CANADIANS OVERWHELMINGLY CRITICAL OF DOCTORED IMAGES IN MAGAZINES AND ADVERTISING

In advance of its first public forum, Media Action released the results of a national poll that shows a majority of Canadians - 71% - consider the use of digital enhancement technology unacceptable in application to beauty product advertising campaigns.

The responses to questions about the prevalence, impact and acceptability of altered images revealed discomfort among both male and female consumers, and across all ages polled. The questions were included in an omnibus survey conducted by Stratcom last fall, which reflects the views of a nationally representative sample of 1,202 Canadian adults.

The survey found that women are slightly more likely than men to believe that images have been altered always or most of time (88% vs 80%), and young Canadians are considerably more skeptical of the authenticity of images than older people: 46% of 18-34 year olds think images in ads and magazines are always doctored, in contrast to only 28% of those over the age of 60.

78% of Canadians believe that the digital enhancement of model and celebrity photos to make them seem younger and slimmer has a negative impact on how women feel about their bodies. Women (86%) and young people (84%) are particularly concerned about this, although even a majority of men (70%) and people over 60 (68%) share similar concerns.

Perhaps not surprisingly, given these views, 71% of Canadians feel the digital enhancement of images of women in ads that promote anti-cellulite or anti-wrinkle cream is not acceptable.

Says Media Action director Shari Graydon, "Canadians are essentially saying it's indefensible for an advertiser to use graphically manipulated images to illustrate claims made on behalf of a beauty product purporting to improve appearance.

"We expect accuracy in reporting and want journalists to illustrate their stories with authentic, unaltered images. Why should corporate communicators be permitted to ignoresuch standards? At a time when public confidence in the marketplace is at a record low, it's time for a recommitment to the principles of ‘truth in advertising'."

Last year in response to a consumer complaint, the industry's self-regulating body, Advertising Standards Canada, ruled that a mascara commercial "misled viewers because the depiction could not have been achieved unless false eyelashes or lash inserts were used."

"We were encouraged by this precedent," says Graydon. "Dozens of other ads for anti-cellulite and anti-aging cream mislead viewers every day because the flawless skin they depict is impossible to achieve without airbrushing. Unfortunately, complaints filed on this matter were dismissed."

A public forum entitled "Beauty (Mis)represented: What's the Matter With Airbrushing Advertisements?" is being held Thursday night to debate these issues, in room 5-280 at Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, 252 Bloor St. W., Toronto at 7:30 pm. It features a demonstration of digital manipulation and a panel discussion, and is presented in partnership with Shameless Magazine and the Women's Centre for Studies in Education. Admission is free.

 OR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: info@media-action-media.com