cream? “I don’t know about that. I
don’t know why you are cancelling off the moisturiser part very conveniently.
It’s Garnier Light Moisturiser. I’m saying if it has a quality of making your
skin look fairer or brighter or whatever, it’s probably part of the thing. I,
as an endorser, am saying, at times your skin gets dull so use this because
it’s a moisturiser.”
Genelia
is not alone. John Abraham – who endorses Garnier’s fairness moisturiser for
men – insists that “in India, fairness means removing blemishes”. And Priyanka
Chopra who earlier endorsed Pond’s White Beauty and now backs a rival fairness
product has famously said that Pond’s White Beauty “doesn’t lighten the skin,
it brightens the skin”.
In
an India where standards of political correctness are changing, clearly these
stars are torn between the large sections of their fan followings who use
fairness creams; and another section that accuses them of being racist, colour
prejudiced and socially irresponsible when they endorse these products.
“The
fact that these stars seem to be going through a dilemma is a positive sign for
me. I thought once they got the money they didn’t care about anything else. I’d
be worried about the celebrity who’d tell you he doesn’t care and that if
there’s a demand there will be a supply,” says ad filmmaker Mahesh Mathai, who
tells us he’s turned down several offers to direct fairness cream commercials
through his career because he finds the concept of these products unethical.
Mathai’s
words are in contrast to the stand taken by R Balki, chairman and chief
creative officer of the ad agency Lowe Lintas (India) whose client roster
includes market leader Hindustan Unilever, producers of Fair & Lovely.
“This
is downright hypocrisy,” says Balki. “Obviously these stars want the big bucks
they can get from endorsing fairness creams, but they don’t want to stand by
the product either.” True. Most celebrities would find it hard to resist the
lure of the moolah offered by the Rs 2,000-crore fairness creams industry. Shah
Rukh Khan (who could take home up to Rs 12 crore per annum for an endorsement)
accepts a lower fee for his long-standing association with Emami, manufacturers
of Fair and Handsome: that ‘lower fee’ is approximately Rs 8 crore a year.
Other celebrities too are paid mind-boggling sums for these tie-ups.
But
many of them clearly do not want to be considered indifferent to their social
responsibilities either. Because matrimonial ads may continue to be dominated
by demands for “fair brides”; professions where beauty is a pre-requisite may
continue to be ruled by light-skinned people; even some critics of these
supposed fairness facilitators may be surreptitiously using them... but at
least among large swathes of the educated population, it’s no longer
politically correct to admit that you believe white is beautiful and dark is
not.
This
is a world far removed from 1978 when Fair & Lovely was first launched in
India. Through the 1980s, advertisers would crudely show a charcoal-coloured or
chocolate-skinned girl using the product to dramatically alter her colour to
near-white and consequently improving her miserable life. “Very early on when
Fair & Lovely began, there was a blatant colour argument,” recalls media
analyst Akhila Sivadas. “Even the ads would be moaning and moping. We were all
protesting at the time. Finally there was an ad that was so derogatory that the
All India Democratic Women’s Association went straight to the I&B Ministry
and said, this is highly demeaning to women and in contravention of the
Indecent Representation of Women Act. The ministry made it clear that such ads
would no longer be tolerated.”
Today’s
ads try to be more positive and understated. “Glow”, “radiance” and
“brightness” have become catchphrases in commercials featuring major
celebrities for products that promise “an even skin tone” and a removal of
blemishes, but quietly tucked away in a corner somewhere the word “fairness”
will peep out.
Few
ads illustrate this new-age subtlety better than the one for L’Oreal’s Pearl
Perfect. The product’s star ambassador Sonam Kapoor sounds convinced that it’s
not a fairness product. “It’s got SPF and it takes off dark spots on your
face,” she explains. “Indian skin has a tendency to be patchy, we get brown
spots in the sun, so it’s all about evening out your skin tone.” But closely
watch the Pearl Perfect advertisement and you will see that while the voiceover
and star endorser speak of a flawless and beautiful complexion, appearing on
the screen in passing are the words “skin looks visibly fairer 88%”.
