So I’m sure most of you heard the big news….Target sucks at Photoshop. This past week, it seems like I haven’t gone a day without hearing about Targets big “oopsie.” For those of your who haven’t heard the latest news, Target uploaded an image to their online store of a teen wearing a swim suite with a very obvious thigh gap. But there’s more to it; the photoshopped image is so extreme that it actually cuts off her pelvis to the point that the there is a huge piece of bathing suite missing, but yet pieces of the swim suite still exist on the models thighs. According to WPGC (2014) “…mega-store Target took it to an entirely different level when it began selling its swimwear collection for 2014. In a obviously photoshopped photo, the young model is seen wearing a white leopard print bikini with an obvious error. Editors for the image removed inches from her inner thighs yet leave evidence of where her legs are supposed to be. But that’s not where it ends.” Target went even further to trim off some inches of the girls arms, which also showed traces of where her actual arm is suppose to be. Jenna Mullins from eonline (2014) says, “The last question you should be asking yourself when you’re cruising Target’s website and looking at pictures of the models showcasing the clothes is: “Where is her vagina?” The image wasn’t taken down until a women’s blog, Jezbel, made it aware and published the image.
I am sure it is clear to most everyone that majority of companies have their product go through some type of Photoshop or image alerting when they advertise their product in digital or print; even more so when their advertisement contains a model. In my opinion when you’re trying to market your product you want it to look at visually appealing as possible to attract consumers; and more often than not, Photoshop or some type of digital manipulation is involved in making that product look appealing.
The real issue is that most of the people who see these ads of ultra thin women in magazines and online are young girls with impressionable minds; and apparently a “thigh gap” is a big worry for a lot of these young girls. And yet from this debacle arises the ever-preset issue of ‘what is real beauty’? Is real beauty a stick thin, blonde haired, blue-eyed woman who resembles Barbie? Or is it a curvaceous woman with realistic curves and features like Kim Kardashian? The fact of the matter is that when it comes to marketing, the thinner the better, and it’s been this way for a long time; but when does thin become too thin? WPGC (2014) said that, “Viewers can easily envision what the young girl would look like sans-photoshop and it’s by no means “fat” or “unhealthy.” If that’s the case, then why photoshop her till she’s ultra thin?
Target has remove the image from their site and issued a statement apologizing by saying, “In response to your query about the swimsuit image on Target.com, this was an unfortunate error on our part and we apologize. We have removed the image from our Web site” (Feldman, 2014). Straightforward, and simple, but comes off as a little insincere in my opinion; however, in the same sense, how sincere can you be when nearly every company and brand Photoshops or alters their advertisements.
Is photoshop an unapologetic epidemic?
Feldman, J. (2014, March 11). Target’s latest photoshop fail looks pretty painful. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/11/target-photoshop-fail_n_4940819.html
Mullins, J. (2014, March 11). Target is now in the lead for worst photoshop job ever with this horrifying thigh gap. Retrieved from http://www.eonline.com/news/519820/target-is-now-in-the-lead-for-worst-photoshop-job-ever-with-this-horrifying-thigh-gap
Staff. (2014, March 12). Target apologizes for ‘thigh gap’ photoshop fail. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/lifestyle/2014/03/target-apologizes-for-thigh-gap-photoshop-fail/
Staff. (2014, March 12). target’s photoshop fail: Excessive airbrushing for teens. Retrieved from http://wpgc.cbslocal.com/2014/03/12/targets-photoshop-fail-excessive-airbrushing-for-teens/