See what I mean? Is that really necessary?
Granted, the product itself may be represented accurately, but there is still that undeniable feeling that the company is lying to us. If the point of the ad is to feature the product, then why does the model need to be tweaked at all? This question goes into some deep issues about body image and the "ideals" presented by the media. I won't address this topic here and now, but rather the fact that governments across the world are finally taking notice of this ill effects photoshopped models are having on the young populations of all nations.
Just recently in Norway, it was proposed that all photoshopped advertisements must have a disclaimer printed at the bottom. The goal is to make it evident to the audience that the model in the photograph is not necessarily an accurate representation of the model in real life. A similar law was proposed in France, where the penalty would be up to half of the cost of the campaign. If there is anything that will make businesses obey laws, it's a hefty fine like that! The United Kingdom has had success with their slightly different version of this idea. There, photoshopping is BANNED from all ads with a target audience of people sixteen years or younger. All other ads must feature a disclaimer. Thus far, two companies have had their ads banned due to failure to adhere to these new regulations. It is too soon to say whether or not these policies are effective in regards to young people's ideas of body image, but I believe the simple recognition that photoshopping pictures of models is a negative thing is a step in the right direction. Let's keep on making steps like this!
If you are interested in reading more about this topic, a more detailed article can be found here.