Why Posting a Disclaimer is a Waste of Ink

After seeing the Dolce and Gabbana ad, and then watching the insider’s scoop on enhancing photographs in advertisements (which was sponsored by that Dove campaign for real womenwhich is a load of bull, by the way) we talked about whether it would be a good idea to include a disclaimer at the bottom of an advertisement in which the subject had been digitally enhanced. The only way this could possibly work is if the disclaimer read something along the lines of “This is a fake, just like the boobs and nose and ass you think you should have, quit looking at it” but maybe a little bit more articulately. Otherwise, a disclaimer that just says this picture has been digitally enhanced will not deter anyone from looking at it critically. How would it be any different from the Surgeon General’s warning on cigarette boxes that make it blatantly clear that smoking cigarettes poses many health risks and is terribly addictive? Plenty of people still smoke cigarettes; plenty of young girls will look at magazines, and then their bodies, and then go puke. And as far as the Dove campaign is concerned, I think it’s ridiculous because it’s just another marketing scheme they’re using to promote their product. They’ve clearly picked up on the fact that many women do not support the unnatural depiction of their sex in the media. Ca-ching! more money for Dove once they make themselves look like they really care about how women’s bodies are portrayed.
…but I must admit, that video was pretty neat (and by neat I mean upsetting); I’ve never seen the transformation process of model to billboard.