Taylor Swift CoverGirl Ad Banned In US

I have to say I am surprised and actually thrilled that this has developed. Appreciate it to anyone who it was that struggled the good deal with on this one so our daughters won’t think they are beautiful if they don’t have flawless skin and unattainable eye lashes.




The ban on Photoshop has begun! The hottest CoverGirl ad featuring Taylor Swift modelingNatureLuxe Mousse mascara will never run again due to “enhanced post-production” and “Photoshopping” to make unrealistic expectations for eyelashes, according to Business Insider. What? You’re telling me Tay Tay’s million-mile long lashes aren’t real?! Sadface times a million. Procter & Gamble, the guardian company of CoverGirl, did reveal in fine print that the image was enhanced but still decided to bring to close running the ad. TheNational Advertising Division is cracking down on advertising that is misleading to consumers, and director Andrea Levine mentioned, “You can’t use a photograph to demonstrate how a cosmetic will look after it is applied to a woman’s face and then-in the mice type-have a disclosure that says ‘okay, not really.’”

This isn’t the first time we’ve seen one of our popular stars in a banned ad-17-year-oldDakota Fanning’s provocative perfume positioning in Marc Jacobs’ Oh, Lola! campaign was interpreted as “sexualising a child,” according to the British Advertising Standards Authority. Yipes! Does this mean the model is at the will of the advertiser’s artistic attention? Looks like that could be the case. The NAD ruling on Tay’s CoverGirl ad read:



“NAD was especially troubled by the photograph of the model-which serves clearly to demonstrate (i.e., let consumers see for on their own) the length and volume they can achieve when they apply the advertised mascara to their eyelashes. This picture is accompanied by a disclosure that the model’s eyelashes had been enhanced post production.”