British Censors Ban Dakota Fanning’s ‘Provocative’ Ad

off-topic conversation unrelated to Jane's Addiction
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
chaos
Posts: 5024
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:23 pm
Location: Boston

British Censors Ban Dakota Fanning’s ‘Provocative’ Ad

#1 Post by chaos » Wed Nov 09, 2011 4:02 pm

Although I think the ad is pretty tasteless, I am surprised the British banned it. It does not seem as bad as some other ads that sexualize children (i.e. Calvin Klein).

http://omg.yahoo.com/blogs/thefamous/br ... 52605.html

Image
Dakota Fanning is one of the few child-turned-teen actresses who has managed to steer clear of tabloid headlines, but the 17-year-old's half-scandalous Marc Jacobs ads were just banned from British shores.

Although they've been running in print since this June, the U.K.'s self-regulatory Advertising Standards Authority just deemed her photo "sexually provocative" as well as "irresponsible," concluding the ads were "likely to cause serious offense" since Fanning is still a minor, reports The Guardian.

American eyes accustomed to a steady stream of underage stars dancing on poles and prancing around in schoolgirl outfits might find the ads--which show Fanning in a flesh-colored polka dot dress holding a flower-topped perfume between her legs--comparatively tame. But the ASA makes an interesting argument that U.S. censors might want to take note of.

"We understood the model was 17 years old, but we considered she looked under the age of 16," the non-governmental organization reasoned. "Because of that, along with her appearance, we considered the ad could be seen to sexualize a child."
So although Fanning certainly acts much older than her years (both in films and in real life, considering that she's already attending NYU), they point out that she looks much younger than her almost-adult age.

Of course, it probably doesn't help things that the perfume itself is called "Oh, Lola!" which brings to mind the similarly-themed controversial novel "Lolita." And even though each unit is sold with a faux-flower coming out of the bottle neck, that association doesn't do the defense any favors either.

Still, it's worth pointing out that when the celebrity-minor-in-question actually was 15, she shared an onscreen kiss with then-19-year-old Kristen Stewart--and the R-rated "Runaways" movie isn't off-limits for British eyes, only those under the age of 17.

User avatar
Artemis
Posts: 10344
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:44 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: British Censors Ban Dakota Fanning’s ‘Provocative’ Ad

#2 Post by Artemis » Wed Nov 09, 2011 5:28 pm

I think recently they've been trying in the UK and Europe to crack down on advertising that sexualizes children. A couple of months ago there was a story about a 10 year model in France and some pics Vogue did. I have to agree that I found them a disturbing. In the case of Dakota Fannings ad, I think she looks older than 17 in that pics. Upon first look without knowing the name of the perfume or anything, I wouldn't think twice about it.

http://healthland.time.com/2011/08/05/v ... -to-grave/

User avatar
chaos
Posts: 5024
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:23 pm
Location: Boston

Re: British Censors Ban Dakota Fanning’s ‘Provocative’ Ad

#3 Post by chaos » Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:10 am

Artemis wrote:I think recently they've been trying in the UK and Europe to crack down on advertising that sexualizes children. A couple of months ago there was a story about a 10 year model in France and some pics Vogue did. I have to agree that I found them a disturbing. In the case of Dakota Fannings ad, I think she looks older than 17 in that pics. Upon first look without knowing the name of the perfume or anything, I wouldn't think twice about it.

http://healthland.time.com/2011/08/05/v ... -to-grave/
Dear God.

Image

What the hell are the parents thinking? I don't get the whole Toddlers and Tiaras thing either.

User avatar
Larry B.
Posts: 7341
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 6:25 am
Location: Santiago

Re: British Censors Ban Dakota Fanning’s ‘Provocative’ Ad

#4 Post by Larry B. » Thu Nov 10, 2011 5:11 am

I guess they could've been a little less obvious with the flower-in-the-underage-crotch thingy, but I wouldn't say she looks less than 16 at all. In fact, I could easily give her 22. And she kinda looks like Madonna there.

But yeah, that other ad... as much as I find is distasteful that parents allow/encourage their daughters to become models at the age of 10, I don't really get how that specific photo is supposed to sexualize her. She was photographed with an attitude not suited for a 10 year old, according to most of Western societies' standards, but it isn't that much of a provocative picture. She's just lying down, with a moderately sexy look. I don't really see how you can go from there (i.e., 'this is inappropriate for a 10 year old') to saying that it's too sexual or something. It reminds me of people saying that women get raped because they use skirts that are just too provocative. 'Hey, today I jacked off to a picture of a little girl because it was too provocative, this is an outrage! You have to jail the parents, fine the magazine and pass laws that forbid this from happening!' :hs:

User avatar
Artemis
Posts: 10344
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:44 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: British Censors Ban Dakota Fanning’s ‘Provocative’ Ad

#5 Post by Artemis » Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:51 am


User avatar
Larry B.
Posts: 7341
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 6:25 am
Location: Santiago

Re: British Censors Ban Dakota Fanning’s ‘Provocative’ Ad

#6 Post by Larry B. » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:08 am

Artemis wrote:That wasn't the only photo...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... model.html
Experts have warned about the psychological implications of such young children being involved in the modelling industry
That, I agree with. I believe that that is the real issue here. Where are the child labor laws here? Kids should be running, reading, sleeping, having breakfast with their parents on Sunday morning, falling down the stairs, making horrible noises while trying to learn how to play violin and feeling awkward with their bodies, not being involved in any sort of industry.

User avatar
Warped
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 6:28 am
Location: Duesseldorf / Germany

Re: British Censors Ban Dakota Fanning’s ‘Provocative’ Ad

#7 Post by Warped » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:48 am

I dislike both cases. And the more because of todays sick society.

And in the case of Dakota Fanning it would even make me not want to buy the product because of that horrible picture.

Post Reply