Fashion victims

Getting front row seats at fashion shows can be a cut-throat business.

Do you know the most stressful part of organising a fashion show, asked a designer at the recently concluded Wills Lifestyle India Fashion Week. Before one could guess it must be designing the clothes or finishing them in time for the show, he revealed, "It's the stress of whom to seat in the front row!" Another designer groaned in agreement, "Why don't people understand somebody has to sit in the second, third and fourth rows as well! How can everyone be in the front row?"


A third designer helpfully offered, "Let's do away with the front row! We should start seating from the second row!" All guffawed.


So coveted are front row seats that people have been known to walk out in a huff if these are denied to them. It's not enough that you get invited; where you are seated is indicative of your status vis-a-vis others at the show! And so, many would rather not watch the show than be seen sitting second row onwards.

So critical is the seating chart issue that at times FDCI president Sunil Sethi has been known to extend the standard 60-foot ramp to 80 feet just so that some more front row seats could be created to salvage fragile egos!


The front row normally seats around 100 persons. The demand for some of the coveted shows goes up to 200 - double the availability. Designers obviously do not want to upset anyone, so they leave it to the organisers to step on designer-shod toes. Clients, buyers, society doyens, Page 3 regulars and fashionistas, sponsors, media and immediate family are the usual front row claimants. In Delhi, add to that bureaucrats, politicians and cops, and you have a political situation!


Around 20-plus seats are reserved for sponsors, a similar number for the media, approximately 33 for the designers' guests and 20 for buyers.


Media focus on first rowers makes the situation worse. A senior designer accused the FDCI president of showing lack of respect when she couldn't find place in the front row; a beauty doyen flounced out when the coveted row couldn't accommodate her and her entourage. An art gallery owner insisted on her right to sit in the media section front seat till she was forcibly convinced otherwise. Two Page 3 regulars in front row seats squeezed in a couple of friends in between. "Please shift a bit, we can all fit in," they assured the disapproving lady next to them. Miss Afghanistan of 10-15 years ago sashayed in and walked out just as elegantly when offered a second row seat!


Disturbed by the constant shifting and adjustments a person's neighbour was making, he finally asked, "Are you alright?" Flashing him a smile she confessed, "Oh, it's the problem of wearing a short dress in the front row." Pulling yet again at the impossibly shrinky fabric, she added with a wink, "I surely don't want to be flashing at the front seaters opposite me!" Now he shifted uncomfortably, worried he might be sitting right next to a potential wardrobe malfunction. Hazards of the trade.


It is de rigueur to seat some prominent people in the front row because the presence of A-listers indicates the success of a designer and his show. But then there are those lesser ones who plonk themselves in premium seats without invitation, refusing to budge to the most polite requests.


At one of the shows sat two wide-eyed, middle-aged guys in the most premium seats. Their eyes never moved up from the legs of the models walking the ramp. Up and down the eyeballs rolled as they swallowed convulsively and forgot to shut their hanging jaws, to the delight of the frontbenchers across the ramp. Upon enquiry, the media was not surprised to know they were officials from some prominent ministries, taking time off for a look at the leggy lasses, design and designers be damned!


Ah, the vagaries of fashion as seen from the front row.

Gandhi and privacy...

'Gandhi was never a man to conceal his private life'

Gyan Prakash, professor of history at Princeton University, shares his ideas and views on the man we call Mahatma.

One of the controversies in 'Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle With India' is the reference to the interesting friendship between Gandhi and Kallenbach. Gandhi has had many interesting relationships with sexuality and celibacy. Can you tell us more on that subject?

To be sure, Gandhi had a close, intimate relationship with Kallenbach. Joseph Lelyveld makes it clear that there is no evidence of a sexual relationship but suggests a homo-erotic one existed. To be scandalised by this is to know nothing about Gandhi's strong and open views on sexuality and love. Gandhi wrote openly and frequently about his struggles with physical desire in newspaper articles, letters and his diary. An unusual figure, he crossed many known boundaries of the public and the private.
 

