http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2910931/Girls-cheated-by-false-hair-and-lashes-in-beauty-ads.html#ixzz0jaRbYc2u
The Sun found that 28 per cent of cosmetics ads in glossy mags admitted — in tiny print — that pictures were artificially enhanced. A further 44 per cent appeared to have doctored images but did not own up.
Just 28 per cent were thought to show the product’s qualities accurately.
Mascara adverts were the worst — with 58 per cent admitting the model’s eyelashes were airbrushed to look longer. And 42 per cent showed artificial lashes.
Maybelline was the only firm to print a disclaimer in large type. About 23 per cent of shampoo adverts used models with artificial hair.
Advertised claims (including visual claims) should not misleadingly exaggerate the effect the product is capable of achieving. For example, lash inserts should not be used to create a lengthening or volumising effect beyond what can be achieved by the mascara on the model’s natural lashes. Lash inserts may however be used to fill in natural gaps in the lash-line and thereby help to achieve a uniform lash-line effect.
Pre-production
The use of pre-production techniques such as styling, make-up, lash inserts, hair extensions etc. is acceptable without explicit disclosure provided such techniques do not mislead. The following are examples likely to mislead:
• ‘Before-and-after’ images where only the ‘after’ image had used pre-production techniques, or the use of different techniques in a series of images showing graded effects.
• The use of lash inserts that are longer or thicker than the model’s natural lashes or that do more than replace damaged or missing lashes, unless it can be shown that the effect illustrated is achievable on the natural unadorned eyelash.
• The excessive use of hair extensions or inserts that significantly adds to hair volume in hair care advertisements, unless it can be shown that the effect illustrated is achievable on natural hair.
• The use of false or artificial nails in advertisements for nail care products where the benefit claimed is other than purely decorative (e.g. claims for nail strength, length, shape).
The following are examples unlikely to mislead: • The use of styling and make-up generally.
2
Help Note Use of production techniques in cosmetics advertising•
The use of lash inserts for non-eye area cosmetics.
• The use of hair extensions and inserts for non-hair care cosmetics.
• The use of false or artificial nails for coloured nail cosmetics where the effect is achievable on natural nails.
Post-production
The use of post-production techniques through the re-touching of photographic images requires particular attention to avoid misleading consumers.
Advertisers should retain appropriate material to be able to demonstrate what re-touching had been carried out in the event of being questioned. This might include ‘before’ as well as ‘after’ images showing the effect of both pre- and post-production techniques as appropriate.
The following are examples likely to mislead and are unacceptable:
• Re-touching related to any characteristics directly relevant to the apparent performance of the product being advertised. For example, removing or reducing the appearance of lines and wrinkles around the eyes for an eye cream advertisement or increasing the length or thickness of eyelashes in an advertisement for mascara.
• Adding highlights and shine to hair for a product claiming to produce shiny hair. • Removing hair ‘fly-aways’ for a product for flyaway hair.
The following are examples unlikely to mislead:
• Minor adjustments to correct for lighting problems and other photographic issues, provided the image produced reflects the model.
• Removal of a few hair ‘fly-aways’ is acceptable, even in advertisements for hair care products except, as mentioned above, products for fly-away hair.
• Removal of skin blemishes provided this does not affect the impression given of the effectiveness of the product.
No comments:
Post a Comment