By: Abisha Sapkota 11/10/2024
Victoria’s Not-So-Secret Struggle with Inclusivity
The 2024 Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show promised a new era of inclusivity and diversity, but is Victoria’s Secret still struggling to break free from body ideals? Let’s dive in.
Famous for showcasing their signature bras, panties, and lingerie on supermodels, Victoria's Secret has been exclusive to specific audiences by catering for a narrow range of body types. Consumers like myself accepted the pigeon-holed standard of body expectations, which went seemingly unchallenged until the #Metoo Movement. Following a six-year hiatus, the highly anticipated return of the 2024 Victoria's Secret Fashion Show was expected to mark the beginning of an inclusive era following the negative reception of the 2018 show. It was called out for being disconnected from emerging conversations of body and trans inclusivity.
In response, the brand promised the comeback would "reflect who we are today", setting high expectations. However, the show didn't keep its promise.
Former Victoria's Secret angels like Gigi and Bella Hadid, Tyra Banks and Adriana Lima were featured alongside well-known "heroin chic" Kate Moss - all who are familiar with the criticism the show has faced for promoting petite beauty standards. As I watched the show, the attempt to represent women's diverse beauty still felt…shallow.
It featured performances from pop stars like LISA, Tyla and Cher, establishing a first-ever all-women artist lineup. Despite the big names and over $12 million production budget, the show maintained the same concern from six years ago: removing male performers doesn't eliminate the influence of the male gaze, which remains foundational to the show concept. Initially created to cater towards male preferences by focusing on aesthetics rather than comfort, the brand was about women fitting a certain visual standard catered to an external gaze. This gaze ultimately influenced everything within the brand, from the models' fantasy figure' who is thin, tall and typically white, to the lingerie they wear featuring sheer fabrics, lace and sculpted silhouettes.
Ashley Graham Ervin was one of the plus-sized models, strutting down the runway in her sexy lace bodysuit and sheer robe with gold flower-embellished wings. She shared on social media that she had initially hesitated when asked to walk in the show, posting, "Their vision of beauty seemed narrow as if everything they created was for just one type of body – and it wasn't mine". Watching plus-size models walk on the runway with perfect hourglass curves and hips still reinforces an unattainable beauty standard. The runway further accentuated and established a dichotomy: to feel beautiful, you need to be either thin or curvy. It was exhausting to watch a brand that promised so much to recycle the traditional definition of beauty.
Another essential thing to bring to attention is the censoring of larger bodies with conservative lingerie. It felt like Victoria's Secret wanted to avoid dipping their toes into body inclusivity entirely. Why were the larger bodies hidden behind their clothes? It's not inclusivity if these carefully chosen curvier models are in a partially obscured spotlight. Ashley looks fantastic in her bodysuit, but you can see the clear difference between her outfit and that of He Cong. Another important thing I noticed was that the lingerie worn by the plus-sized models wasn't available on the site for purchase. As a clothing brand promising inclusivity, it's essential to be able to cater to your consumers beyond the runway.
On a positive note, Alex Consani and Valentina Sampaio were the first transgender angels to strut down the runway. Valentina wore a shimmering black lingerie with a huge bow tied to the back with a teased hairdo whilst Alex devoured her signature bleached eyebrows in a metallic lilac lingerie set with angel wings.
Verdict: Whilst the brand has taken the bold step to represent a broader spectrum of women's body types the attempted inclusivity after six years felt tokenistic rather than a genuine representation of what it means to feel, look and be confident in lingerie.
Budget Lock Up: Viral or Cancelled?
By: Abisha Sapkota 28/03/2025
Influencers at Canberra's Budget lock-up spark debate surrounding new media's involvement in the Australian political sphere.
The recent controversy surrounding Treasurer Jim Chalmers' Federal Budget lock-up has sparked debates about the nature of journalism, the growing influence of digital creators, and their place within Australia's political sphere. Traditionally reserved for media outlets, policy experts, and interest groups, this year's lock-up unexpectedly featured influencers and digital content creators, a decision that has sparked both intrigue and backlash
2025 Budget papers printed, Source": Lukas Coch/AA
Among the invitees were prominent digital voices like Hannah Ferguson of Cheek Media and Natasha Etschmann, a finance influencer with a substantial online following. Their presence in Canberra wasn’t merely symbolic, it represented a noticeable shift in how political discourse is shared and shaped, especially with younger generations.
Natasha Etschmann celebrating three years of TashInvest, Source: Instagram
Hannah Ferguson, Source: Kate Williams
However, the alleged sponsorship of some influencers' travel expenses by the Australian Labor Party raises serious concerns. Such moves blur the critical line between impartial journalism and politically motivated content creation. Journalism, after all, is built on principles of rigorous verification, objectivity, and ethical transparency. Influencers, although powerful in their reach and relatability, typically engage their audiences through personal opinions and authentic, though subjective, content.
This shift also comes at a critical time when public trust in traditional media is declining, and misinformation or "fake news" continues to rise, particularly online. The presence of influencers in traditionally journalistic spaces thus intensifies concerns about credibility, accuracy, and accountability in political communication.
But does this evolving landscape necessarily undermine democratic discourse, or could it, in fact, enhance it?
Influencers undeniably reach younger audiences who feel disconnected from traditional journalism and conventional political engagement. Their presence in political spaces could democratise information access, making complex policy discussions approachable and relatable. If managed responsibly, influencers might bridge crucial gaps, drawing in demographics traditionally either distanced or excluded from political conversations.
Still, it's essential to select influencers thoughtfully, ensuring they align with clear ethical standards and transparency. While bias can't be completely avoided, openly acknowledging and addressing these biases when influencers engage in political events can help maintain trust and credibility. Clear communication about their perspectives and affiliations is essential.
Yet, such potential gains cannot overshadow legitimate fears about integrity, transparency, and accountability. With digital creators entering traditionally journalistic arenas, clear guidelines and rigorous transparency about their affiliations and incentives are vital.
The Australian Labor Party’s strategic pivot towards digital platforms ahead of elections acknowledges the undeniable power of influencers. Still, if political parties utilise influencer credibility without sufficient transparency, they risk losing trust with the public doubting the influencer’s authenticity. Additionally, the lack of openness can damage the trust and connection that influencers typically rely upon to maintain their credibility.
The question moving forward isn't whether influencers should participate in political events, they already are, and effectively. Instead, it's how their participation can coexist ethically alongside traditional journalism. Encouraging responsible content creation, transparency, and ethical standards among digital influencers isn't just desirable, it's essential.
Ultimately, whether information is delivered through traditional reporting or influencer-driven platforms, the goal remains unchanged: a well-informed, critically engaged public capable of meaningful democratic participation.