What do you think about the magazine retouching?

[teacups]

Kelly Clarkson on the cover of SELF, the issue that touts being true to yourself, and then they airbrush her to about 5 sizes smaller than she really is on the cover! Inside the magazine she says something along the lines of being fine with her weight, but others seem to have a problem with it.... Some editor from the magazine just gave a big line of boloney on the news about they want girls to be true to themselves inside, but also aspire to their goals. HUH? How can being 5 sizes smaller be her goal when she says she is fine with her weight? Nobody should buy this magaizne issue IMO. They certainly can not believe the crap they are selling.

 

[Camicar]

I think that the editors are fools and have shot their magazine in the foot.

First of all, this airbrushing was caught asap because everyone knows what Kelly looks like. So why set yourself up to get caught? Stupid, just stupid.

Secondly, this issue is the 'body confidence issue' and Kelly would be the right person for that topic because she is actually okay with her REAL body. So why ruin that combination?

Thirdly, so why take away the POINT of having Kelly as the cover model? They have just contradicted their own advice. They might as well have hired Calista Flockheart or Paris Hilton and just made it clear that "You can have body confidence ONLY as long as you are thin."

Fourthly, their "whatever" response about it makes me wonder why I should trust them about anything. Why should I believe anything in that magazine if they are willing to lie on the cover about their main topic? They contradicted their own advice, so even THEY don't believe it. So why should I?

Seriously, if I owned that magazine, the editors would be collecting unemployment now.

 

[Buckalew11]

Bad move, MO.

 

[apirateslifeforme]

Didn't another magazine do this to Kate Winslet some years back, and she pitched a fit about it, too? I personally don't understand why these magazines have to do that...I think both women are thin enough, but I get it...the whole "Hollywood standard" or whatever they call it...

 

[MusiqChic99]

I think it sends a bad message.

However saying that, I want someone to airbrush me on a cover so that i can see myself 20 lbs lighter. Then maybe I will get my butt up off the couch!

 

[The Mystery Machine]

I do remember some actor in which they put their head on a different body in some mag? Or maybe that was a movie.

We know that covers sell mags and that is what it is about at the end. It is a business. Read and see all things with a grain of salt is my motto, esp. magazines.

Has Clarkson said anything about the airbrushing?

 

[MusiqChic99]

Oh and I thought I would point out that they don't just retouch people they think would look better thinner. Even the thin chicks get a few retouching here and there.

 

[elgerber]

I saw that editor from Self this morning. She was very annoying. Everytime they would ask her why they airbrushed it, she would go into a speech about Kelly being self confident, blah blah blah, but never once did they answer the question, nor acknowledge that maybe they shouldn't have done it. How stupid! She kept saying something about the cover being a poster and something about a snapshot being a real photo inside the magazine.
Unfortunately I subscribe to Self, so I will be getting the issue regardless.

 

[Christine]

I remember a few years ago there was some discussion about Faith Hill getting Photoshopped on Redbook. I even think Redbook discussed it in a later issued and showed the before and after pictures. Basically they lengthened Faith's arms to make them look longer and thinner. She looked absolutely fine in the "before" shots so I really don't know why they do it.

 

[DebIreland]

The whole airbrushing thing has become idiotic. I use Photoshop a lot and it's such a great tool for fixing, altering and improving photos but people get carried away. I did alter a pic of myself once - it was with dd on her birthday with her cake and I wanted to frame it so I brightened my teeth and airbrushed a pimple - I did what I thought were minor changes. Until my friend (of 30 years) saw the pic and said "aw A (dd) is soooo cute in that pic. Who's that woman she's with?" ROFL!!

Remember the l'Oreal airbrushing job of Beyoncé? That was disgraceful. Such a stunningly beautiful woman needed NO touching up but, of all things, to whiten her was appalling. Here's the comparison: http://anthonyturano.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/425beyonce2080708.jpg

 

[Camicar]

There is a big scandel in the UK right now over an Olay ad with a heavily-airbrushed Twiggy. She is absolutely unrecognizable and her photoshopped skin bears NO resemblance to her real-life skin.

