Guest fountainhall Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Well, here’s one in the eye for Lancôme and Maybelline, and one in the pocket for the brand owner L’Oreal. The UK Advertising Standards Authority has banned ads featuring Pretty Woman Julia Roberts and supermodel Christ Turlington. It found both ads had been excessively airbrushed. The ASA ruled that both ads breached the advertising standards code for exaggeration and being misleading and banned them from future publication . . . "On the basis of the evidence we had received we could not conclude that the ad image accurately illustrated what effect the product could achieve, and that the image had not been exaggerated by digital post-production techniques," the ASA said. MP Jo Swinton, who has long spearheaded a movement against “overly perfected images” of women in advertising, said - "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." http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/27/loreal-julia-roberts-ad-banned Wonder if the ASA standards apply to sites like gayromeo in the UK? If so, I imagine a number of XXL and XL descriptions will quickly be modified - downwards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thaiworthy Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Are you kidding me? There's an advertising standards authority in the UK? Do they censor slogans? My personal favorite is the one I see most often: SAVE up to 50% OFF and MORE! What the heck does that mean? In a way, this is all kind of comical. There is no such thing as truth in advertising, there are only lies and deception. It is the norm. Everyone expects it. Excessively airbrushed? Have they noticed the layers of makeup used by the second and third sexes around the world? This is a world of excess! Someone ought to slap them silly if they think they can standardize exaggeration. In the world of advertising, there is no reality! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fountainhall Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 The ASA is the UK's independent regulator of advertising across all media, including marketing on websites. We work to ensure ads are legal, decent, honest and truthful by applying the Advertising Codes. http://www.asa.org.uk/ From the UK's ASA website. Now you know! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 There is no such thing as truth in advertising, there are only lies and deception. It is the norm. Everyone expects it. Excessively airbrushed? Have they noticed the layers of makeup used by the second and third sexes around the world? You miss the point. People wearing make up is no different to people cutting their hair or shaving. There's nothing dishonest about that. However, when a cosmetics company is advertising anti-wrinkle creams or whatever and they publish photos showing the effect of the cream, but the wrinkles are actually removed with photoshop (hypothetically), that would be a deception. [i have no idea if that's what's happened in this case, but am merely explaining the principle] The ASA exists to prevent such fraud. That is why we frequently have truthful adverts in the UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogie Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 The adverts that intrigue me are the ones that show a before and after shot. This might be for a weight loss programme, showing a dreadfully overweight individual on the left and sporting the svelte new-look on the right. That must be very tempting for advertisers to 'doctor'. Other examples might be an ad for hair restorer for men facing male pattern hair loss, or for firms undertaking plastic (cosmetic) surgery or dental work. Just as wrinkles could be airbrushed away, presumably the opposite trick could be perpetrated - the 'post treatment' photo could be genuine, but the 'pre', showing lots of unsightly wrinkles in the wrong places, skillfully added by sleight of hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fountainhall Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 Other examples might be an ad for hair restorer for men facing male pattern hair loss I remember hearing Dr. Oz on Oprah's show some time ago (yea, I know he can't be an expert on everything, but I enjoyed his discussions) saying there are only two products on the market which can actually help restore hair - and then only on the crown of the head in men aged between around 20 and 42. If you read ads very carefully, you realise that very often they are not in fact making the claims the ad title might suggest. In the Svenson hair product ads, for example, you frequently see 'after' photos of guys with thick heads of hair whose hair had 'before treatment' been pretty thin. I've taken a before and after comparison from the Svenson website. It's clear that this guy has had a radical, almost unbelievable improvement. Read the blurb, however, and you find this - The first thing Svenson did, after presenting him with the diagnosis, was to restore his hair using Addhair Technology, a cost-effective and non-surgical hair weaving technique that micro-links added hair into his own hair, thereby creating a flawless blend. This added hair is also durable and low-maintenance, and can be shampooed, groomed and treated just like normal hair. At the same time he is receiving treatment for his hair and scalp to prevent further thinning, and to activate and promote hair growth. The weave proved a hit! He finally looks like a 25 year old. His family and friends have complimented him on how much younger and better he looks. http://www.svensonhair.com.my/testimonials_my_03.html A hair weave is absolutely nothing to do with hair restoration - it's a wig under a different guise. As for the allegation in red, it does not specify where on the head the hair growth is being promoted. The assumption will be where the hair has receded at the temples. I suspect that is a very wrong assumption as I don't think there is any product anywhere which can achieve that. If there is, I'll buy shares in it today! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thaiworthy Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 Notice how the "after" picture shows the man is smiling and the "before' picture shows that he is not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fountainhall Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 Poor guy! Just wait till the hair onto which the "weave" has been woven itself falls out. He's then going to start crying when he finds out the cost of yet more "treatment". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
