Like most controversies, this one started small. A photo of French president Sarkozy canoeing with his son, shirtless and noticeably slimmer, appeared in a French publication that was later forced to admit that Le Président had lost weight courtesy of Le Photoshop.
Then, Ralph Lauren (the company, not the man, presumably) decided it was a good idea to alter the photo of a model by putting a regularly sized head on an impossibly thin body. Worse yet, they used the face and body of a model they had fired, allegedly for – wait for it – being too large (read: fat) to model the company’s new clothes.
Worse still, they did it again after claiming it was all a big mistake. That’s not an “Oops.” That’s a head-slapping “What were they thinking?”
The issue here isn’t that marketers use re-touched photos. It isn’t even that consumer advocates over-react and demand full disclosure when a photo is altered. (French lawmakers want to take it a step further and require warning labels that disclose when a photo has been altered. Viva la France!)
People pretty much expect marketing materials to be “improved.” Not only do we embrace using technology to make things appear better than they are, we all but demand it through our consumer behavior.
We buy Ralph’s clothes because we want to look like the people in the pictures. We pick a beach resort from a photo that crops out the dumpster and parking lot that stands between you and your “beachfront suite.” Add to that all the Botox, Spanx, Alli, and Viagra we buy to create an altered reality.
No, the issue, my friends, is not that photo editing occurs, it’s that marketers don’t think about the risk to their brand when they engage in extreme alteration. I dare say sales of Ralph Lauren brand clothes won’t be significantly impacted by this dust-up, but it is a distraction. And, there is a nice new ding in the reputation of RL.
In this economy, no brand – no matter how strong – can afford to be distracted from their mission by needless controversies like requiring photo disclosures.
Besides, where would you put warning label?
Posts
While I would agree that sales won't be significantly impacted, I would say that any time something like this pops up, there is that risk. In today's era of transparency and speed of information transfer, it is hard to "get away" with something like that. And when you don't, it can spread across the net almost instantly.
ReplyDeleteI do agree about altering pictures - although I do think that ones that steer toward outright fabrication are heading in the wrong direction. Sure, a picture may not show the parking lot, but it's not necessarily lying. When companies substantially change a picture, my personal opinion is that then borders on lying to the general public. And to reiterate something you said above, no matter how strong your brand, that is something you don't need.