SPECIAL FEATURES:
Email
Taylor Swift ad pulled for being too perfect
Procter & Gamble questioned for mascara ad that featured digitally enhanced eyelashes.
Wed, Dec 21 2011 at 10:00 AM
Related Topics:
SPEAK NOW: Taylor Swift's mascara ad. (Photo: Procter & Gamble)
Just when it seemed the Photoshopping couldn't get any worse in ads — particularly in the beauty industry — it seems the National Advertising Division (NAD) might actually be making a move in the right direction by questioning advertisements with over-the-top enhancements.
The ad in question is one featuring American's favorite sweetheart, Taylor Swift. In the ad, for CoverGirl's NatureLuxe Mousse Mascara, Swift is featured in her standard beauty queen pose — eyes a-flutter to show off her fabulous lashes. Only those aren't her real lashes. And the look wasn't achieved using CoverGirl mascara. Her lashes were enhanced digitally after the photo shoot.
Seriously? And we wonder why our kids — girls in particular — have such issues with body image? Companies make ads to sell their products, but kids need to know that there is no real-life way for them to achieve the looks they see in beauty and fashion magazines.
Fortunately, even the NAD got fed up with the deception involved with an ad for mascara that uses digitally enhanced lashes. The agency sent a letter of inquiry to Procter & Gamble, manufacturers of CoverGirl's NatureLuxe Mousse Mascara, and asked for substantiation of their claims that their mascara produces "2x the lash volume" of bare lashes and is "20 percent lighter" than more expensive mascaras.
"Upon receiving the inquiry from the NAD, P&G discontinued the advertisement in question," a P&G spokesperson explains in a statement. "The NAD has deemed our intervention as accurate and proper. We have always been committed, and we continue to be committed, to featuring visuals and claims that accurately represent our products' benefits."
What do you think? Should Procter & Gamble have pulled the ads?
The opinions expressed by MNN Bloggers and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of MNN.com. While we have reviewed their content to make sure it complies with our Terms and Conditions, MNN is not responsible for the accuracy of any of their information.
You might also like:
Sign in with one of these accounts to add your comment.
EDITORS' PICKS
Advertisement
TODAY'S MOST POPULAR ON
- 15 famous people who mysteriously disappeared
- 9 habits that may do more harm than good
- Spanish town sends dog poop back to irresponsible pet owners
- 10 false facts most people think are true
- Too beautiful to be real? 16 surreal landscapes found on Earth
- Yurts: Everything you ever wanted to know but were afraid to ask
- Henry Cavill's 'Man of Steel' workout video
- Henry Cavill's 'Man of Steel' workout and diet
- 7 surprising things Pope Francis has done in his first 100 days
- 22 surprising uses for turmeric
NEWSLETTER
ABOUT Jenn Savedge
Green parenting author on raising eco-friendly kids.
Advertisement
I am a little worried that this will mar the product.
It's a much better mascara as it uses beeswax instead of synthetics - that's what everyone should be focussed on.
Really? As if every other mascara commercial is real? The "Falsies" commercials, LashBlast...those models are all wearing false lashes and looks way more fake than Taylor Swift.
i think there are a hell of a lot more important things to worry about than the eyelashes of a pop/country star!!!!!! raise your daughters to be confident,independant,educated young women they will know the difference between fact and fantasy!!!!
Not pulled for being "too perfect."
Pulled for being "too fake."
False advertisement. Plain and simple.
False headline too.
I think I will go with what Mother Nature would say: " Keep it natural " I also take photos with a grain of salt, and now when looking at magazines, the new saying will be: " believe none of what you see, and almost none of what your hear "
You sir, are a genius.
Procter & Gamble (P & G) - a confirmed, notorious & unrepentant corporate tester of products on animals, including cats, dogs, rabbits, etc. P & G owns Iams & Eukanuba & hundreds of other brands - PLEASE BOYCOTT PROCTER & GAMBLE & ALL THEIR PRODUCTS! Animals shouldn't be chemically poisoned & tortured to death for household & cosmetic goods.
I think it's fair of them to pull it. I agree with all the reasons in this article. Even more so, not just taking into account body image and girls/women, but isn't that extremely FALSE advertisement? They didn't just make Taylor look "better" but they made up the results of their product. Ridiculous. Good for NAD.
I'm glad something is being done to all these false advertising claims. As an esthetician, being in the beauty industry, I can see all they do to over exaggerate these products in commercials. I say bravo NAD! Enough with the deceptive ads.
Wat to go