ABOUT allDAY

allDAY is the official TODAY blog, your virtual window to Studio 1A and the people who make America's favorite morning show come alive. Whether it's exchanging views with the anchors and contributors or going behind the scenes with the producers, editors, camera people and more, we'll bring you the buzz here at 30 Rock, and we hope you will make this a regular part of your online routine. We want this to be a conversation, so please respond with your comments and questions directly to the blog, and we'll do our best to post what you have to say.



Should there be a law to label retouched photos?

Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 1:00 PM by Bobbie Thomas
Filed Under:

 From Style Editor Bobbie Thomas

The fashion scene in France is dividing at the seams over a proposed law that would require retouched photos (including advertising, press photos, political campaigns, art photography, and packaging images) to come with labels clearly stating that they have been altered. It’s no secret (at least it shouldn’t be at this point) that most of the images we see in magazines are doctored before they make it to print — be it simple color correcting or dramatic figure altering.

Now on the heels of recent issues involving the likenesses of such famous ladies as Kelly Clarkson, Jennifer Love Hewitt, Kate Winslet and Kim Kardashian, this law has people questioning the potential harm associated with passing distorted images off as the real deal. With teenage eating disorders consistently on the rise and unrealistic standards being set, lawmakers hope this regulation combats the negative body images that pervade popular culture.

On the flipside, many magazines and periodicals call the proposed legislation unnecessary and ridiculous, citing that art is always up for interpretation and that labels such as these compromise artistic integrity. So I’d like to pose a question to all of the allDAY readers out there: Do you think labeling retouched photos is an infringement on the right to artistic expression, or does it help to provide a reality check to those who view these “picture perfect” flawless photos?

Related: Magazine editor on Kelly Clarkson's retouched curves

Discuss: Should magazines make cover models look slimmer than they are?

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

If looking at art, that you can't tell is art, is it art?  I think the proposed labeling is a good idea.  It is true, looking atthe before and after pictures that photo touch-ups truely are an art form, so why should it be bad to identify them as being art?  Having your work labeled as art is a compliment.  It acknowledges the work that went into final product.  And yes, it can help promote healthy body image.  But it certainly won't solve the problem.  Healthy body image and self-esteem need be taught to our children.

Andrea, Saskatoon, Sk (Sent Tuesday, September 29, 2009 2:15 PM)

There are too many laws as it is. Social outcry that gets the discussion going is enough. Schools should teach critical thinking, so kids can distinguish fact from from fiction, and not have to be told the obvious all the time.

Jem (Sent Wednesday, September 30, 2009 5:10 AM)

I feel there should we live in a society where being physically perfect and looks and your body is emphasized so much that when young(er) and even we adults look at pictures it can cause you to go to extremes to look like a person in a photo when that person doesn't even look like that, their photos have been doctored.  I can see touching up a zit or something minor like that without disclosure but not changing the look of the body in anyway without disclosing it.  And if you are not happy with the way you naturally look you shouldn't be on a cover or in a magazine then.  I think Hollywood needs to start a new trend and show the world that it is ok to be human and to like and love who you are and work toward what you want to look like and not hide behind re-touched photos to look like something you are not.  It gives false impressions to everyone especially our young teenagers.  

Miki Baltimore, Md (Sent Wednesday, September 30, 2009 9:39 AM)

Interesting. In most other ads and photographs, there are disclaimers. Think cereal/cracker boxes that say "product shown not actual size" and new smartphone commercials that say "screen transitions have been edited." Difference is, people don't formulate unrealistic expectations about themselves when staring at a giant Triscuit.

Lindsey Groepper, Indianapolis (Sent Wednesday, September 30, 2009 9:44 AM)

As a make up artist and beauty fan, I understand the passion for perfection. However, I believe it is destructive to promote unreal images which can erode the beauty of what is. It is harmful to young people, who are vulnerable to image standards. We don't realize how they erode self esteem on many levels... Let's be accepting of what is natural..and REAL!

Blake - Upstate NY (Sent Wednesday, September 30, 2009 9:59 AM)

I think there should be a law. That readers know trying to look like the person in that picture is useless because not even the person really looks like that.

Martine Alphonse Sicard, Port Saint Lucie, Florida (Sent Wednesday, September 30, 2009 10:05 AM)

I think an actual law is taking it too far.  But, I think it would be helpful if more celebrities talked openly about their retouched photos (and even showed before and after photos), most of them still don't speak about it.  Also, it is insulting to everyone  when the fashion magazines do excessive re-touching.  I have seen countless covers of middle age female celebs without one one little wrinkle - that has got to stop.  On a related note, I keep seeing the billboard for "The Mentalist" and the actor featured, (forget his name), is smiling broadly with many "untouched" crow's feet.  We rarely see that with female celebrities, which is sad.

Mary Ellen, Los Angeles, CA (Sent Wednesday, September 30, 2009 10:11 AM)

Hi:

I think that it doesn't infringe the artistic integrity, it would be the print equivalent of the TV/movie "based on real events, names have been changed to protect the people involved" or "This is a fictional story, any resemblance to actual people is purely coincidence".

This law has been drafted with teenager health issues in mind, so it should be considered like a public health warning, not a creativity leash.

Greetings from Lima, Perú...I'm a great fan of yours Bobbie, keep up the good work!

Fernando Merino, Lima, Perú (Sent Wednesday, September 30, 2009 10:13 AM)

I really don't think there should be a "law" per say, but I do feel like it cast a negative light. Creative expression should try and capture the purest part of the moment you capture. You didn't capture a person with out flaws, you just took them away. Body image is such a big deal these days and eating disorders are on a rampage. I mean, I admire people like Kim Kardashian who stood up after the untouched photos were leaked showing her legs slightly bigger and cellulite and said, "I have cellulite, so what? I am a curvy girl", and she did a whole photo shoot with no make up or retouch. Jamie Lee Curtis who did that photo shoot with no retouching and let her love handles just hang out...that was refreshing. Young women everywhere look at these magazines and wonder why they can't look like that. Well, the celebs themselves don't look like that. I just think it shouldn't happen. Let's see the cracks and wrinkles, lets see the cellulite, who cares? It's you, why can't you just embrace it? If you do, everyone else will. Then again with the whole "Law" perspective of it, I think it can go against their constitutional rights too of freedom of press and expression...wrong as retouching may be of shedding a bad example. It's kind of a catch 22. That's just my opinion.

Jessica Sanner, New York, New York (Sent Wednesday, September 30, 2009 10:15 AM)



SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.): 

 Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private)

More allDAY

Recent Posts:

Archives:

Categories

Syndicate This Site

Add allDAY to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google

MSNBC Weblogs

More Links