I am sure you’ve heard about the banned in the UK Marc Jacobs ad featuring Dakota Fanning

Dakota is the modern day impersonation of Lolita, according to the designer himself.

Here is what the Daily Mail had to say about it:

“The perfume was made by the global beauty brand Coty, which has previously come under fire for its use of sexual imagery.

In a second ruling, watchdogs have also banned a website ad from the clothing brand Drop Dead Clothing, which appeared to legitimise anorexia.

The ad featured an apparently dangerously thin model, with visible hip, rib, collar and thigh bones, wearing a bikini and denim shorts.

The bans have been announced by the Advertising Standards Authority(ASA) and follow calls from the Prime Minister for action to prevent the sexualisation of children.

The ASA said the ‘Oh, Lola!’ advertisement showed Dakota Fanning, sitting on the floor, alone, wearing a pale coloured thigh length dress.

‘We noted that the model was holding up the perfume bottle which rested in her lap between her legs and we considered that its position was sexually provocative,’ it said”.

Banning is quiet common, a lot of ads are too sexual, revealing, intolerant, etc.

Here is a banned advertisements with Julia Roberts:

It was banned because of the air brushing! Apparently there is too big of a difference between the ad, and what the actress looks like in real life.

The question is – what makes one decide if an ad should be banned, or not?

As for me – keep the airbrushing, ban the inappropriate!

I do remember some rather revealing ads by American Apparel, there are a ton of ads and commercials that fall into the “banned” category but are still available on the Internet. So is it really banned, or is it not banned until it’s gone?

What are your thoughts?

Zhenya