The results for the observational method which involved looking through a magazine are as follows.
Looking through the magazine, I mainly found articles based arund celebrity couples. The first article in the magazine is an interview with the actress / singer Jennifer Lopez. The feature included six pictures of her by herself and one of her with her new husband. The six of her by herself are all very glamourous shots with captions underneath describing her 'beauty' and 'talent'. One picture in particular where she is lying on a bed in what appears to be a bra and a lacy transparant top. Personally I feel that this shot is portraying Miss Lopez as a sex symbol which she clearly enjoys. Another good example of her streotyping her self as a sex object is in another picture in which she, again, is lying on a bed, showing alot of skin. If a foreigner was to flip through the magazine, unable to read the text, he or she may find these pictures and see Miss Lopez as just another pretty face, flaunting her body for the world to see. There are no poctures of her performing on stage to suggest she is a singer, neither are there any clips from her films to suggest she has starred in any films (which she has). This article on the whole, in my opinion, does not show Jennifer Lopez in a good light, but only as a sex object which proves my point about women are pictured more often for their beauty than their talent.
The next article in the magazine is one about the Royal Variety Performance. There are obviously picyures of the event and then there are pictures of the guests meeting the Queen and the lastly there are the pictures of the celebrities that turned up and what they were wearing. The female celebrities seem to be the main focus in this section. The only males that are featured are the husbands or boyfriends of the female. To singers from Hear'say are pictured weraing extremly reavealing dresses, one of which is completely backless, both laughing into the camera. Denise Van Outen and Cher are also pictured weraing glamourous clothes and plastered in make - up. The next article is an interview with Fiona Philips who is a presenter on GMTV. The pictures seem harmless as they are just of her and her new baby and husband. Although again, the focus is on a so called 'glamourous' woman, the theme of the interview is about how she became pregnant at the age of 41. There are no pictures of her lying half - naked on a bed, which is good.
The next is a small feature about singer Natalie Imbruglia with her new boyfriend. Again, the article is looking at a woman. Its seems to me that so far the magazine is very reluctant to have articles and interviews featuring famous men.
Next there is a long piece about the royals in which I can safely say there were no sexy pictures of anyone.
Then there is yet another article about a famous woman and a debate about weather she is in love. The celebrity being Nicole Kidman and the man being italian film producer Fabrizio Mosca. Again the main focus is on a female and not about her talent, but weather she has a new boyfriend or not. This to me is stereotypes the female sex just as much as if she was in a bikini lying on a bed (which she is not). I think this because the article is again not focusing on her acting talent but her love life, as if it was anyones business but herself. I also thing this is a tame example of saying that a woman is good for nothing apart from being a girlfriend to a man.
Throughout the magazine there continue to be pictures of various celebrity events which show much the same thing as the Royal Variety Performance, beautiful woman wearing next to nothing.
The next article is quite a contrast to the previous ones as it is all about Prince Harry and shows us pictures of him playing rugby. It goes on to claim that her has inherited the sporting genes from his mother and father. They then go on to show pictures of the late Princess Diana playing tennis and skiing and so on. The article seems to be harmless and not in any way streotypical.
Next, there continues to be small articles on current affairs, featuring celebrity illnesses, brake - ups and make - ups which are not really worth mentioning. The article which I would like to say something about next is of the celebrity couple model Gisele and film star Leonardo Di Caprio. The article claims that Gisele has dumped Di Caprio after her did not come home one night. I think that this aricle shows Gisele as a strong and more independant woman than most would believe of a super model. Even so, there are pictues of her being described as stunning as if they were only featuring her because she is pretty. It is positive in one aspect but the picures let it down.
The next is an article about Al Pacino and his adopted children, no strereotyping there.
Then a feature about the Damilola Taylor case, none their either.
Then there is another celebrity party all though I have never even heard of the majority of the people there. Mainly shows famous couples having a good time. Seems to be harmless.
The next is a long piece about a memorial service for the British citizens lost on September 11th, Just pictures of Tony Blair and the Royals. I am sure that there will be no sexist remarks or gender issues to report here.
The next is a double page about Julia Roberts and her new boyfriend. Yet again this is about a celebrity relationship and includes secret photos taken without the Celebritys knowledge. As I said with every single other articles with this topic, it is strange how the magazine is again focusing on a famous female star. Still no reports on a famous male and his new girlfriend.
The last nineteen pages are devoted to life and career of the late George Harrison.
The results of my second observational method which involved listeningto a radio station for one hour are shown on this table:
As you can see, I failed to find alot of evidence against Chris Moyles as he seemed to be playing safe on that show. The most offensive thing he said was probably when he was talking about a woman he had met who had gigantic breats. He used a series of words to describe breasts which some women may have found offensive. Later on in the show he was talking to a female employee also in the room about women and how they cannot get ready to go out in under 10 minutes. This also could have been labelled as a sexist comment against woman, as not all women are particually vain, but I think that it was a harmless comment, and that he was just speaking of experiance.