Play hard, look good

Given the spread of television media, sport today isn't just about athletes sweating it out in the heat of competition. With millions of dollars in advertisement revenue at stake, sports federations can hardly ignore this reality. This is one area where badminton has lagged behind. That in turn has meant declining interest, as few badminton tournaments are broadcast on TV. The game is in dire need of a dose of glamour. The Badminton World Federation's decision to have women players wear skirts as part of a new dress code must be seen in this context. There's in fact a case for a suitable dress code for male players as well so that the effort to add colour to the sport is gender-neutral.

The concept of a dress code is hardly new to sport. It can be born of tradition, as in Test cricket, or due to considerations like curbing political and religious symbolism, as in football. Thanks to the growth of professional sport, players' uniforms have become integral to the branding exercise of individual athletes and sport itself. Women's lawn tennis has led the way in sporting designer outfits. In recent years, players like Anna Kournikova have been known for their on-court glamour quotient. This has not only helped pull in the crowds but also popularised the game. A parallel can be drawn with cricket's latest avatar - T20. With cheerleaders and glitzy presentation, the game's popularity has been ramped up, roping in new demographics.

The argument that the focus on glamour will deflect attention from the game is false. Professional sportspersons will still have to perform to earn recognition. There's no harm in looking good while they're at it. Since badminton needs to shed its dull image, a pleasing dress code for both men and women shuttlers would help.

An arbitrary decision


The Badminton World Federation has made it mandatory for all women players to wear skirts in Grand Prix tournaments and above. The reason cited is "to ensure attractive presentation of badminton". However, in its ham-handed bid to boost the sport's glamour quotient among fans and sponsors, the federation has gone too far. Not only is its decision arbitrary, it also exposes the administrators' skewed approach to the task of popularising the sport.

Imposition of a dress code on women badminton players must be opposed. It goes against their freedom to choose what they want to wear in accordance with their comfort levels and suitability for on-court performance. Not surprisingly, the new order has met with stiff opposition from shuttlers in Indonesia, including world champion Lilyana Natsir who has been quoted as saying: "Skirts hamper my movement when i play". Our own Saina Nehwal - though she has not opposed the move but prefers to wear shorts - will be among those affected by the decision. In this regard, the federation has displayed utter disregard for individual choice. Such top-down diktats can negatively impact the performance of many players to the ultimate detriment of the sport. Why not instead let big sponsors incentivise players to wear designer outfits, as in the case of lawn tennis?

Asking women shuttlers to wear skirts will inevitably be seen as an attempt to commodify them. People are bound to ask why the sartorial choices of male players haven't been similarly targeted. Besides, the BWF has failed to factor in the sensitivities of players coming from different cultural backgrounds. Rather than display insensitivity merely in order to attract more fans and rope in greater numbers of sponsors, the federation should promote badminton in newer territories and at the grassroots levels.

CONSUMER AWARENESS - What's in a brand name?

In a few seconds, advertisers tell us stories from a fairy-tale world of the strongest, whitest, coolest and simply the best. And alas, like most fairy-tales, advertisements are often false. How can consumers be better informed? The products are everything they are not supposed to be. More complicated still is the case of products like liquor and tobacco, which are banned from being advertised in the mass media. 

The makers of most of these products which are banned from advertisements resort to 'surrogate advertising' – a sort of indirect advertising in which a 'cover product' is made to point towards the actual product, the latter being banned from advertising. For instance, the Ministry of Health (MoH), Government of India, has banned the advertising of tobacco and liquor. But many liquor brands (like McDowell's whisky) initiate other products like sodas in the same name which are then advertised. Similarly, many 'gutkha' brands introduce their pan masala products which indirectly advertise the gutkhas. Another instance of surrogate advertising is 'Four Square Bravery Awards' in the name of Four Square cigarettes.  