Some people are calling for legislation to ban this type of airbrushing as a form of fraud. I see their point in that this photoshopped pic is being used to sell wrinkle cream. The cream didn't remove the wrinkles, the airbrushing did.
The-faces-Twiggy-59-How-airbrushing-Olay-ad-hides-truth-skin-shes-in.html

 

[FireDancer]

I think she looks way better on the cover. She got a bit pudgy around the middle lately (not fat but kind of frumpy) so they had to do something to make her cover worthy.

As long as they don't say "That is an untouched picture" when it is I don't see it as dishonest. Magazines from GQ to Hen's Health do the same thing with people of both sexes.

I do agree that using the picture to sell a product like weight loss or anti wrinkle should be unaltered to show the true product, but that would be assuming there is truth in advertising, which there isn't.

 

[bicker]

I agree: She looks good on the cover, and the cover is supposed to look good, so mission successful, job well done.

 

[teacups]

I remember a few years ago there was some discussion about Faith Hill getting Photoshopped on Redbook. I even think Redbook discussed it in a later issued and showed the before and after pictures. Basically they lengthened Faith's arms to make them look longer and thinner. She looked absolutely fine in the "before" shots so I really don't know why they do it.

FAITH HILL- great singer, but can we talk arm length?
OMG. How stupid is that?

 

[PaddingtonBear]

There is a big scandel in the UK right now over an Olay ad with a heavily-airbrushed Twiggy. She is absolutely unrecognizable and her photoshopped skin bears NO resemblance to her real-life skin.

Some people are calling for legislation to ban this type of airbrushing as a form of fraud. I see their point in that this photoshopped pic is being used to sell wrinkle cream. The cream didn't remove the wrinkles, the airbrushing did.
The-faces-Twiggy-59-How-airbrushing-Olay-ad-hides-truth-skin-shes-in.html

Until the last cycle or two, Twiggy was a judge on America's Next Top Model, and she looked more like the 'retouched' version than the not retouched version. On the show her skin and hair looked great and the retouched photo looks like her on the show

 

[LuvOrlando]

It is so interesting to me that this is making waves right now. I just took the time to read through my August Vogue the other day and noticed, with a few exceptions including Burberry whose models looked like they could have been my DD10 & D11 playing dress-up, the models looked decidedly older and more sophisticated than they normally do. Elegance is something that is as elusive to young people as innocence is to the old. I wonder if the designers finally figured out young kids do not have the money for their clothes or their subscriptions.

I like seeing older and more normal women in the media and am sick to death of being told the ideal female form is that of a pre-pubescent boy who can only have a chest if its fake and sculpted

How are we really supposed to teach our kids about respect and equality when this very same culture shouts out from every form of entertainment "You are only valuable if you look like THIS>, and own THIS>" and THIS is unattainable by almost everyone???

 

[LuvOrlando]

Double post

 

[Liberty Belle]

I think she looks way better on the cover. She got a bit pudgy around the middle lately (not fat but kind of frumpy) so they had to do something to make her cover worthy.

As long as they don't say "That is an untouched picture" when it is I don't see it as dishonest. Magazines from GQ to Hen's Health do the same thing with people of both sexes.

I do agree that using the picture to sell a product like weight loss or anti wrinkle should be unaltered to show the true product, but that would be assuming there is truth in advertising, which there isn't.

If they thought she was too pudgy to put on their cover, then they did not need to put her on the cover.

 

[Hillbeans]

I think there is a big difference between retouching a photo to get rid of a pimple than making someone who is a size 12-14 look as if they are a size 4-6.

 

[Stacerita]

I think there is a big difference between retouching a photo to get rid of a pimple than making someone who is a size 12-14 look as if they are a size 4-6.

Exactly.