forum summary

this is where im at

Manipulative language/imagery/graphic design in trashy celebrity magazines, effects on readers and celebrities in question.
My progress with this topic has been more visual than written, I've been doing drawings based on things I found in magazines that I thought to be problematic in some way, or totally stereotypical of said magazines, what one would expect, so I'm more solid on the drawn aspect than the essay and theoretical bit, and my research has all been first hand from the magazines themselves.
Questions I'm considering
How can graphic design be used to manipulate a reader, this being the very bottom end of the hierarchy of design, the trash mag
What does it influence readers to think and do
What does it try to influence people to think and do, successful or not
What would the same article look like if it was entirely non-manipulative
How does the choice of imagery and photographs of subjects help to form the opinion the magazine wants
How does the content and the message of it differ between male and female editors for magazines, and magazines aimed at men and women (if time allows) also how do the manipulative graphic choices differ between women's magazines aimed at different audiences, e.g. Star vs Vogue (again if time allows)
How does the choice of language dictate the thoughts and opinions of the reader on the subject
How do the articles published about celebrities affect the celebrities themselves, especially ones that are only famous because of their involvement with the magazines
Is it ethically acceptable for publishers and writers of these magazines to bring up and tear down celebrities in order to sell their product