Overly Airbrushed Julia And Christy Ads Banned - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-28-2011, 06:23 PM   #1
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:28 AM
Overly Airbrushed Julia And Christy Ads Banned

There is no such thing in the US-should there be? We all know that no product can make you look perfect or erase age. They can help somewhat. Are they just pretty pictures or are they harmful to the extent that they should be banned? Julia looks so pretty in that ad (Mario Testino makes everyone look gorgeous and she is anyway), if I could afford Lancome it might tempt me to buy it. But of course I know logically that it won't make me look that good. But that's the point, that's why those ads work. What women their age in Hollywood look real even WITHOUT airbrushing?


Britain's Advertising Standards Authority has pulled a pair of ads featuring Julia Roberts and Christy Turlington for being overly-airbrushed, the Guardian reports.

Member of Parliament Jo Swinson first alerted the campaign watchdog to Lancome's two-page ad showing Roberts as shot by Mario Testino and a spot for Maybelline's "Eraser" foundation featuring Turlington.

According to the BBC, Swinson said the manipulated photographs could impact an individual's body image:

"We should have some honesty in advertising and that's exactly what the ASA is there to do. I'm delighted they've upheld these complaints," she said.

"There's a big picture here which is half of young women between 16 and 21 say they would consider cosmetic surgery and we've seen eating disorders more than double in the last 15 years.

"There's a problem out there with body image and confidence. The way excessive retouching has become pervasive in our society is contributing to that problem."

Swinson added, "Excessive airbrushing and digital manipulation techniques have become the norm, but both Christy Turlington and Julia Roberts are naturally beautiful women who don't need retouching to look great. This ban sends a powerful message to advertisers -- let's get back to reality," the Guardian writes.

The beauty giant, for its part, did acknowledge that the pics had been taken to ye olde Photoshoppe. From the Independent:

L'Oreal admitted post-production techniques had been used in its advert featuring Turlington to "lighten the skin, clean up make-up, reduce dark shadows and shading around the eyes, smooth the lips and darken the eyebrows".

However, the beauty firm said it believed the image accurately illustrated the results the product could achieve.

It also said the flawless skin in the image of Roberts was down to her "naturally healthy and glowing skin", adding the product had taken 10 years to develop.

The ASA previously banned a YSL Belle D'Opium commercial for simulating drug use, nixed "indecent" Diesel billboards and said no to two misleading Louis Vuitton print ads. However, the group decided there was nothing wrong with a particular Miu Miu ad depicting what some dubbed a "significantly underweight" model.



__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2011, 06:30 PM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 02:28 AM
Reminds me of something I saw on ANTM (ok, yes, sometimes I watch the marathons while working on computer projects!). The judges were criticizing one of the models for posing in a way that made the airbrushing difficult.
__________________

__________________
Liesje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2011, 06:32 PM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 08:28 AM
I would bet there are hundreds of adds with photoshopping or touching up that get published in UK newspapers and magazines every year.

The Advertising Standards Authority can only investigate when a complaint has been made.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2011, 06:33 PM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liesje View Post
The judges were criticizing one of the models for posing in a way that made the airbrushing difficult.
How exactly would that work that you could do that? And of course those girls are all so young, so that makes it even more pathetic. And Tyra's into real beauty and flaws and such.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2011, 06:35 PM   #5
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,730
Local Time: 11:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
And Tyra's into real beauty and flaws and such.
Well, that's the reality of the modeling world, whether or not Tyra or others are trying to expand on the definition of "beauty."

Photoshopping has gotten ridiculous. One blog I visit daily has a running feature called "photoshop of horrors," where you'll see models who have entire body parts missing, like an arm that's clearly been accidentally removed during the photoshop process.

There are clear mistakes like that, and then more appalling conscious choices, like taking an already-slim woman and whittling her waist down even further.
__________________
corianderstem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2011, 06:49 PM   #6
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 02:28 AM
I guess it honestly doesn't bother me much one way or the other. I've done senior photos and air brushed acne or fixed this or that. I also photograph dogs and do a lot of retouching (usually removing stuff from the picture, like if there is a row of nice trees in the background and one yellow fire hydrant). I'm sure there is a line but I'm not really sure where that line falls and whether I really care to decide one way or the other. I mean, what to we expect? The entire industry is based on extreme views of beauty and perfection that are basically unatainable anyway.

