The New York Times and the Great Nail Polish Debate

The New York Times and the Great Nail Polish Debate

Wild nail polish colors are hot, but is this really the most important news?

 

 

Summer is here, which means that many women will start paying more attention to beauty regimes that can go hidden in the winter; namely, more women will get pedicures and bikini waxes so they can safely show off their toes and not be embarrassed at the beach. According to the New York Times, “Nail polish is the new lipstick” and the current trend is towards more “wild colors.”

 

 

The NYT writer’s thesis is that nail polish represents a way for every woman to participate in the beauty and fashion industry without spending too much money; as she rightly points out, a Chanel handbag will cost a relative fortune, but Chanel lipstick won’t. She also observes that Americans continue to follow celebrity trends incessantly; recently, both Beyonce and Katy Perry have been noticed in the wide world of the gossip media for their unusual nails, at which point their fans copied their styles.

 

Of course, the bigger question is why the NYT is featuring an article—termed a “debate” in the article’s teaser—on its web site’s front page in the first place.

 

Predictably, many of the NYT commenters and readers were fairly critical of the article touting the virtues and benefits of nail polish. More than one said that nail polish was “tacky” and another said that “If the nail polish doesn’t look good on your fingers and toes, it doesn’t look that good on your fingers and toes.” Yet another commenter said that the new colors worn at work represent a “disintegration of taste and discretion in American society.”

 

The best comment—at least from my perspective—was from readers questioning why the New York Times would actually have a debate on nail polish at all. I have to admit that I totally agree. I don’t feel out of place writing about nail polish on this beauty blog because blog posts are by their very nature driven by the topic of the blog itself, but I don’t understand how or why the decision was made to prominently feature a hot debate on nail polish on the same page featuring an Op-Ed piece about NATO’s military action in Libya.

 

The fact that most of comments from readers didn’t center on the “great nail polish debate” itself shows that the article either shouldn’t have been published in the NYT or shouldn’t have been featured on the front page. Just as wild nail polish might detract from someone’s professionalism at the office, an article debating wild nail polish detracts from the real issues.