And what better advertising than Bollywood hits showing superstars consuming the products in question. Shah Rukh Khan was shown smoking a cigar in 'Devdas'. In the ruffle over this which followed, the MoH indicated to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MoIB) that display of smoking in mass media must be banned. The MoIB in turn was pressurized by the film industry against imposition of such a ban. The industry suggested instead that self-regulation be imposed. Of course, no self-regulation was practiced since Amitabh Bachchan was again seen smoking in the film Bunty aur Bubli. 

But one wonders if advertising can indeed influence people's minds to an extent such as inducing them to smoke, drink etc. Yes, says, Parag Paul Choudhury of Voluntary Organisation in Interest of Consumer Education (VOICE), a Delhi-based NGO, also member of Consumer International. Choudhury cites the example of Rajnikant, the popular actor of films in the south, who had a particular style of flipping a cigarette to his lips. Boys in the south unconsciously started trying to flip the cigarette in the same manner and many took to smoking through this playful, imitative initiation. 

Choudhury also talks about the shifting target of the advertising industry. Through the 60's and 70's it was the house-wife but this gave way to youth being the target of the ads. The focus then shifted to children, which continues even today. He says that today, children can be seen in ads which are not at all child-products. He cites the Maruti Esteem ad in which two children compare whose daddy has the bigger car. "In fact, today 84% of parents take their children along when buying products which are not child-products – simply because children have a big say in buying decisions," Choudhury says.

The advertising agencies have formed an association called the Advertising Agencies' Association of India (AAAI) which also has a governing board called the Advertising Standard Council of India. The AAAI is almost like a union with the main function of protecting the rights and interests of the agencies. The governing board on the other hand, forms rules, regulations and guidelines to be followed by AAAI in order to facilitate work in a structured manner. The governing board also represents the agencies before the government.

According to VOICE, both of these organizations are only namesake. Far from performing their watchdog functions, they often succumb to pressure from various corners. For instance, if a client has a problem with one agency member, another agency member takes up the assignment of the client. There is no teeth in the association's or the board's statements or actions, says Choudhury. The most they do is to withdraw ads if there is an uproar over them. 

Choudhury says, tests invariably reveal that products advertised heavily fare very badly compared to the less advertised ones.  What about consumer rights vis-à-vis advertising? According to Choudhury, there is a very strong interface between advertising and consumer rights. First of all, he says, this includes the right to have a transparent system to know about a brand or a product. It includes the right to demand during-sales and after-sales service, right to know how the pricing is arrived at, right to know the terms and conditions which apply – information to which the consumer is typically not privy. These rights are documented and recognised by India's Ministry of Law, and based on international agreements and standards which India adheres to. For instance, in the Hero Honda bike ad, a son escorts his blind father to 'see' the 'super' brand of the bike. But there is hardly anything superior about the 'super' brand. Only cosmetic changes have been made in the non-super variety with no real changes in the body, engine or fuel-consumption of the original product. 

As for VOICE, one of its main activities is product testing, which aims to educate the consumers in order to facilitate informed choices among them. Every month 10-12 different brands of a particular product category are tested. According to Choudhury, these tests invariably reveal that the most advertised products fare very badly as compared to the less advertised ones. For instance, in a latest test of ceiling fans, Usha and Bajaj turned out to be worst while Havell and Orient were the best. In a test of shaving creams, V-John – a product usually rejected by classy urban youth because of very low pricing – turned out to be second best. Also, 6 of the 8 shaving creams tested were found to be underweight by 2-3 gm – this seemingly negligible amount, when stretched over the millions of pieces produced, saves the companies tons of shaving cream. 

These test reports can be bought online at VOICE's website at http://www.consumer-voice.org. 

VOICE says it will soon launch a 24X7 call centre where consumers can call for product complaints. The organisation plans to help by getting in touch with manufacturers and shopkeepers.