Home Fashion Covergirl ad banned because of excessive photo shopping. Why all the deceit?

Covergirl ad banned because of excessive photo shopping. Why all the deceit?


In a timely move the National Advertising Division has announced steps to restrict the use of misleading image manipulation in cosmetic advertisements. This after leading cosmetic advertiser Covergirl came out with an ad stating the use of mascara will serve to affect a fuller appearance for anemic eyelashes. Yet when it came time for the proof of the claim it turns out that Covergirl had resorted to photoshopping to affect purported appearance. Hardly the endorsement one should be looking to spend their money on.

jezebel: At issue was an ad for NatureLuxe Mousse mascara, which was both ridiculously named and ridiculously advertised. CoverGirl featured Taylor Swift as its model for most of the NatureLuxe line, and according to CoverGirl parent company Proctor & Gamble, the ad was subjected to “enhanced post-production,” and “photoshopping.” In other words, the picture of Tay Swift’s big, gorgeous, princess lashes? Not so much mascara generated as computer generated.

Computer generated? Should we really be surprised? What perhaps should surprise us why it has taken so long for the NAD to clamp down on such false advertising and why such complicit arrangements have been allowed to exist for so long? After all what are we agreeing to as consumers when we buy into products that even in small print disclose photoshopping was used( see Taylor Swift ad below)? Is there so much an affinity to appear clued in that one will allow oneself to be duped by manufactured images? At least such affairs have been heavily scrutinized in Europe for some time now. Let’s hope going forward what cosmetics companies purport to be the truth actually  correspond to the truth. Not that it really mattered until now. Go figure…

Like Scallywagvagabond on Facebook