‘Seventeen’ Magazine Signs ‘Body Peace Treaty’: Is It Enough?
SodaHead Living
2012/07/08 17:58:11
|
|
|||||
|
132 votes
|
|
58% | |||
|
97 votes
|
|
42% | |||
After a 14-year-old girl led a crusade against altered photographs in Seventeen, the magazine’s staff vowed not to change girls’ body or face shapes. But is their new Photoshop policy really all that different from their old one?
According to Ann Shoket, the magazine’s editor-in-chief, Seventeen “never has, never will” alter the way girls look. Apparently, their retouching just involves “removing wrinkles in fabric, stray hairs, a few zits, random bra straps,” etc. Hmm…interesting. Essentially, because they admit no wrongdoing, there is nothing for Seventeen to change.
Jezebel's Jenna Sauers puts it this way: “So, a quick list of what Seventeen is not doing under the terms of this ‘treaty’: it is not going to stop Photoshopping its models and celebrity subjects. It is not going to acknowledge that its reliance on Photoshop has ever been in any way problematic. It is not going to commit to publishing any unretouched photo spreads. Lame.”
Seventeen’s new “Body Peace Treaty” has the support of the National Eating Disorders Association, but even their president, Lynn Grefe, admits that this is just a first step in working to promote positive body image and more attainable standards of beauty in magazines.
"I'm not saying it's a total victory," said Grefe. "Seventeen, Teen Vogue, Vogue, Cosmo, every magazine still has ads for diet products and other things that we find problematic, but in terms of the Photoshopping stuff, I believe that Ann is sincere and wants to really educate the consumer and work with the girls and show them what has been Photoshopped and how to recognize that."
So SodaHeads, what do you think about Seventeen’s “Body Peace Treaty”? Is it enough?
According to Ann Shoket, the magazine’s editor-in-chief, Seventeen “never has, never will” alter the way girls look. Apparently, their retouching just involves “removing wrinkles in fabric, stray hairs, a few zits, random bra straps,” etc. Hmm…interesting. Essentially, because they admit no wrongdoing, there is nothing for Seventeen to change.
Jezebel's Jenna Sauers puts it this way: “So, a quick list of what Seventeen is not doing under the terms of this ‘treaty’: it is not going to stop Photoshopping its models and celebrity subjects. It is not going to acknowledge that its reliance on Photoshop has ever been in any way problematic. It is not going to commit to publishing any unretouched photo spreads. Lame.”
Seventeen’s new “Body Peace Treaty” has the support of the National Eating Disorders Association, but even their president, Lynn Grefe, admits that this is just a first step in working to promote positive body image and more attainable standards of beauty in magazines.
"I'm not saying it's a total victory," said Grefe. "Seventeen, Teen Vogue, Vogue, Cosmo, every magazine still has ads for diet products and other things that we find problematic, but in terms of the Photoshopping stuff, I believe that Ann is sincere and wants to really educate the consumer and work with the girls and show them what has been Photoshopped and how to recognize that."
So SodaHeads, what do you think about Seventeen’s “Body Peace Treaty”? Is it enough?
Read More: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5...
Shay Mitchell, for instance, is on the show Pretty Little Liars and constantly looked super skinny and with flawless skin and great hair. Obviously that takes a lot of make up and upkeep, but you can't just assume that everyone pretty or skinny is photoshopped.
The media is all around us, and is virtually impossible to escape, (in all of it's forms). Apparently the subscribers of Seventeen are not going to cease reading this and will seek beauty tips continually. This is where they seek guidance in a shallow society, in order to try and improve themselves. Perhaps the magazines in which they read should change for the better. I'm sure they will be just as profitable, if not more. What is the point of making models resemble a cigarette shape in the first place?
Its not really magazine that distort one's personal image. Not many of the good clothes at the stores, fit everyone the same. Skin problems, like uneven skin tone, blemishes and eczema/psoriasis. Not everyone has thick hair. On TV you see a lot of people, that people consider: sexy, perfect, beautiful, etc. That make you and a lot people think thats the "ideal", makes you think you're not good enough and makes people think thats the ideal. Oh and don't forget the guys, it does hurt a bit when you are turned down by a guy and he comes up dating someone that is thinner and more feminine. Even worse when it has happened more than once.
It'd be even better to see some average people in these types of magazines that aren't overly skinny. Magazines, tv, and various things help determine/push what people think looks good or is attractive. It's kind of annoying that they choose to focus on one type of person and leave the rest out to dry.
Honestly, even in this case I prefer the non-photoshopped pictures because it just looks more... real. Like the model is a person, not just a body in a perfectly shaped pose. But that's just me.
Otherwise magazines will just further reduce their tolerance for physical features that they don't think will help promote their magazine.
Additionally If model's are offended by having certain features altered then maybe they shouldn't be in the limelight.
After all, you are acting as a promotion for the publication; provided the publication makes changes of a positive nature you should have no argument against it. You get paid, they have the right to tailor the content to best suit their media.
Enough!
try looking at that drunk or high. lol.