<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Target Wearing Its Own Bullseye?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jedimom.net/2008/01/14/is-target-wearing-its-own-bullseye/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jedimom.net/2008/01/14/is-target-wearing-its-own-bullseye/</link>
	<description>A Mom Uses the Force and Jedi Mind Tricks to Maintain Balance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 06:28:25 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Shaping Youth</title>
		<link>http://www.jedimom.net/2008/01/14/is-target-wearing-its-own-bullseye/comment-page-1/#comment-313</link>
		<dc:creator>Shaping Youth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 22:11:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jedimom.net/2008/01/14/is-target-wearing-its-own-bullseye/#comment-313</guid>
		<description>Hey Lisa, I found you quite awhile back on Izzy&#039;s blog, and keep meaning to formally ping you, so I suppose since I&#039;m the blasted &#039;target&#039; of all this brouhaha, I might as well do it here.

Just to clarify, the dialog was NEVER meant to be about &#039;this one ad&#039; as I recognize it is MILD by comparison and &#039;no big deal&#039; if not put in context...

Fergawdsakes if I wanted to make a stink about &#039;one ad&#039; it sure as heck wouldn&#039;t be a TAME BY COMPARISON fully clothed persona as I know full well the media would turn that into a trumped up hypefest of an over-reactive public (oh, yeah, that&#039;s right, they already did! ;-)

Seriously though, the whole experience has been fascinating to see how the absurdity of incivility turned ME into the target of vitriolic &#039;get a life&#039; outrage despite lack of context, or even probing the verbatim words of what was said.

As a former journalist, I KNEW this would get skewed into a &#039;one-off&#039; sure as I was breathing...but many cautioned, &quot;look, the NYT is gonna write about you anyway, so you might as well agree to a WRITTEN e-interview so you can at least get your words out.&quot;

Well...we saw where that landed, eh?

Here are my verbatim words w/the NYT reporter:
http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=1063

And here is the original context...http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=969
which as you can see, is all about normalization of objectification via mass market &#039;family&#039; retailer adding to the cacophony of noise/urban wallpaper in highly charged media environs of surround sound sexual cues. (How&#039;s that for a mouthful?)

Seriously though...it was never intended to be about &#039;one ad&#039; but about raising the bar of retail to get away from innuendo that&#039;s shrill, harsh, and crass...even if not &#039;on purpose&#039; (See the new &#039;Lolita&#039; children&#039;s bed line for girls that Woolworth&#039;s is saying is another oopsie &#039;mistake&#039; after moms complained in the U.K.)

As Kelley implied above, until parents say &#039;hey, knock it off&#039; and give a ruler whack to the wallet of corporate creepiness it&#039;ll just keep on coming...

So if I have to &quot;take the hit&quot; for a misguided missile, in the hopes of a wake up bracer for the &#039;other 86% of parents polled&#039; to see this is &#039;the norm&#039; NOT the exception of corporate policy to do the &#039;wink-n-nod-let&#039;s put it up &#039;til they carp about it&#039; bit (look at the &#039;mistaken&#039; gruesome billboards from Captivity the movie that got put up, or the countless other oopsies) then so be it...Fire away!!!

Meanwhile...um...Lolita beds anyone? I need a rest on controversy, so I&#039;ll let &#039;one of the Lisas&#039; take this one...here&#039;s the Packaging Girlhood post and my replies:

http://packaginggirlhood.typepad.com/packaging_girlhood/2008/02/the-lolita-bedr.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Lisa, I found you quite awhile back on Izzy&#8217;s blog, and keep meaning to formally ping you, so I suppose since I&#8217;m the blasted &#8216;target&#8217; of all this brouhaha, I might as well do it here.</p>
<p>Just to clarify, the dialog was NEVER meant to be about &#8216;this one ad&#8217; as I recognize it is MILD by comparison and &#8216;no big deal&#8217; if not put in context&#8230;</p>
<p>Fergawdsakes if I wanted to make a stink about &#8216;one ad&#8217; it sure as heck wouldn&#8217;t be a TAME BY COMPARISON fully clothed persona as I know full well the media would turn that into a trumped up hypefest of an over-reactive public (oh, yeah, that&#8217;s right, they already did! <img src='http://www.jedimom.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Seriously though, the whole experience has been fascinating to see how the absurdity of incivility turned ME into the target of vitriolic &#8216;get a life&#8217; outrage despite lack of context, or even probing the verbatim words of what was said.</p>
<p>As a former journalist, I KNEW this would get skewed into a &#8216;one-off&#8217; sure as I was breathing&#8230;but many cautioned, &#8220;look, the NYT is gonna write about you anyway, so you might as well agree to a WRITTEN e-interview so you can at least get your words out.&#8221;</p>
<p>Well&#8230;we saw where that landed, eh?</p>
<p>Here are my verbatim words w/the NYT reporter:<br />
<a href="http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=1063">http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=1063</a></p>
<p>And here is the original context&#8230;http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=969<br />
which as you can see, is all about normalization of objectification via mass market &#8216;family&#8217; retailer adding to the cacophony of noise/urban wallpaper in highly charged media environs of surround sound sexual cues. (How&#8217;s that for a mouthful?)</p>
<p>Seriously though&#8230;it was never intended to be about &#8216;one ad&#8217; but about raising the bar of retail to get away from innuendo that&#8217;s shrill, harsh, and crass&#8230;even if not &#8216;on purpose&#8217; (See the new &#8216;Lolita&#8217; children&#8217;s bed line for girls that Woolworth&#8217;s is saying is another oopsie &#8216;mistake&#8217; after moms complained in the U.K.)</p>
<p>As Kelley implied above, until parents say &#8216;hey, knock it off&#8217; and give a ruler whack to the wallet of corporate creepiness it&#8217;ll just keep on coming&#8230;</p>
<p>So if I have to &#8220;take the hit&#8221; for a misguided missile, in the hopes of a wake up bracer for the &#8216;other 86% of parents polled&#8217; to see this is &#8216;the norm&#8217; NOT the exception of corporate policy to do the &#8216;wink-n-nod-let&#8217;s put it up &#8217;til they carp about it&#8217; bit (look at the &#8216;mistaken&#8217; gruesome billboards from Captivity the movie that got put up, or the countless other oopsies) then so be it&#8230;Fire away!!!</p>
<p>Meanwhile&#8230;um&#8230;Lolita beds anyone? I need a rest on controversy, so I&#8217;ll let &#8216;one of the Lisas&#8217; take this one&#8230;here&#8217;s the Packaging Girlhood post and my replies:</p>
<p><a href="http://packaginggirlhood.typepad.com/packaging_girlhood/2008/02/the-lolita-bedr.html">http://packaginggirlhood.typepad.com/packaging_girlhood/2008/02/the-lolita-bedr.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Target Won&#8217;t Talk to Bloggers</title>
		<link>http://www.jedimom.net/2008/01/14/is-target-wearing-its-own-bullseye/comment-page-1/#comment-311</link>
		<dc:creator>Target Won&#8217;t Talk to Bloggers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:47:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jedimom.net/2008/01/14/is-target-wearing-its-own-bullseye/#comment-311</guid>
		<description>[...] You can see some discussion of the ad here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.  Apparently, Target is refusing to talk to nontraditional media outlets (like blogs) about the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] You can see some discussion of the ad here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.  Apparently, Target is refusing to talk to nontraditional media outlets (like blogs) about the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Does this target ad offend you? - Reality Wired</title>
		<link>http://www.jedimom.net/2008/01/14/is-target-wearing-its-own-bullseye/comment-page-1/#comment-308</link>
		<dc:creator>Does this target ad offend you? - Reality Wired</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:10:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jedimom.net/2008/01/14/is-target-wearing-its-own-bullseye/#comment-308</guid>
		<description>[...] Does this target ad offend you?       Thought I&#039;d conduct a little experiment. The photograph is from a 20&#039; x 20&#039; billboard in Times Square displaying an ad for Target. If you already know about this feel free to chime in, if you don&#039;t then I&#039;ve listed a few resources below to give you some background. However, before you read them, look at the photo and tell us whether or not the ad offends you and if so why. No right or wrong answers or opinions here. Call it like you see it.   Resources on the issue: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Does this target ad offend you?       Thought I&#8217;d conduct a little experiment. The photograph is from a 20&#8242; x 20&#8242; billboard in Times Square displaying an ad for Target. If you already know about this feel free to chime in, if you don&#8217;t then I&#8217;ve listed a few resources below to give you some background. However, before you read them, look at the photo and tell us whether or not the ad offends you and if so why. No right or wrong answers or opinions here. Call it like you see it.   Resources on the issue: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kelley</title>
		<link>http://www.jedimom.net/2008/01/14/is-target-wearing-its-own-bullseye/comment-page-1/#comment-307</link>
		<dc:creator>Kelley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2008 04:52:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jedimom.net/2008/01/14/is-target-wearing-its-own-bullseye/#comment-307</guid>
		<description>For what it&#039;s worth, I find the ad highly offensive. And I&#039;m kind of offended that 86% of the moms you polled don&#039;t. Gracious.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For what it&#8217;s worth, I find the ad highly offensive. And I&#8217;m kind of offended that 86% of the moms you polled don&#8217;t. Gracious.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
