Affordable Access

Only for men - two analyses of Dressman's advertising

  • Roxenmo, Mikaela
Publication Date
Jan 01, 2005
DiVA - Academic Archive On-line
External links


Abstract Purpose/Aim : My purpose with this essay is to analyse what men and women think is sexist in TV advertising. I have decided to focus my studie on Dressmann's advertising October- November 2004. I will do interviews with four different groups, two women groups and two men groups, which will include 3-4 people each. The two women groups have persons with an age between 20-30 and one with women older then 30. The men groups have also been divided into two similar groups. After this interviews I will do a semiotics analysis of three of Dressmann's tv-commercials, that I have choosen, who will confirm my hypothesis that it exists sex gender in commercial. Material/Method: The primary data is four interviews with 14 people who are heterogeneous in age. I have also done a semiotic analysis of three commercial movies. I will begin my analysis to analyse the result from the interviews. Then I will analyse the results from the commercial advertises and finally combine these two results and use them in my conclusion. Main Results: The result of my essay is that men and women have different point of view if the Dressmann's advertising is sexist or not. The younger generation of women do not accept these kind of advertisement and they think that advertising should not have sex allusion. They were more critical in comparison with the older women who thought that it existed more critical commercial. They thought that commercial for kids was worse then the Dressmann's advertising. The men´s opinion was that they thought that the commercial is sexy and not sexist. So they have no problem with it, becuase they think that men appreciate this kind of advertis because it´s sexy. To sum up, there is only one group who dislike this commercial and it was the younger generation of women. Keywords: Dressmann, sexy advertising, gender

Report this publication


Seen <100 times