At first I thought this was an amusing case of the French getting indignant over fugly chicks being passed off as hot, but the brief article goes on to say this is an anti-anorexia issue, implying that skinny models on magazines lead to dead girls.
Now obviously it’s sad when anyone dies of an eating disorder. And the proper public policy (putting aside the issue of whether government needs to or should get involved with telling people what to do about their health) would seem to be one that discouraged and disincentivized both over- and under-eating.
But isn’t this a waste of time in a Western society in which, AFAICT, far, far more people die of obesity-related diseases than of anorexia?
I couldn’t find anything for France but this U.K. abstract seems to suggest about 130 verified anorexia deaths in the U.K. in a six year period. How many people died during that period of congestive heart failure, diabetes complications, etc.?
It strikes me that this proposed legislation is a solution looking for a problem – you want to impose a mandate against age-old publishing/photo-editing tricks (which the public apparently likes), thinking that some handful of teenage girls who might otherwise starve themselves won’t when they realize Jennifer Love Hewitt’s actually closer to 140 lbs. than the airbrushed cover makes her look? Would that really change behavior? Shouldn’t we be worried that unless we label superhero films with a CGI disclaimer teenage boys everywhere will believe they can kung fu kick their way 20 feet up to a ledge, and thus fall to their deaths?
I think it’s a good idea for all images that look real but aren’t to be so labelled. A fake image should be clearly labelled as such. After all, reconstructions on TV are labelled as such, and doctored photos aren’t allowed in the press as real images.
There’s a big difference between your two examples : when you go see Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, you are well aware that it’s bullshit. It’s the movies. Movies are bullshit, even teenagers know that. On the other hand, marketers are hard at work trying to convince people (men and women alike) that not only is that stunning cover bombshell 100% real, but a) with the right combination of aftershave, shaving cream, car and bling, she’ll come over to your house and suck your dick (males) or b) if you follow our 15 easy steps and buy a copy of The Secret, you can look like that too ! (females). We internet geeks might have seen our fair share of before/after Photoshop shock pictures, but it’s easy to forget that fourteen year old girls might not have an extensive Something Awful culture
Also, don’t kid yourself, anorexia is a serious problem to have. It may rarely kill, but it can really and *durably *mess up a life. It’s not cancer, and it seems like a really stupid disease to have, but there you go.
On the other hand, I kind of agree with you that this measure amounts, likelier than not, to pissing in the sea - the roots of anorexia, eating disorders, sub-zero self esteem, dismorphia etc… run a hell of a lot deeper than mere “I don’t look like the girls in the magazines”.
Still, in the end, it doesn’t cost a thing, and it might just help a smidge. So why the hell not ? As **Quartz **notes, we don’t like being shammed about news, and there are laws against false advertising. Maybe we do need laws against false booty.
