Airbrushed Photos Advertising Wrinkle Creams Are Dishonest Advertising

Kate Winslet

The photo jumped out at me the moment I saw it in the magazine.

There was Kate Winslet, one of my favorite celebrities, airbrushed almost to the point of being unrecognizable. Her eyes looked positively vampiric. Her skin was eerily pristine, poreless, and entirely wrinkle-free. The problem I have with this photo? It was advertising a cream that promises to "lift, firm, reshape" and assures us that we'll "[s]ee youthful contours return." If this photo doesn't fly in the face of truth in advertising, I don't know what does.


Of course, we've all come to expect to see expertly Photoshopped models in magazines, but there's something especially galling about seeing them in advertisements promoting wrinkle creams and instant fixes for crow's feet.

I would much rather see an advertisement with the un-retouched photos of a famous actress who's gotten real results from what she's supposedly using than one in which the woman has been airbrushed into a creature that barely resembles a human being. If these creams and potions work, why can't makeup companies simply show us the results?

RevlonDoes Revlon really expect us to believe our skin will look like this if we use its Age Defying Moisturizing Concealer?


ChanelIs this really what we can expect from Chanel's Ultra Correction Line Repair?

If not, why can't these companies show us the truth? Is it because the real results aren't all that great?

What do you think of these kinds of advertisements?


Images (top to bottom): Lancome; Revlon; Chanel

Read More >