Posts Tagged ‘l’oréal’

Here’s Hugh Laurie, former comedy legend, star of House and renowned sufferer of dark moods, punting some fucking face cream for L’Oreal, something that we presume he must have thought would cheer him up.

Obviously the $400k he gets for every single episode of House that he appears in isn’t enough for Hugh. He clearly felt compelled to make himself look like an utter bell-end in this skin cream ad that parodies other skin cream ads, only not quite enough for it to appear to the casual observer as just another skin cream ad. Or something.

Damn him. Damn him to hell and back. Double damn him with an extra slice of damn for the weekend. The mock-hobling, pill-popping, fake Yank wanker.

Picture 18 Some make up adverts mislead consumers   official, but hardly a shock

Some make-up adverts are photoshopped to the point where they mislead the public – who’d have thought THAT, eh readers? Despite it being obvious to anybody with eyes, nobody has held the cosmetic industry to account for its snake-oil style practices. And since it’s the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) that has upheld a complaint against them, that’s still the case – but at least they’ve delivered a short, sharp kick to the balls.

L’Oreal used the mug of Julia Roberts to promote Lancôme’s “Teint Miracle” foundation, stating that it “recreates the aura of perfect skin… instantly complexion appears naturally bare, beautifully flawless and luminous.” MP Jo Swinson quite rightly pointed out that the photo of Julia Roberts appeared to have been photoshopped within an inch of its life, and therefore using it to promote the product was a nonsense.

How did L’Oreal defend the accusation? By saying that the photographer has used “a lot of light, which was flattering, and reduced the appearance of imperfections by giving the image a soft focus and lower resolution”. Not only that, but that they “maintained the ad provided an aspirational picture of what could be achieved by using the product.” You know – “aspirational”, as in something that might be achieved but isn’t necessarily real or obtainable.

Since L’Oreal decided not to share the detail of its post-production technique, the ASA upheld the complaint and found the ad misleading. The company did share more information for another complaint upheld by the ASA concerning a similar advert featuring model Christy Turlington promoting an anti-aging product. L’Oreal UK admitted the photo had been “digitally retouched to lighten the skin, clean up makeup, reduce dark shadows and shading around the eyes, smooth the lips and darken the eyebrows”. Well that’s ok, then.

cheryl cole 300x295 Cheryl Coles pants not on fire over LOreal hair ads

Cheryl Cole - just look at the state of her hair

Cheryl Cole has had it tough of late – her solo career has floundered after the public decided that they all prefer to see Rufus Hound dancing around to ‘Fight For Your Love’ instead, and she’s recently become a single lady again following the collapse of her marriage.

Read more about: Uma Thurman getting sexyKate Moss in her pants with a rabbitKylie in her classic pants on bucking bronco

It’s high time that the feisty Geordie songstress had some good news and here it is – she WON’T be feeling the full force of the Advertising Standards Authority coming down on her like a ton of bricks.

They’ve thrown out 40 complaints about Chezza’s L’Oreal advert where she boasts that her hair “feels stronger” and “full of life” with a “healthy shine” even though a significant amount of said “hair” is actually glued-on extensions.

But perhaps someone at the ASA fancies himself as a possible suitor to the newly-single Ms Cole as the official verdict was: “We considered most consumers would interpret the ads to mean the product would have an effect on the look and feel of hair that was weak, limp, lifeless, dull or straw-like. However, they were likely to understand that individual results would vary according to their own hair type.”

L’Oreal pointed out that the ads had not been intended to promise that consumers would look exactly like Cheryl Cole and that the average consumer would understand that the effects would vary according to hair type and the style adopted.

Over in the corner of the Bitterwallet office sits our near-bald Paul Smith. He is surrounded by empty L’Oreal hair product bottles and is clutching a crumpled photo of Cheryl Cole. He is in the foetal position and he is crying. We hope you’re happy now Cheryl.

Either advertising planners are rarely aware of the content that appears on the billboard space they sell, or this is deliberate. It’s probably the former, but it’s nice to think it’s the latter. Or perhaps it’s a case of Cheryl Cole making a refreshingly honest admission to counter the revelation she used hair extensions for her L’Oréal commercials.

This juxtaposition of statement and form was spotted near Saint James’ Park in Newcastle by Bitterwallet readers Gaz and Robbo from NUFC blog ShiteSeats.co.uk:

IMG00580 20091129 1455 Cheryl Cole   after LOréal, a more honest advert

“For the record – we love Cheryl and think she’s a great ambassador for the region. She’s just not the sharpest tool in the box.”