Banning Photoshopping - Nanny State or responsible editor?

The place for measured discourse about politics and current events, including developments in science and medicine.
Post Reply
User avatar
Alatar
of Vinyamar
Posts: 10596
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Banning Photoshopping - Nanny State or responsible editor?

Post by Alatar »

I don't know if anyone else heard about this before. It's the first time I've come across it. I have to say, personally I agree with this. Campaigns like the Dove commercials were great for raising awareness, but have had little effect. Now I accept that some people know they are being sold a fantasy, and accept that, but if so, I agree that it should be clearly stated when photoshopping is being used.

As for the BMI restriction, thats a bit trickier. I don't agree that you should be allowed to deny someone employment for being, say, a smoker, but in the fashion industry its been the norm to routinely deny people a job for being overweight, so why not underweight?

Some interesting issues raised by this I think.

This March, Israel passed what are now known as the Photoshop laws. The legislation requires all models to maintain a certain BMI, and all designers to disclose when they've photoshopped their models. Today, The Atlantic posted a thorough look into the making of the laws, and whether governments can intervene in a creative process that doubles as the root of disease for many teenagers and adults alike.

The new laws require all models working in Israel to have a Body Mass Index (BMI) over 18.5. People with BMIs under 18.5 are generally considered underweight, and while being underweight doesn't constitute an eating disorder, politicians claim that most models aren't underweight and eating healthily.

Rachel Adato, a former gynecologist and current politician who pioneered the bill, reported that Israel sees 1,500 new cases of eating disorders every year.

Israel's Photoshop laws will also prohibit any undisclosed airbrushing, computer editing, or other kinds of photoshopping to make models appear thinner. Advertisers that choose to edit their models' photos must clearly state that fact to the viewer. International advertisements must comply with these regulations to have their ads placed in magazines or on billboard space sold within Israel.

While some decry the laws as a blow to free speech, many see them as a way of protecting vulnerable people from a very real and deadly disease. But psychologically, eating disorders aren't always simply about seeing an image and wanting to be that image (if that type of causation were always true, then video games would make more violent personalities). "Developing an eating disorder is a complex process in terms of specific constellation of personality traits that one's born with," Daniel La Grange, professor of psychiatry and director of the eating disorder program at the University of Chicago told The Atlantic. "Genetic, environmental, societal things have to come together in a vulnerable individual, so it's not just one piece that makes it possible."

Israel's laws likely aren't expected to have an effect on computer editing in America, where eating disorders are as much of a problem. Recently, a 14-year-old girl (and 26,000 signatories) petitioned Seventeen Magazine to run at least one spread per issue without digital photo manipulation. While Seventeen didn't make any promises, its campaign did make headlines in photography, fashion, and feminist circles.
Image
The Vinyamars on Stage! This time at Bag End
User avatar
Frelga
Meanwhile...
Posts: 22479
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:31 pm
Location: Home, where else

Post by Frelga »

It doesn't sound like they are banning photoshop at all. :scratch: They are introducing a disclosure requirement, which surely is well within any government's rights. Like nutrition labels on food.
If there was anything that depressed him more than his own cynicism, it was that quite often it still wasn't as cynical as real life.

Terry Pratchett, Guards! Guards!
User avatar
narya
chocolate bearer
Posts: 4904
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:27 am
Location: Wishing I could be beachcombing, or hiking, or dragon boating
Contact:

Post by narya »

If we paraphrase or manipulate someone's words in a place where it is not expected to be fictionalized, we have to include a disclosure. Should be the same with images.
In the midst of winter, I found there was, within me, an invincible summer. ~ Albert Camus
User avatar
Primula Baggins
Living in hope
Posts: 40005
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
Contact:

Post by Primula Baggins »

I don't believe that video games cause violence, but I do think images of women who are literally impossibly thin contribute to some young women's unrealistic perception of what is "normal" and leads to them thinking they're fat—because they can't match a Photoshopped body that has had a third of its pelvis edited out.

The problem has been around for a long time, long before Photoshop, of course—artistic images of women often tweak reality in the direction of the fashion of that time. The problem with Photoshop is that it's possible to believe the image is of a real person, the way she actually looks, and to think it should be possible to look that way yourself—if only you're good enough, restrict your food enough, exercise obsessively enough.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
User avatar
Lalaith
Lali Beag Bídeach
Posts: 15714
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Rivendell

Post by Lalaith »

I have to say that I rather like this legislation. It's not saying you can't do it, just that you have to disclose when you do. What I would hope for is the eventual cultural pressure to stop doing it altogether.

As for the BMI issue, I think that's kind of interesting. Again, what would be ideal is for culture itself to stop wanting the ultra-thin, unhealthy model.

The girls like to watch America's Next Top Model, and I'm just floored at the "plus" size models--size 4 or so. It's beyond ridiculous. <smh>
Image
User avatar
anthriel
halo optional
Posts: 7875
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:26 pm

Post by anthriel »

I was reading an article about horseback riding last night (yes, I know you are all shocked), and it had a quick sentence about how many calories are burned while riding.

Paraphrased: "The average man, weighing 195 pounds, will burn about XX calories riding, and the average woman, weighing 166 pounds, will burn about XX."

Okay, I can't remember how many calories it was, and I'm not going to bother to look it up, because that wasn't the point. The POINT is that the average woman was described as 166 pounds.

Not 120 lbs. 166 pounds. It looks like a specific enough number that it might be the result of some actual data gathering, which would be marvelous.

Yes, they should disclose when they Photoshop. And yes, the average woman is not a stick-thin model.
"What do you fear, lady?" Aragorn asked.
"A cage," Éowyn said. "To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Post by yovargas »

anthriel wrote:I was reading an article about horseback riding last night (yes, I know you are all shocked), and it had a quick sentence about how many calories are burned while riding.

Paraphrased: "The average man, weighing 195 pounds, will burn about XX calories riding, and the average woman, weighing 166 pounds, will burn about XX."

Okay, I can't remember how many calories it was, and I'm not going to bother to look it up, because that wasn't the point. The POINT is that the average woman was described as 166 pounds.

Not 120 lbs. 166 pounds. It looks like a specific enough number that it might be the result of some actual data gathering, which would be marvelous.

Yes, they should disclose when they Photoshop. And yes, the average woman is not a stick-thin model.
Not meant as an commentary on the OP but...the average American is overweight so I'm not sure "average" is a good measuring stick.
I wanna love somebody but I don't know how
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists


Image
User avatar
Folca
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 10:40 pm
Location: The Great Northwest

Post by Folca »

Ethically, organizations should have been identifying the use of things like Photoshop long ago. I find it unfourtunate a law has to be passed to compel it, but in the limited context of notifying the viewer it is a modified image, I think that is acceptable.

Many people have unrealistic expectations about life and how the world works, and there is no viable control of that. Too much subjectivity as it is a perception thing.
"Ut Prosim"
"There are some things that it is better to begin than refuse, even though the end may be dark" Aragorn
"Those who commit honorable acts need no forgiveness"
http://killology.com/sheep_dog.htm
Post Reply