Rimmel gets a lashing for ‘misleading’ advert

[The Hat]

Magazine and TV advertisements for Rimmel’s new 1-2-3 Looks Mascara have been judged as ‘misleading’ by the Advertising Standards Authority. The ads featuring model Georgina May Jagger, show three progressive stages with her lashes growing longer, thicker and fuller in each shot.

The ASA has confirmed the ads, which were achieved using false eyelashes rather than the model's own, cannot be shown again in their current format,

In its defence Rimmel, owned by Coty UK, said it had used inserts "to ensure a consistent and aesthetic lash look" and that a disclaimer clearly stated the ads were "shot with lash inserts".

However the ASA disagreed. On banning the ads it said: "Because we considered that the use of different length lash inserts applied to the eyelash area was likely to distort the visual representation of the effect achievable from the use of the product alone, we concluded the images in the ad were misleading."

The case is the latest in a string of run-ins between the ASA and the beauty industry. L’Oreal was recently embroiled in a dispute over its shampoo ads featuring Cheryl Cole, who was wearing hair extensions in the promotional TV and print ads.

 

[naturalnails]

I dont see how this is any different to all the other Super Lash type Mascara adverts. They all say in miniscule writing that they are enhanced with lash inserts. I only know this because my daughter tells me as my old eyes are not sharp enough to see it LOL.

 

[jo-from-moorspa]

Call me cynical but these ads get banned is probably getting these companies more column inches and marketing than the ads alone would have done.

 

[VHunter]

I wish more companies would get slapped for false/misleading advertising.
It doesn't happen often enough.

 

[Lynne Baker]

Agree with Victoria. And really, who in their right mind believes any advert these days? They're all digitally enhanced out of all recognition.

 

[MaisyMouse]

Agree with Victoria. And really, who in their right mind believes any advert these days? They're all digitally enhanced out of all recognition.

I agree. But I am still suprised by the number of clients who do believe them!

 

[Wee Fee]

Magazine and TV advertisements for Rimmel’s new 1-2-3 Looks Mascara have been judged as ‘misleading’ by the Advertising Standards Authority. The ads featuring model Georgina May Jagger, show three progressive stages with her lashes growing longer, thicker and fuller in each shot.

Her lips get fuller too!

 

[tracey louise]

I wish more companies would get slapped for false/misleading advertising.
It doesn't happen often enough.

i completely agree
its frustrating as a consumer that certainly all the mascara and hair ads the models are wearing false eyelashes and hair extensions
i may be blowing my own trumpet but i actually have naturally long eyelashes to the point that if i wear mascara people comment and think ive had eyelashe extensions so why cant they just find girls with naturally long eyelashes in the first place.
its also sad that as a comsumer that when there are reports that a beauty product actually does work we all get excited and go and buy it because most products dont work

 

[pazzy]

I always wondered how Cheryl cole got those hair ads when it was more than obvious she was wearing hair extensions - cheater!!!:lick: