Jul 27 2011

Retouching the flaws, or just plain false advertising?

Category: Uncategorizedharmonicminer @ 9:16 pm

L’Oreal ads of Julia Roberts and Christy Turlington banned for airbrushing

Retouched advertisements are certainly nothing new, but The British Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has been cracking down on companies they believe have been heavy handed with the airbrushing wand. According to BBC News, Member of Parliament Jo Swinson has been lobbying against digitally altered images and she raised the red flag on two L’Oreal advertisements she claimed were “not representative of the results the products could achieve.” One ad features actress Julia Roberts for Lancome Teint Miracle foundation, while the other shows supermodel Christy Turlington for a Maybelline foundation called The Eraser. As evidenced by the ads, the results of these products, both owned by parent company L’Oreal, are just a little too flawless.

In Roberts’ foundation ad, the text claims it is the “1st foundation that recreates the aura of perfect skin.” MP Jo Swinson felt the real magic was done digitally. L’Oreal admitted they retouched the photos, but stood true to their claim that the products could potentially yield these results. The French company said Teint Miracle took 10 years to develop and that their research proved it makes skin “more radiant and luminous.” According to the ASA Adjudication, L’Oreal insisted Julia Roberts’ “naturally healthy and glowing skin” was the perfect palette to show the effects of their product, and that acclaimed photographer Mario Testino used lighting that reduced imperfections. The ASA requested a before shot to illustrate just how much the ad was digitally manipulated, but unfortunately Roberts’ contract stipulates that no un-airbrushed shots can be released. L’Oreal supplied red carpet photos of the actress to illustrate her nice complexion, but that was not enough.

“Advertisers must be able to provide appropriate material to us to demonstrate what retouching they’ve done in the event we question them, and they mustn’t mislead,” Guy Parker, Advertising Standards Authority chief executive, told BBC News. “In this event, L’Oreal didn’t provide us with that evidence so we were left with no choice but to uphold the complaint.” In other words, Roberts’ ad must be pulled in the UK.

Hmmmmmmmnnnnn. It seems to me that Harry Reid has been airbrushing his economic proposals (to the extent that he actually makes any, instead of just saying NO to the House) to hide the flaws.  I’ll bet he stays up nights doing it.  I’m sure Obama would airbrush his economic proposals if he actually made any.  But as it is, he hasn’t listed a single item of federal spending he actually plans to cut….  so there’s nothing to airbrush out of visibility for the moment.

Since the US also has laws against false advertising, when is someone going to apply them to the claims made by politicians when they’re trying to sell us the latest tax, borrow and spend boondoggle?  Lies like this:

The stimulus is going to lift us out of recession and create jobs.

Government managed healthcare will make healthcare more affordable, more available, make you healthier, and cost less money nationally, too.

You can improve the economy by taking money from productive people and spending it on who knows what.

Cash for clunkers will stimulate the economy.

Regulations on businesses help to create jobs.

Minimum wage laws and rent control help poor people.

Taxing “the rich” EVEN MORE (they already pay hugely disproportionate taxes) doesn’t reduce the number of jobs available for normal people, doesn’t hurt the economy overall, and (maybe the biggest whopper of them all) brings more money into the government.  (See Laffer curve for more.)


Mock the spending.

Jul 27 2011

Wise beyond their years

Category: Congress,economy,government,legislation,liberty,mediaharmonicminer @ 10:08 am

Another entry in the Powerline Prize contest for a media product illustrating the severity of the debt crisis.

Out of the mouths of babes.