Last Updated on 12th August 2011
Another week, another boot in a glossy magazine’s metaphorical behind. This time, weekly glossy, Grazia, were reminded of the harrowing effects of promoting digitally altered images.
The Press Complaints Association confirmed the magazine admitted to altering an image of Kate Middleton for their 9 May royal edition which made her appear slimmer, but the Bauer Media-owned magazine provided a host of reasons for their ill-received technical work.
Claiming that in order to place Kate on the cover, they had to crop out her husband (poor Wills, sidelined yet again), as there were no lone images of Kate from the big day –ultimately contributing to the waist slimming. A touch of tech-wizardry and a few crops and click later, Kate’s waist in the image appears unnaturally shrunken.
For a woman so admired, but not immune to digs about her ‘straight’ physique and dismal efforts to accentuate her nonexistent waist in tightly clung Issa creations, Grazia’s digital blunder must have been a beating to the soul.
But Kate isn’t alone. Another Kate received the ‘slim fast’ treatment back in 2003 when, curve celebrating Kate Winslet had her legs digitally lengthened and slimmed for a GQ shoot. More recently, L’Oréal were slammed for their use of highly airbrushed images featuring actress Julia Roberts and model Christy Turlington to promote foundation creams, resulting in the adverts being banned.
Although the cover is over three months old, it’s pretty obvious Kate Middleton hasn’t totally heeded to Grazia’s retouching gaffe and suddenly started sporting a corseted, Dita Von Tees-esque waistline. I do hope she doesn’t bow to any negative pressure if an episode such as this is repeated again in the future. Although glowing, her face appeared slimmer on the wedding day which hinted towards a disciplined, pre-wedding diet, but the real panic will set when Kate’s regular sightings at Waitrose, Anglesey stop.