Brush with the law

There is nothing new in saying that advertisers must show restraint when using airbrushed images (‘Airbrushing damages consumer trust in brands’). The CAP Code (UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing) is clear that advertisers cannot use post-production techniques in cosmetic advertisements when the result is an image that could never have been achieved from use of the product. The ASA has recently banned ads which ended up being misleading because of post-production techniques, and awareness of this issue is at an all-time high.

But the issue of misleading airbrushing must not be confused with post-production techniques that simply correct and improve stylised ads. Consumers expect adverts to look beautiful – it’s how advertising sells a brand promise. Post-production techniques are a vital tool in selling the image to consumers.

Provided post-production doesn’t lead to a misleading effect, no consumers will have been harmed. Displaying kitemarks when post-production techniques have been used seems a misguided proposal. Advertisers won’t be able to simply put a kitemark saying ‘Airbrushed’ and then show a heavily airbrushed image for a skin firming cream, as that would still be a breach of the CAP Code, leading to ASA sanctions. But forcing advertisers to put a kitemark whenever they use post-production techniques where it doesn’t have a misleading effect seems heavy handed – and not something consumers need for their protection.

Jo Farmer
Partner in the media, brands and technology department
Lewis Silkin LLP

Recommended

icon

Mind the app infrastructure

Webops Temp

With a 4G network still a long way off, Lara O’Reilly’s piece on the frustration of failing to access her preferred apps and websites while recuperating in hospital, provides food for thought. 3G technology is great, but when the network was designed it did not anticipate the level of content that is rich in data […]

icon

Win over the savvy shopper

Webops Temp

It’s encouraging to read that consumers are becoming more open to sharing their information with brands (‘Safe in their hands?’, MW 8 December). With ‘savvy shoppers’ concerned about privacy but willing to share their information, we must now look at ways of showing consumers how marketers and brands can understand them better and deliver improved […]

icon

ICANN your dot-brand

Webops Temp

Your article ‘The new domain names that will be a game-changer for brands’ (MW 20 October) made clear the benefits of owning a branded top level domain (TLD) – greater control of your brand online, enhanced security and opening new possibilities for customer engagement – but I want to add that businesses should not deliberate […]

Comments

    Leave a comment