Balki
insists that fairness cream ads “have not changed for reasons of political
correctness but because the world has changed. It’s like today if we advertise
Vanaspati the way we used to, people would be up in arms pointing out the
health impact, so we have to position it differently.”
But
Shruti Swetambhari, CEO of celebrity and brand management firm Green Leaf
Sports and Entertainment, explains that today’s more refined ads have added to
the allure of fairness cream endorsements. “When brands like Garnier and
L’Oreal entered the market, fairness products immediately shot into an A-list
category of products that became desirable and acceptable to big stars,” she
explains. “Stars are also more comfortable with the fact that these ads no
longer talk about a dark person becoming white, but about healthy skin.”
Sociologist
Shiv Visvanathan explains this ‘politically correct’ advertising: “There’s a
gradient of whiteness these products sell. One is epidermal; the other guy
almost sells it as a health cream. So it’s ecological whiteness. The whiteness
is not epidermal or cosmetic and therefore catering to racialism, but a kind of
inner whiteness. And that’s what a John Abraham would like to sell because it’s
eco-brand friendly. He and Priyanka can advocate green ecologies and health
programmes while at the same time catering to folklore racial categories.”
Sure
enough, “healthy” is a key word in most fairness cream ads today, as if
assuring dithering consumers, those who are seated on the fence in their
attitude towards such products, that there’s nothing to be embarrassed about
using them since they’re no different from a medical prescription.
Corporates
and star brand ambassadors stress the “ethical” aspects of their advertising. A
L’Oreal India spokesperson says: “The communication for L’Oreal India’s
fairness products focuses on their efficacy and is done in a manner that is
ethical, responsible and backed by scientific fact. We do not play up the
social discrimination and insecurities of people in the communication for any
of our brands.” And asked if Garnier Light is a fairness product, Priyanka
Chopra responds: “Discolouration, pigmentation, dark spots and uneven skin
tones are common problems plaguing Indian skin, including mine. Garnier Light
Ultra Intense Fairness Moisturiser is a fairness cream that works towards
improving skin quality and texture by protecting it from the sun and taking
care of all these problems. The communication for Garnier Light Ultra focuses
on specific issues like dark spots and the efficacy of the product. It has been
done in a manner that is ethical, responsible and backed by scientific fact.”
Ethical?
Hmm… let’s get down to brasstacks: can any cream make a dark person’s skin
lighter? “Koi kaala aadmi kabhi gora nahi
ban sakta hai (a dark man can never become white),” replies Dr Anuj Pall,
consultant dermatologist at Max Hospital, Gurgaon. “These over-the-counter
products only even out skin tone if the person has normal skin, so maybe the
user feels that they’ve become fairer but they’ve not. Even their claims of
removing a tan and acne marks is questionable, since those acne marks will go
away anyway, if left to themselves. So will that temporary tan acquired right
after a visit to the beach.”
But
there is a more dangerous aspect to these so-called fairness products that goes
beyond political correctness. Dr Shehla Aggarwal, skin specialist and director,
Mehak Skin Clinic, Delhi, says, “Our Indian skin produces a dark melanin that
protects us when we are exposed to the sun and prevents cancer. It is this
element that also makes our skin age less than the skin of white people who get
more lines and wrinkles than we do. These fairness products bleach the melanin.
So a long-term use of fairness products could cause ageing and perhaps even
skin cancer. The Indian dermatologists’ community doesn’t want to cause a
cancer scare but it’s been about 30 years since Fair & Lovely was launched
in the Indian market and the impact is likely to be felt in the coming years.”
With
so much baggage accompanying these products, it’s clear that the fairness
creams industry needs to offer incredible sums of money to filmstars to bring
them on board. While SRK remains the highest paid of the lot, Abraham gets
anywhere from Rs 2-3.5 crore a year for an endorsement, Priyanka Chopra and
Deepika Padukone are paid in the range of Rs 2-3 crore per annum (Deepika endorses
Johnson & Johnson’s Neutrogena skincare range that includes its Neutrogena
Fine Fairness cream), Shahid Kapoor (Vaseline’s whitening advocate) earns Rs
2-2.5 crore, Sonam Kapoor gets Rs 1.5-2 crore and the figure for Genelia is Rs
1.5 crore.
There is another
irresistible benefit for these stars. Intense competition in the fairness
products market ensures that consumers are bombarded with ads at every turn,
which translates into high visibility for brand ambassadors. So as long as
there are professional rivalries in the film industry, Indian stars will
continue to endorse fairness products (for exceptions, scroll to the bottom
of the article ).
And so if Asin – a
darling of south Indian cinema buffs – has been the face of CavinKare’s
Fairever Fairness Cream, then it’s perceived as a major upset when arch rival
Trisha Krishnan replaces her. If Bollywood’s baby-faced youth icon Shahid
Kapoor has entered the fray, then can his industry junior Neil Nitin Mukesh
afford to be far behind? Neil, who is now associated with Emami, does not know
yet which product he will be endorsing, but is not disconcerted at the prospect
of Fair and Handsome. “Where there is a demand, there is a supply,” he says
with a nonchalance that some people may find disturbing but is at least
uncommonly frank in this scenario. “If you want bad films you will get bad
films. And if using a fairness product makes someone feel better about
themselves, then why not?”
.jpg)
But perhaps his
equanimity would be dented if he googled a fellow celebrity endorser with the
key words “Virat Kohli fairness creams ad”. Topping the search results is this
tweet by a girl called @Supreeka a.k.a. Chocoholic: “Virat Kohli has done a
fairness cream ad???? Okay my heart just broke:(.”
(Anna MM Vetticad is the author of The Adventures of an Intrepid Film Critic.
Twitter: @annavetticad)
AFTERWORD:
The Stars Who Said ‘No’
Hindi filmstars who
say no to skin ‘whiteners’ are treading a fine line in their community. After
all, no one wants to offend colleagues, friends and relatives in the industry
who are endorsing such products. That’s perhaps why Ranbir Kapoor is not
particularly anxious to tomtom his stance that he will never lend his name to a
fairness cream. But earlier this year he quietly rejected an offer from a major
manufacturer simply because he doesn’t believe in what the product stands for.
Bipasha Basu has
negotiated this tricky situation with admirable finesse. Her
just-recently-ex-boyfriend John Abraham has been the face of cosmetic giant
Garnier’s men’s fairness cream for a while now, but that has not deterred the
gorgeously and unapologetically olive-skinned Bipasha from consistently
rejecting the advances of fairness product makers.
Says a source close
to Bipasha: “There have been not just one or two, but several offers over the
years. Bipasha has always refused. She believes we are all beautiful the way
nature made us and we should accept ourselves that way.” Fans would expect
nothing less from this beauty and fitness icon who has chosen the brand name
“BB Love Yourself” for her fitness videos and clothing range.
Bipasha and Ranbir
are not merely grandstanding to make waves. Considering that Bipasha earns Rs
1-1.25 crore and Ranbir gets Rs 4-5 crore for a year’s commitment to a brand,
their anti-fairness-creams stance has cost them big money. But it is just as
attention-worthy that Abhay Deol says he’ll never endorse a fairness cream,
even before he’s been approached to do so. Reason? These stars are rare
phenomena in an India where actors – unlike their counterparts in the West – usually
avoid taking positions on controversial social and political issues, unless
they’re keen on alternative careers in politics.
Bipasha is the face of 14 products
right now. And Ranbir currently endorses Docomo, John Players, Pepsi,
Panasonic, Hero Honda and Nissan Motors, a list he pointedly restricts to six
because “it’s a big responsibility, it’s not just a money thing. You have to be
careful, you have to believe in it, you have to be honest to what you’re
endorsing.”
Dated: June 2011
Photographs
courtesy:
Note: These photographs were not
used in The New Indian Express
Link
to original article:
