js
01-12-09, 12:30 PM
With endless celebrity photoshop scandals and images of models being severely altered to meet beauty standards, it seems no one can actually live up to the outrageous ideals set for women these days. Up until now, we'd always been slightly suspicious of seemingly perfect shampoo commercial hair.
Sure, the women advertising hair care products probably had their hair trimmed and styled by professionals beforehand, but we assumed they were showing off their real hair. This was not the case in a recent UK television ad for L'Oréal Elvive Full Restore 5 hair care line.
Singer and "X Factor" judge Cheryl Cole promotes the products, claiming they makes her hair "feel stronger, full of life, replenished with a healthy shine."
The problem? The Times of London is reporting that the that's not her real hair in the ad; she's wearing very pricey extensions. And now her hairdresser is even stirring some debate over whether the extensions were actually synthetic, rather than made from human hair as the ad's disclaimer insinuates.
In the commercial, a quick message flashes for under two seconds that says her hair is “styled with some natural extensions." In corresponding magazine ads, the extensions are referenced in 2mm high font.
Is this enough of a disclaimer?
The Advertising Standards Authority in the UK told the Times they have rejected complaints about the ad since the information about Cole's extensions was “clear and legible.” A spokesperson for L’Oréal said, “Cheryl has worn hair extensions for some time. They are part of her look and are cared for in the same way as normal hair.” Meanwhile, a representative for Cole is defending the brand as well. “L’Oréal are within their rights and the ads are not breaking any rules," they said. "We would ne
KV-48hASWfo
Do you think it was fair for L’Oréal to allow Cheryl Cole to wear extensions in their commercial since they provide a disclaimer? Or do you think it's still misleading?
Sure, the women advertising hair care products probably had their hair trimmed and styled by professionals beforehand, but we assumed they were showing off their real hair. This was not the case in a recent UK television ad for L'Oréal Elvive Full Restore 5 hair care line.
Singer and "X Factor" judge Cheryl Cole promotes the products, claiming they makes her hair "feel stronger, full of life, replenished with a healthy shine."
The problem? The Times of London is reporting that the that's not her real hair in the ad; she's wearing very pricey extensions. And now her hairdresser is even stirring some debate over whether the extensions were actually synthetic, rather than made from human hair as the ad's disclaimer insinuates.
In the commercial, a quick message flashes for under two seconds that says her hair is “styled with some natural extensions." In corresponding magazine ads, the extensions are referenced in 2mm high font.
Is this enough of a disclaimer?
The Advertising Standards Authority in the UK told the Times they have rejected complaints about the ad since the information about Cole's extensions was “clear and legible.” A spokesperson for L’Oréal said, “Cheryl has worn hair extensions for some time. They are part of her look and are cared for in the same way as normal hair.” Meanwhile, a representative for Cole is defending the brand as well. “L’Oréal are within their rights and the ads are not breaking any rules," they said. "We would ne
KV-48hASWfo
Do you think it was fair for L’Oréal to allow Cheryl Cole to wear extensions in their commercial since they provide a disclaimer? Or do you think it's still misleading?