In reality, the data, which was completely unconnected to the product in question, came from a study that simply asked women if they felt more attractive now than they had a decade before. Given the fact that less censorship goes on in the US, do you think we need more consumer protection? Or is it silly to believe ads in the first place?
Source: Flickr User jbcurio
Lash inserts used prior to application to add fullness but not length.
You could have knocked me over with a feather! That's the kind of full disclosure that some people are calling for, especially in the UK. But it hasn't been required of cosmetics companies yet — which is why it's pleasing to see this kind of straightforward initiative. What do you think?
A new year, a new banned advertisement in Britain. The Advertising Standards Authority has had this Clean & Clear commercial removed after two viewers complained about the before-and-after photos. In the "before" shots, the women are wearing only eye makeup; in the "after" pictures, they're wearing powder. It's pretty easy to tell, too:
"We considered that, in order to make the before and after comparison fair, both shots should have been taken under the same conditions (both without makeup) to ensure that any visible improvement was an accurate representation of what could be achieved with the product," the ASA stated. It's pretty amazing to think that two complaints could lead to an entire ad being knocked off the airwaves — and I, for one, am all for transparency in advertising. Things are so different on the other side of the pond, aren't they?
I know that marketing in schools is nothing new, but a program in Australia is taking things to a new level. A program called Fashion Roll Call, which is sponsored in part by makeup brand NP Set Cosmetics, is touring all-girl schools around the country. Their goal is to educate girls in fashion and beauty industry careers by presenting a "lunch-time fashion parade" followed by makeup application tutorials taught by makeup artists who work for NP Set.
When I was 13, I probably would have been excited for this, since it means no class and playing with stuff my parents wouldn't let me wear. But as an adult, I have mixed feelings. The cosmetics brand is getting choice branding access to kids in exchange for a few makeup tips. And since this program is being billed as educational, and intended to teach children about the fashion and beauty industries, why no boys or coed schools? There are tons of men in the fashion and beauty industries, and their absence suggests that the informational element here is a thin veneer to make aggressive marketing more palatable. What do you think?
Ruh roh! First it was L'Oreal that got a lashing, now it's Rimmel. The British beauty company is in hot water because of its ads for Magnif'eyes. The Advertising Standards Authority criticized Rimmel for failing to prove evidence that Kate Moss was not wearing false eyelashes in the ad, saying that the visuals were misleading.
I'm curious to know what you think about this trend of calling beauty companies out on their advertising. On the one hand, I think, "Certainly people understand that ads are retouched and faked." But on the other hand, I look at videos like this and wonder if it would be better if advertising were honest about what products can and can't do. What do you think? Should beauty companies be forced to be truthful in advertisements?
It's not "Mad Men" but it's pretty darn close.
According to Variety, TNT is in the process of creating a "pilot of ad-world drama" titled "Truth in Advertising." The story will focus on "a powerful agency in contemporary Chicago. [Eric] McCormack will play Mason McGuire, an exec who is better at the corporate side of the biz but is unexpectedly promoted to creative director. [Tom] Cavanagh is cast as Conner, described as McGuire's more emotional and creative counterpart."
Product placement will play a big role.
I was wondering about this project which sounds suspiciously like it might be simply trying to ride on the successful coattails of AMC's "Mad Men," until I read that there will be "commercials-within-the-show." These will fit within the story but also "offer opportunities for a new kind of product placement." Greeeeat.
Well, at least Eric McCormack is back at work on the small screen!
Will Truman Eric McCormack! I can't wait to see him on TV again. And it will be interesting to see if Tom Cavanaugh can be seriously serious on a regular basis in this drama.
Due to an eagle-eyed couch potato in the UK, L'Oreal is under fire for having misleading ads. A commercial for Telescopic mascara features Penelope Cruz looking long-lashed and lovely. It also promised that women could have "up to 60 percent longer eyelashes" with the mascara.
The problem? As the TV viewer suspected, Cruz was wearing false lashes in the commercial! She complained to the Advertising Standards Authority, which deemed the ads misleading. According to the Daily Mail:
L'Oréal told the ASA its product made the tips of lashes more visible, giving a lengthening effect.
It said: "Penelope Cruz was wearing a few individual false lashes inserted into her natural lashes to fill in the gaps in her natural lashes for a consistent standard of lashes."
Furthermore, the Beeb reports that L'Oreal said it was "common industry practice" to use artificial lashes.
Are you surprised? I'm not. To find out why, read more