As for myself, I do not buy products based on magazine ads or photos of supermodels. I think Christy and Julia are both gorgeous.
__________________
Liesje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2011, 09:02 PM   #7
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 08:28 AM
Wasn't the ASA's reasoning that these two ads present particularly egregious truth-in-advertising problems? For example, I think the Lancome ad is for some product that purports to give older skin a "luminous" look, but obviously the depiction goes way beyond that (she looks sandblasted frankly). Whatever article I saw about this earlier quoted Lancome's spokesperson as protesting that the ad was only meant as an "aspirational picture"--that cracked me up. In general I agree with Lies, everybody knows (or should) that most all fashion/makeup ads are heavily manipulated "aspirational" fantasy anyway, but I can at least see a stronger argument here than in many cases given the accompanying claims being made about what the product does.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 05:36 AM   #8
Paper Gods
Forum Administrator
 
KhanadaRhodes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: a vampire in the limousine
Posts: 60,609
Local Time: 01:28 AM
i really wish something like this existed in america. i remember a similar thing happened over some mascara i believe? now for those ads they have to state the models are wearing the mascara...with about 15 sets of false eyelashes.
__________________
KhanadaRhodes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 07:29 AM   #9
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,694
Local Time: 01:28 AM
Has there ever been truth in advertising?

I don't think the problem is photoshop, because honestly we've been doctoring photos since the invention of photography.

The problem is that we need to learn that advertising is not reality, that TV is not reality, and that reality TV is definitely not reality.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 08:12 AM   #10
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
mama cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,906
Local Time: 08:28 AM
i think it's a bit silly... surely anyone with half a brain knows advertising is mostly plain fantasy anyway...
__________________
mama cass is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 08:23 AM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
mad1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Angie Jolie lover from Belfast Norn Ireland. I LOVE YOU ANGIE! Im a Bono fan!
Posts: 13,153
Local Time: 08:28 AM
exactly. it just feels like for a major time they have used teen type or young actresses/models for their ad campaigns, who are going to have plump faces and virtually no lines anyhow, so they dont need to alter much but WILL still make skin look very fuking un-naturual, and when I was younger I was very naive and actually hated myself for not having flawless skin like the girls in the ads, (but Angie and Kate make me see the real thing now), and anyhow, these advertisers are taking an actress in her 40s and making the obvious dramatic photoshops because lets face it, the media suck serious earth ass when it comes to women's looks, and its really cause Julia has natural lines round eyes, etc and you cant see it there, and anything and everything to try and convince women to spend loadsamoney on products that really do fuck all except hydrate your skin for a while when its better to just be heathy and eat fruit/veg, have plenty of water and exercise now and again to get the blood flowing and hey presto, you are FUCKING NORMAL and NOT A FUKING WALKING AIRBRUSH!

__________________
mad1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 08:48 AM   #12
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liesje View Post
As for myself, I do not buy products based on magazine ads or photos of supermodels. I think Christy and Julia are both gorgeous.
I look at those magazines in the library so I don't spend money on them. If I see an ad it's more like "that's a new product I might try", not that I would buy it based on the photos. A pretty picture of a pretty woman (ha) catches your attention, there's really no denying that. It's just like seeing a cute top in one of those magazines. Only for me it's the cheap stuff. I do think there are definite subliminal effects of advertising, there are countless studies about that.

Yes I read the "aspirational" thing, and I hate that somehow women are supposed to aspire to look like any sort of unrealistic fake ideal, or like any Botoxed or non Botoxed models or actresses. I aspire to look the best I can look with what I've got (and some days well I just don't give a shit ) for me, not for anyone else. I gave up on caring about trying to please anyone else but me in that dept a long time ago, and for me that is such a healthy way to go. If I get down on myself it's because I don't like the way I am looking-not because I don't look like a sandblasted Julia Roberts.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2011, 07:56 PM   #13
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 02:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy
I would bet there are hundreds of adds with photoshopping or touching up that get published in UK newspapers and magazines every year.
I've got a little secret for you: ALL of the adds are photoshopped.
__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2011, 03:11 PM   #14
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:28 AM
How old do you think this model is?


__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2011, 03:41 PM   #15
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,653
Local Time: 03:28 AM
I read that she's 10 years old. Isn't that disturbing?
__________________

__________________
Pearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com