IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rfa/smcjnl/v3y2015i1p109-116.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Photoshop and Deceptive Advertising: An Analysis of Blog Comments

Author

Listed:
  • David S. Waller

Abstract

The advertising industry is often criticized for presenting unrealistic images of fashion and beauty which can have a negative influence on women and girls. In particular, a small number of advertisements for cosmetics have come under fire from advertising regulators in the UK and USA. This exploratory paper discusses two magazine advertisements for mascara which came to the attention of by the US regulatory authority (National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus) ¡°for excessive photoshopping¡±, leading to both ads being withdrawn from future campaigns. Using content analysis, the paper will analyze bloggers¡¯ comments about the decision to discover what were the main issues raised.

Suggested Citation

  • David S. Waller, 2015. "Photoshop and Deceptive Advertising: An Analysis of Blog Comments," Studies in Media and Communication, Redfame publishing, vol. 3(1), pages 109-116, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:rfa:smcjnl:v:3:y:2015:i:1:p:109-116
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://redfame.com/journal/index.php/smc/article/view/841/788
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://redfame.com/journal/index.php/smc/article/view/841
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sylvie Borau & Marcelo Vinhal Nepomuceno, 2019. "The Self-Deceived Consumer: Women’s Emotional and Attitudinal Reactions to the Airbrushed Thin Ideal in the Absence Versus Presence of Disclaimers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(2), pages 325-340, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    advertising; photoshop; deceptive advertising; blogs;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rfa:smcjnl:v:3:y:2015:i:1:p:109-116. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Redfame publishing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.