Julia Roberts is the latest celeb steamed at a magazine for messing with her megawatt mug. Roberts, whose appearance in a flick commands $20 million-plus, was the victim of a mix-and-match cover when Redbook magazine slapped her head onto another body for its July issue. Roberts' head was allegedly plucked from a paparazzi shot taken at the 2002 People's Choice Awards, according to a story in USA Today, while her body was borrowed from the Notting Hill movie premiere four years ago. The clipped-together photo is accompanied by a headline that blares, without a trace of irony, 'The Real Julia.' 

The practice of airbrushing cellulite and stretch marks or tweaking an errant nipple is standard procedure at most magazines that count on their flawless cover shots to woo readers. But the practice of pasting different body parts together is drawing criticism, especially when said body parts aren't perfectly proportional...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=796&ncid=1777&e=2&u=/eo/12006 Question Who's Online | Find Members | Private Messages
Questions
Quizzes
Articles
My Journal
Forums
Answer Questions | Question Comments | My Questions | Favorites | +Add Question
LATEST
POPULAR PRIORITY RANDOM

All | Games | Funny | Entertainment | Quizzes | Weird | Tech | People | Arts/Lit | News | Science | Sports | Places | Misc

1,098 hits 4.0 (1 vote) Share Favorite | Flag 15 years ago by KikiPeepers

Should magazines be able to alter and/or `create` photos like this of celebrities without consent?
Julia Roberts is the latest celeb steamed at a magazine for messing with her megawatt mug. Roberts, whose appearance in a flick commands $20 million-plus, was the victim of a mix-and-match cover when Redbook magazine slapped her head onto another body for its July issue. Roberts` head was allegedly plucked from a paparazzi shot taken at the 2002 People`s Choice Awards, according to a story in USA Today, while her body was borrowed from the Notting Hill movie premiere four years ago. The clipped-together photo is accompanied by a headline that blares, without a trace of irony, `The Real Julia.`

The practice of airbrushing cellulite and stretch marks or tweaking an errant nipple is standard procedure at most magazines that count on their flawless cover shots to woo readers. But the practice of pasting different body parts together is drawing criticism, especially when said body parts aren`t perfectly proportional...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...


Put This Question on Your Page (MySpace, Livejournal, Blog, etc)
[Preview] EMBED CODE:


Prev 1 2 Next (showing 1-25 of 26)

Bottom Last Post

18 yrs ago, 7 mos ago - Tuesday 10/14/03 - 3:32:44 PM EST (GMT-5)
Wow. That picture is kind of creepy.
Shame on them to do that.
18 yrs ago, 7 mos ago - Tuesday 10/14/03 - 3:34:56 PM EST (GMT-5)
No.
18 yrs ago, 7 mos ago - Tuesday 10/14/03 - 4:14:40 PM EST (GMT-5)
I don't think magazines should alter pictures at all.. but they certainly shouldn't be able to without the consent of the person being photographed.
18 yrs ago, 7 mos ago - Monday 10/20/03 - 8:57:14 PM EST (GMT-5)
i agree with unhailey... i dont want to see some one that was made pretty by a computer... i want to see what they actually look like... but magazines suck anyways.. unless they have cars or bikes in them.. or videogames.. those are fun
18 yrs ago, 7 mos ago - Monday 10/20/03 - 8:59:13 PM EST (GMT-5)
I agree, they shouldn't beable to alter the photos atall.
18 yrs ago, 7 mos ago - Monday 10/20/03 - 9:02:56 PM EST (GMT-5)
Now I can see that the body is too big for the head, she is tall so her head should be a bit bigger than that.

Anyways I don't think any magazine should alter pictures, thats fake and it shows how much that magazine concentrates on so called beauty.

