As I was doing research for my paper, I came across a lot of articles dealing with the manipulation of fashion models for magazines, whether for the cover or for advertising. I’m sure most girls would agree that many of those models look too good to be true, but many don’t know exactly how much editing (if any) has gone into the photos. This doesn’t help the self-image of teenage girls who look at these magazines.
It’s easy to say from an ethical standpoint that airbrushing should be minimal if allowed at all, but don’t photo editors have some artistic freedom? Do advertisers have the right to say how flawless they want the models who are representing their products?
It’s hard to discern the line between how much editing is too much editing for photos in magazines. For news photos, it’s been suggested that any photo that undergoes editing (besides the normal kind to correct technical things like color, brightness, etc.) should be labeled as an illustration or an edited photo. But if that were the standard for a magazine, every photo would have a label like that.
Should magazines change their standards for photo editing so that young girls will see what beauty standards they should realistically try to live up to?
media ethics 