Should Airbrushing Come With Warning Labels?
Posted by: Jessica Wakeman
Filed in:
style
1:30PM, Wednesday August 5th 2009
Even though she’s a mom, Victoria Beckham‘s taut and toned body in the new Armani ad released today is utterly devoid of wrinkles and jiggly bits. Gisele’s pregnant belly was flattened in the London Fog ads. Beth Ditto got fattened up on the cover of Love. Kim Kardashian appeared slimmed and lightened in Complex. Jeez Louise, the Photoshop-wielding warlocks should win big fat trophies for all their Great Moments In Airbrushing humdingers this year.
Or maybe airbrushed ads should get warning labels, says one British politician. Jo Swinson, a Liberal Democrat in the U.K., said that airbrushing should be banned on advertising intended for viewing by children younger than 16 and all other airbrushed images should carry labels that say what’s been altered.
It’s an absolutely brilliant idea. But unfortunately, it will never happen.
We wish we’d thought of “banning airbrushing in advertising” for our Top 25 Items On Our Feminist Wish List. But unfortunately, we think that’s exactly where this idea will remain: on a wish list. Ad agencies won’t want to share their beauty secrets, celebs and models would sooner die than see their wrinkles on a giant billboard, and companies want their products to look as sexy as possible, even if the people hawking their goods are totally fake.
But even if ads themselves aren’t likely to lay off the Photoshop as Swinson hopes, some magazines are listening to their readers who say enough is enough. We’ve noticed two trends we hope take off in more glossies:
One, a couple of magazines, like Dolly in Australia, and French Elle, have done airbrush-free or makeup-free issues. French Elle even posed Scarlett Johansson on the cover in a bare face. If more mainstream American glossies joined in (are you listening, Anna?), even for just one photo spread in one issue, it would make a difference.
The other trend we’ve noticed is celebs speaking out against how they’ve been airbrushed and hated it. Kate Winslet is definitely the most vocal anti-airbrusher, but Keira Knightley has also asked airbrushers to lay off her boobs and Jamie Lee Curtis did a makeup vs. no-makeup side-by-side photo spread for MORE magazine. Even Hugh Hefner’s ex, Holly Madison, said she wanted to keep the Photoshopping in Playboy to a minimum. (By which she probably meant don’t make that CCC cup into a DDD cup, but still.) We’d be tickled pink if even more celebs spoke up about how airbrushing makes them look so not like them.
What do you think about the idea of putting warning labels on airbrushing? Good idea, or do you just assume most ads and celebs on magazine covers are airbrushed anyway?
TheFrisky.com is part of the Turner Sports and Entertainment Digital Network
LayD
wrote on August 5 2009 @ 12:43 pm: [report]
I think its a good idea. At this point though, I look at models in ads as just art. I assume they are airbrushed and with all the make-up, hair styling, and other tricks used in the photoshoot, I understand these aren’t real depictions of the woman or reality. It doesn’t bother me that Giselle’s baby bumb was smoothed out because the focus is the jacket, not her. What bothers me is when someone on a cover of a magazine has been airbrushed or photos of celebrity as themselves (not in character or used to model a product) is airbrushed. That just perpetuates body image issues. I honestly don’t understand why a magazine, especially a woman’s magazine would rather show a falsified Scarlett Johansen rather than what she really looks like, sure the tweaked image may be more aesthetically appealing, but its not the real Scarlett! I think everyone would rather see the real person rather than the airbrushed person, so I hope magazines get with it and put a halt on the airbrushing.
Joey Daytona
wrote on August 5 2009 @ 01:37 pm: [report]
We live in a ‘Society of the Spectacle’ where simulacra IS perceived as reality… that and perfectionist fallacy rules the day in pop culture.
Riley
wrote on August 5 2009 @ 01:49 pm: [report]
More warning labels, yes. People need to be told when something isn’t what it seems or is bad for them. Slap a warning label on everything. Nobody should have to think for themselves.
I also remember a multitude of negative commentary from the author and in the comments section regarding Scarlet’s cover of Elle. Say one thing and do another? That is surprising.
plasticrose
wrote on August 5 2009 @ 02:31 pm: [report]
I think it’s a good idea because, although I expect anyone in an ad or glossy mag to be airbrushed, young girls and boys don’t necessarily know that. And I know when I was younger I saw people in ads and thought “why don’t I look like that?” and I wondered if something was wrong with me.
eskim00ninja
wrote on August 5 2009 @ 03:21 pm: [report]
Posh actually looks like that though.
tattooed_redhead
wrote on August 5 2009 @ 06:49 pm: [report]
But the reason she doesn’t jiggle is because her boobs are concrete and she doesn’t eat.
Chebs
wrote on August 5 2009 @ 07:20 pm: [report]
@plasticrose - I was thinking the same thing. When I was in middle school reading seventeen and whatnot, I’d see all the pretty models and and marvel at how lucky they were to have perfect skin and hair. I knew in my head that the photos were touched up, but I always thought that meant removing red-eye or something. At that age, it never occured to me that they could be removing some fat, smoothing over imperfections, etc. And I bet a lot of modern tween girls are the same way - they see these pretty girls who are fixed, and wonder why they don’t look like that. I’m not sure how much good a warning on a magazine would do, but I think for the tween/teen stuff, it’s a step in the right direction. If it ever happened.
blondekris
wrote on August 5 2009 @ 07:36 pm: [report]
I don’t agree with warning labels on ads. I’m an advertising major (don’t kill me). Advertising is selling an idea or a perception…Would you buy a Big-Mac if you saw the REAL version on a billboard? Would anyone actually crave a Big Mac and think “that sounds so good right now” after seeing the real, bland version of it? Yes, it might be real, but is it convincing? Would you buy an acne product if the spokesperson in the magazine ad had a couple of visible blemishes on their chin?
http://youngerminds.blogspot.com/
spanishbutterfly
wrote on August 6 2009 @ 02:14 pm: [report]
i agree with Layd n plasticrose… i had those same thoughts while goin thru Seventeen an Cosmo mags. its hard on ur self esteem when society puts out what they think is the perfect shape/height/color etc…I didnt become comfortable with my wieght until i got older.. how many people can say that they 4 kids an still are the same weight an by the miracle of someone’s gene’s not a strecth mark to boot… take that Seventeen