18 yrs ago, 7 mos ago - Monday 10/20/03 - 9:05:59 PM EST (GMT-5)
While I'd rather see them not touch up photos, that doesn't bother me. But to mix and match bodys with heads is over the top.
18 yrs ago, 1 mos ago - Wednesday 3/31/04 - 11:19:12 AM EST (GMT-5)
No, they should only put "REAL" people on the covers.
18 yrs ago, 1 mos ago - Wednesday 3/31/04 - 11:21:31 AM EST (GMT-5)
no, that's wrong and stupid.
15 yrs ago, 11 mos ago - Friday 6/16/06 - 10:02:54 PM EST (GMT-5)
15 yrs ago, 11 mos ago - Friday 6/16/06 - 10:28:27 PM EST (GMT-5)
no that shouldn't, it's wrong and stupid.
15 yrs ago, 11 mos ago - Friday 6/16/06 - 10:35:20 PM EST (GMT-5)
No, it's called invation of privacy.
15 yrs ago, 10 mos ago - Monday 7/3/06 - 6:56:09 AM EST (GMT-5)
They shouldn't do that, but atleast they used her actual body, not someone else's.
15 yrs ago, 8 mos ago - Thursday 8/31/06 - 8:45:05 PM EST (GMT-5)
15 yrs ago, 8 mos ago - Friday 9/8/06 - 11:35:04 PM EST (GMT-5)
No, that's common sense.
15 yrs ago, 8 mos ago - Friday 9/8/06 - 11:36:01 PM EST (GMT-5)
Sure, that's the price they pay for their fame.
15 yrs ago, 5 mos ago - Saturday 12/23/06 - 1:29:02 AM EST (GMT-5)
15 yrs ago, 5 mos ago - Saturday 12/23/06 - 7:05:14 PM EST (GMT-5)
No, not without permission.
14 yrs ago, 8 mos ago - Tuesday 9/4/07 - 8:38:07 AM EST (GMT-5)
On 9/8/2006 11:36:02 PM Colon_Cancer wrote:
Sure, that's the price they pay for their fame.

But there has to be a line somewhere doesn't there? Or is it open slather when it comes to celebrities?

I think even celebrities deserve to be treated fairly. And I just find the practice totally dishonest. It says a lot for the integrity of the magazine.

14 yrs ago, 8 mos ago - Tuesday 9/4/07 - 8:39:09 AM EST (GMT-5)
No, they shouldn't and especially without the permission of the artist.
14 yrs ago, 8 mos ago - Sunday 9/9/07 - 1:11:47 AM EST (GMT-5)
Umm TOTALLY subtle airbrushing here

What The.....

14 yrs ago, 8 mos ago - Sunday 9/9/07 - 4:01:50 AM EST (GMT-5)
No they shouldn't. That's why celebrities are worshipped. They are portrayed as perfect, making people love them and want to be like them.
14 yrs ago, 8 mos ago - Sunday 9/9/07 - 4:13:07 AM EST (GMT-5)
I just think it's really funny when they stick a giant head onto a teeny tiny body, making them look like a freak show.
As far as whether they should be allowed to: if the celebrities don't like it then they can afford to bring up as many lawsuits as they wish.
14 yrs ago, 5 mos ago - Thursday 12/6/07 - 2:51:24 AM EST (GMT-5)
They should be able to airbrush out pimples or something, but alter it so horribly like that? No.
12 yrs ago, 9 mos ago - Sunday 8/23/09 - 5:01:22 PM EST (GMT-5)

Prev 1 2 Next (showing 1-25 of 26)



You need to be logged in to post a reply

New to YT? Create a Free Account ~ Have an Account? Log In

Top



10 Most Popular Questions Today
1 What does your money do?

2 Have you ever seen an Aurora?

3 If you had a genetic disease, would you reproduce?

4 Do people become more likeable once they`ve realized their faults?

5 How do you pronounce the word 'Italian'?

6 Do you sleep between seven and nine hours a night?

7 Would you live underground?

8 Have you ever won a radio competition?

9 Should the clock have been shifted 6 hours when it was designed, so that dawn occurs at approximately 12:00 and each hour corresponds to an hour of daylight?

10 Would you volunteer to be hypnotized on TV?

More Questions
 
Edit